Se Te Se ere 
ati, Chaos 
wats 


a Sr ee 


pia Ne 


<WASE 


ww 


regener 
. _ —~ a 








3 








Cre 


HoLy BIBLE 


ACCORDING TO THE AUTHORIZED VERSION (A.D. 1617), 


WITH AN EXPLANATORY AND CRITICAL 


Gommentary 


AND 


SB Rebision of the Granslation, 


By ols wOrs “Nb OTHER CLERGY 


OF THE ANGLICAN CHURCH. 


EDITED 


By F. C. COOK, M.A., Canon or EXETER, 


PRRACHER AT LINCOLN’S INN, CHAPLAIN IN ORDINARY TO THE QUZ2H. 


NEW TESTAMENT. 


VoL, ov 


HEBREWS - REVELATIONS 


NEW YORK: 
CHART Bsa eRIiBNER’S SONS. 1 


ens ot) 





in 2022 with funding from 
Duke University Libraries 


1KO 


https://archive.org/details/holybible41 unse 


- : ¥, 


PREFACE 





IGHTEEN years have now passed since this Commentary 

on the Holy Scriptures was undertaken. Its publication 

was commenced ten years ago, and the concluding volume is now 

presented to the public. Its conception was due to the late Lord 

Ossington, then Speaker of the House of Commons, and to that 

circumstance it owes its familiar title of “The Speaker's Commen- 

tary ”—a title, however, which derives a further justification from 

the warm interest he maintained in the progress of the work, 
and the constant encouragement it received from him. 

The course of thought during those eighteen years has abun- 
dantly shown the opportuneness of such an undertaking, and, it 
may be hoped, has vindicated the general wisdom of the plan on 
which it was designed. In consequence of ever-accumulating 
discoveries, antiquarian and philological, public attention has been 
concentrated to an unprecedented extent upon the Holy Scrip- 
tures, upon the origin and history of their several books, upon 
their text and their interpretation, and this attention has, for the 
great mass of English readers, given a new interest and impor- 
tance to the Authorized Version, in which, by the use of nearly 
three centuries, those Scriptures have become enshrined for them. 
The first anxiety of the public at large was to know how the 
new discoveries in philology and history bore upon that venerated 
translation, what corrections of its text they rendered necessary, 
aud what elucidations of its meaning they atforded. To meet 


this want was the simple and practical purpose with which our 
a2 


336C42 


iv PREFACE: 


Commentary was designed, and from first to last this purpose 
has been kept steadily in view. In publishing the final volume 
a few observations seem desirable on the method with which 
these objects have been pursued. 

In the first place, as stated on the title-page, it was from the 
outset a primary purpose of the Commentary to furnish in the 
Notes corrected translations of all passages in which the old 
version required revision. These emendations of the Authorized 
Version, when deemed certain, have throughout the work been 
printed in a distinctive type, darker than the rest of the Note; 
and the reader is thus enabled to see at a glance every correction 
in rendering which modern scholarship has made really necessary. 
The work thus presents substantially the advantages of a Revised 
Version—a circumstance on which it is desirable to insist, in view 
of the scheme for providing such a version which about eight 
years afterwards was set on foot and has since been partially 
executed. 

While, however, the present work has thus, for a large class of 
readers, anticipated, both in conception and execution, the purpose 
of the Revised Version now in progress, it presents one marked 
difference from that undertaking. It was deemed preferable, after 
mature consideration, to present in our Text the Authorized 
Version intact. As was stated in the Preface to the first volume, 
“it was thought that in this way might be reconciled the claims 
“of accuracy and truth with that devout reverence, which has 
“made the present text of the English Bible so dear to all 
“Christians that speak the English tongue.” Our design was not 
to supersede the Authorized Version, but to furnish the reader of 
it with the requisite corrections and elucidations, so that the Book 
which has been the life of English religion, and to a great extent 
of English literature, might continue to be studied in its old 
familiar form, while at the same time all danger of mis-reading 
“the pure Word of God” might be avoided. 

It is, however, a fact which must give general satisfaction, 
and for which we feel exceedingly thankful, that on comparing 
the corrections adopted in. the Notes to this work with the cor- 


PREFACE, v 


responding alterations in the Revised Version of the New Tes- 
tament, we find a close approach to agreement in passages 
which affect the sense and have any bearing on doctrine. To 
appreciate the value of this result, it must be borne in mind 
that whereas the Revised Version of the New Testament was 
published in May, 1881, the three volumes of this Commentary 
which extend to the end of the Pastoral Epistles were com- 
pleted in 1878, 1879 and 1880; while it is due to the contri- 
butors to this last volume to add that the Commentary on the 
remaining portion, from the Epistle to the Hebrews to the 
Revelation, was not only printed, but for the most part stereo- 
typed and ready for publication, long before the appearance of 
the New Version. Any coincidence, therefore, between our 
corrections and those of the Revisers is the more valuable, 
as being undesigned and completely independent. In our 
Commentary, the reader has for every such correction the 
authority of a scholar who for many years had given special atten- 
tion to the portion of Scripture in which it occurs, and whose 
judgment has generally been confirmed by his fellow-labourers, 
to whom as a rule the proofs of each portion were sent, and 
by many of whom singular care has been bestowed upon them. 

When the conclusions in the two works are identical 
in substance, if not in form, there can be little doubt that 
they express positive results of Biblical Scholarship, and will 
probably command the consent of competent judges. When 
the corrections or alterations differ, the difference seldom, 
if ever, occurs in reference to questions of pure scholarship. 
It generally depends on the greater or less importance attached 
by either party to the testimony of early Versions, or of the 
great Fathers, and to the general judgment of the Churches. 
To such considerations great weight is, indeed, on all hands 
attached. But a different estimate of their influence from that 
adopted by the Revisers has undoubtedly determined some of the 
results presented in this Commentary on questions of considerable 
importance, especially as affecting the integrity of Holy Scripture 
as hitherto generally received. 


ob6C42 


vi PREFACE. 


Such has been the nature of our labours as respects the 
correction of the text of the Scriptures. In respect to the 
explanatory matter in the Notes, great pains have been taken 
to present the results of laborious investigations in a condensed 
form. As a rule, but little. space has been allowed to the 
discussion of interpretations dismissed as untenable by our 
contributors. Our object has been to put the reader at once 
in possession of the results of our enquiries, and to spare 
him the task of comparing conflicting views, especially those 
which appeared merely speculative’. 

Where subjects required fuller discussion than could con- 
veniently be afforded in notes of this character, they are dealt with 
separately in Essays at the close of a Book or Chapter. Our 
object has been simply to afford the reader the necessary mate- 
rials for understanding the text; and the limits of our space 
precluded us, for the most part, from admitting observations 
which did not bear directly on this purpose. The extent of 
the Commentary was expected not to exceed eight or ten 
volumes; and it has been found practicable to complete the 
Old Testament in six volumes, and the New Testament in 
four. The volumes are, indeed, somewhat larger than was at 
first contemplated; but the enlargement was rendered inevit- 
able by the constant accumulation of materials, and by the 
growing demand for full and precise information on points of 
exegetical interest. 

It remains to give some account of the general conduct of the 
undertaking. Its conception, as has been stated, was due to the late 
Lord Ossington ; but that the idea was carried into effect is due in 
the first instance to the present Archbishop of York. On the 


? To this general rule the present of recognized position and authority. As 


volume presents one exception which calls 
for notice. The writer of the Commentary 
on the Revelation, who had devoted many 
years to the study of this most difficult 
book, deemed it essential to present, to- 
gether with his own conclusions, a com- 
plete view of the systems of interpretation 
adopted by ancient and mover expositors 


a necessary result of this decision, in 
which the Editor reluctantly acquiesced, 
the Commentary on the Revelation con- 
siderably exceeds the average length. But 
it may be hoped that the reader will, on the 
whole, welcome what may be regarded as 
an exhaustive commentary on a peculiarly 
difficult and obscure portion of Scripture. 


PREFACE. vil 


suggestion being made to the Archbishop, he at once proceeded 
to call a meeting for forming a Committee, and took an active 
part in its formation. By that Committee, which comprised many 
Prelates and distinguished laymen, with the Regius Professors of 
Divinity in Oxford and Cambridge, the plan of the work was settled, 
and the selection of the Contributors and of the general Editor was 
finally approved. The Archbishop of York of course became 
Chairman, and the practical direction of the work was entrusted 
to the Editor. Both in the constitution of the original Committee 
and in the choice of contributors, care was taken that all parties 
shculd be represented by whom the fundamental principles of the 
Anglican Church are recognized. For some years, meetings of 
the original Committee were held frequently, at which points not 
definitely determined, or open to question, were fully considered. 
These meetings were attended by all the members, generally at 
the residence of the Speaker; but when questions respecting the 
form and character of the work had been unanimously and finally 
decided, and when the list of contributors was completed, the 
execution was left to them, and to the Editor, whose responsi- 
bility extends to every part. Had questions of principle arisen, 
reference would have been made to the Regius Professors of 
Divinity and the Archbishop; but no such intervention has been 
called for. From first to last the work has proceeded without 
any clash or danger of disruption; and, as now presented to 
the public, it affords an attestation to the substantial unity of 
principles which underlies all superficial divergences of opinion 
within our Church. 

The duty of the Editor has necessarily involved a vigilant and 
laborious supervision of the work of his colleagues, particularly in 
ensuring that no important investigations on their respective 
subjects were accidentally unnoticed, but the contributors have 
enjoyed practical independence. More particularly, in points not 
of primary or doctrinal importance, whether affecting the compara- 
tive value of differing expositions, or the results of archzological or 
philological investigations, the Editor has not attempted to inter- 
fere with the liberty or discretion of the contributors, and each of 


viii PREFACE. 
them is strictly responsible for his own statements. It may be 
admitted that thorough uniformity, such as marks the production 
of a single mind or the labours of colleagues under complete 
control, is not attainable under such a system. But it will pro- 
bably be felt that this disadvantage is more than compensated 
by the greater freedom and independence, and by the wider scope 
of research, which are rendered possible when each scholar follows 
his own course, and is himself mainly responsible for the eluci- 
dation of the portion of Scripture specially entrusted to his care. 
The original list of contributors is necessarily somewhat differ- 
ent from that which is presented by the successive volumes. But 
it differs far less than might be supposed. In the Old Testament, 
the gaps occasioned by the deaths of three contributors were 
supplied from the general list without calling in new hands, except 
for the Book of Daniel. Thus the Editor, who originally under- 
took the Book of Job only, had to write the Commentary and 
Essays on the first part of Exodus, the Introduction and part of 
the Commentary on the Psalms, and that on Habakkuk; but with 
few exceptions, the other books have been treated by the writers 
to whom they were originally assigned. In the New Testament, 
the portion of the Gospels left incomplete by the death of Dean 
Mansel devolved upon the Editor. Some portions of St Paul's 
Epistles, from Ephesians to Philemon, surrendered by Bishops 
Lightfoot and Benson, were undertaken by the Bishop of Derry, 
aided by the Dean of Raphoe, and by other contributors originally 
connected with tne work. In this last volume, with the exception 
of the Second Epistle of St Peter, and that of St Jude, every portion 
was written by the contributor to whom it was first allotted? 


1 The two Epistles of St Peter, together 
with that of St Jude, were originally as- 
signed to the Editor. They were willingly 
transferred, however, by the Editor to 
Bishop, then Professor, Lightfoot, in sub- 
stitution for the Pauline Epistles which he 
had undertaken, as he desired to be re- 
heved from the latter, on the ground that 
he was producing a Commentary of his 
own upon them. Dr Lightfoot then en- 


gaged Professor Lumby for the Second 
Epistle of St Peter and for that of St Jude; 
and some time afterwards, on his elevation 
to the Bishopric of Durham, he gave up 
also the First Epistle of St Peter, which 
thus reverted to the Editor. This state- 
ment seems necessary to account for the 
withdrawal of so distinguished a name 
from the list of contributors 


PRERACE. ix 


The Editor cannot but express his deep thankfulness that a 
work involving so many difficulties, and liable to so many unfore 
seen disturbances, should thus have been brought to its conclusion 
witout any substantial deviation either from the principles or 
the form adopted and explained at its commencement. 





CONTENTS OF VOL. 


IV. 


HEBREWS. 


INTRODUCTION. BY WILLIAM KAY, D.D., 
RECTOR OF GREAT LEGHS, 


. The Title of the Epistle . a BRE 
il. [ts Canonicity . . .. 4 
(II. The Authorship of the Epistle : 

1 The External Evidence .. . 

2. The Internal Evidence. . . . . 

§$ i—iv. Verbal resemblances . 
§v. The use of Metaphors. . . 
§ vi. The Quotations from the O.T. 


§ vii. Ways of viewing or handling 
religious truth 
§ viii. Summary of Internal Evi- 


dence . . : 
3. Examination oe the Leading Obje 
tions. ect ° 


ib. 


IV. Where, and when, the Epistle was 
written 5 fo aetake 
V. To whom it was ee 
APPENDICES. 
1. On 2 St Peter iii. 15, 16 
2. Words in St Paul’s speeches which 
have been referred to as charac- 
teristic of St Luke 
3. Verbal resemblances between the 
(acknowledged) writings of St 
Paul and those of St Luke . 
4. Divergencies alleged by Dr Riehm 
to exist between this Epistle and 
those of St Paul 


COMMENTARY AND CRITICAL NOTES. BY Dr KAY. 
Pp. 29—103. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES: 
On‘chap: i. 3,6,7 . . SP Moukety iis 
On chap. il. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 

OMA MRT amn ante, (athe caiysly Fete anes fo 


Onjchap:.6,16 . 9. . « 
Qnichapyiv.25 12°. 5 . 
On chap. v. 4, 7,13 . . 
On chap. vi. 11, 17. 


On chap. vii. 22, 24, 27 


33 


ADDITIONAL NOTES: 

On chap. viii. 3, 9,13. . 3 

On chap. ix. 4, G, 14, 15, 16, 17, 24 .« 

Onichap x2034503.S rom ech ee eet 

Onchap. xi. 3, 3,.2%,37. . -. « 

On chap. xii. 1, 7, 12, 17, 18, 21, 22, 
23,28) ate eel ee te 

On chap. xiii. 5, 10, 1§ . D5 





PAG 


28 
ib, 


24 


1b. 


2€ 


xii CONTENTS. 


THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF 
JAMES. 


INTRODUCTION. BY ROBERT SCOTT, D.D., DEAN OF ROCHESTER. 


pp. los—trit. 


COMMENTARY, CRITICAL NOTES, AND EXCURSUS. BY DEAN SCOTT 


pp. 112—I53. 
PAGE Ss PAGS 
ADDITIONAL NOTES: ADDITIONAL NOTE: On chap. iv. 5,6 141 
Onichap.(i-05)) <n eee Fis 122 Excursus.—St James and St Paul . 150 
On chap. iv. 3 . «. 42) oh ee eeLAD 


THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF 
PETER 


INTRODUCTION. BY F. C. COOK, M.A., CANON OF EXETER. 


§ Introductory Remarks . . . . 155 §6. Evidences of its authenticity: 

§2. The Objects of the Epistle. . . i. A. External Evidence . . . 166 

§ 3. Class of readers to whom the B. Internal Evidence . . . 169 
Epistle was addressed . . . 158 §7. Bearing on the state of the — 

§ 4. Timeand place of its Composition 159 stolic Church . . . “ ib. 

§ 5. Characteristics of this Epistle. . 164 


COMMENTARY AND CRITICAL NOTES. BY CANON COOK. 
PP. 173—220. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES: 
Qn chap. i. 1,2,6,8. . 2 Sa) ge On chap. iii. 15, 18, 19, 21 - 206 


CONTENTS. reli 


THE SECOND EPISTLE GENERAL OF 
Pit ER. 


INTRODUCTION. BY J. R. LUMBY, D.D., 
NORRISIAN PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY, CAMBRIDGE. 


PAGE . PAGS 
Genuineness and authenticity. . . . 221 Language .......4. 4. 6 234 


Argument of the Epistle . . . . . 233 Conclusion. . . - Ser ee |S 
Time and place of Writing . .. 234 


COMMENTARY AND CRITICAL NOTES. BY PROFESSOR LUMBY. 
pp. 236—268. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Chap. it. 4, 11, 15 . tts z seis “ : - 259 


THE .FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF 
JOHN. 


INTRODUCTION. BY W. ALEXANDER, D.D., 
BISHOP OF DERRY AND RAPHOE, 


a. St John’s life in reference to his V. 1. Summary of the argument— 
Epistles. . . . ps as to 
His connection with aaa » 272 (a) theauthorship .. 292 
li. Polemical element in the Epistles (4) the time and place es 
Of Stajohniow 9 7) 276 writing . 293 
III. Close and pervading peaneenen 2. Importance of the Epitiets in 
of the Gospel and First Epistle the controversy upon the ge- 
of St John. . . 282 nuineness of the Gospel . . 295 
{V. Alleged faults of St John's VI. External testimony to the Epistle 296 
Styler.) |: TRA AWG ee VEINS Bae wake Ben a weicuee ty, 
Conclusion . obiitie cae 299 


COMMENTARY AND CRITICAL NOTES. 
BY THE BISHOP OF DERRY AND RAPHOE. 


Pp. 301—353. 
ADDITIONAL NOTEs: ADDITIONAL NOTES: 
On‘chap.1.2,4,5 - . - 309 On chap. iii, 2. . noe 384 
On chap. ii. ro, 16, 18, = 29 - «324 On chap. iv. 3, 9, Bee Mo aaah: [att 338 
ORG AR ETON go cial vis ivi sy wy 98M On chap. v. 6, 7,8,9,16 - + « » 348 


On chap. ili. 8,9, 12, 19,20 . . » 331 





xiv CONTENTS. 


THE SECOND EPISTLE OF 
JOHN. 


INTRODUCTION. BY W. ALEXANDER, D.D., 
BISHOP OF DERRY AND RAPHOE. 


PAGE PAGS 

I. To whom is the Epistle ad- III. Interest and importance of the 
dressed? . . 355 letter . . . ss + 359 
{1 Who is “the Elder” spoken IV. Analysis. . . aye ee 
Phi ay dt ais . « 35g) VV. External testimony ope oe. 6 SO 
Additional Note ; a « 363 


COMMENTARY AND CRITICAL NOTES. 
BY THE BISHOP OF DERRY AND RAPHOE, 


PP. 365—370. 
ADDITIONAL NOTES on vv. 1, 9, 12; 3 John 13 . ote ee weak . 368 


THE THIRD EPISTLE OF 
JOIN: 


INTRODUCTION. BY W. ALEXANDER, D.D., 
BISHOP OF DERRY AND RAPHOE. 


I. Analysis. . . - 371 IV. Interest given to St John’s Epistles 
{{. Probability that the Gaus adds by their connection with Ephe- 
is |\Gaius of Cornth. 2 <) ema 2 sus and Asia Minor ine 374 


‘JI. Characteristics and peculiar func- 
tion of these two short letters . 373 


COMMENTARY AND CRITICAL NOTES. 
BY THE BISHOP OF DERRY AND RAPHOE. 
Pp. 376—382 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on 7. 3, 4, 7, 8,12 . . . pee 7a 38 


THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF 
JUDE 


INTRODUCTION. BY J. R. LUMBY, D.D., NORRISIAN PROFESSOR 
OF DIVINITY, CAMBRIDGE. 


The writer... - 383 Its relation to the Second Epistle of St 

The persons to eit the Epistle is a Peter . 2. 6 «(Ohi ten oe 
dressed © se ee omy fostes siage4, sContentsemamr - 389 

Its aitienticity we eee opm lees 580s ene mB OOkMOn Faces he Zolat and 

Date and place of writing . . . . . 385 jalkut §..: Joo > sen 


COMMENTARY AND CRITICAL NOTES. BY PROFESSOR LUMBY 
PP- 390—403. 


§ 2. 


CONTENTS. 


THE REVELATION 


OF 


> Le JORN. 


INTRODUCTION. BY WILLIAM LEE, D.D., 
AP.CHBISHOP KING’S LECTURER IN DIVINITY IN THE UNIVERSITY 
OF DUBLIN, AND ARCHDEACON OF DUBLIN. 


The Authorship of the Revela- 
tion cae 8 
External Pearse, 


(a) The Eastern Church . 
(b) The Western Church . 


§ 3. 
§ 4. 
§s. 


The Canon of the New Testa- 
ment . 

When and Where was ite Reve: 
lation written? . 

Doubts as to the iswssite ite 
thorship 


External Evidence . 


§ 6. The present stage of Subjective 
Griticism:. 7+. 2 6 
§ 7. Doubts as to the Bpesate Au- 
thorship 
Internal Evidence . . . . « 
I. Internal Characteristics . : 
{l. The Spirit, Temper, and Tone 
of the Revelation . 
III. The Doctrine of the Revelation 


(a) Christology . .. .« 

(6) The Doctrine of the Holy 
Spiti. = Ae 

(©) The Ministry of eels : 

(d) The Christian Life 

(e) Eschatoloz7 


(Cf) Demonology 


PAGE 


IV. The Language and Style 


(a) Hebraisms. . . es 
(4) The use of the LXX. sine 
(c) Language to. 3) 
(ad) Irregular Constructions. . 
(e) Solecisms . . . 

(f) Style . 


The Text of the pacinee 
The modern conception of ‘* Apo- 
kalyptik”. 
Ideal Symbols 
(a) The intimations of the Reve- 
lation itself 
(b) The interpretations supplied 
by other Books of Scripture 
Symbolical Numbers 
(a) Numbers taken simply 
(b) Numbers applied to time 
The Interpretation of the Reve- 
lation . Sent 
(1) The Preterist System. . 
(2) The Historical or Continuo ts 
System . 2 
(3) The Futurist Siem 
(4) The Spiritual System . 


The principal Works consulted 
Analysis of the Contents 


CONTENTS. 


REVELATION—continued. 


COMMENTARY, CRITICAL NOTES, AND EXCURSUS. 
BY ARCHDEACON LEE. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES: 


On chap. 
On chap. 
On chap. 
On chap. 
On chap. 
On chap. 
On chap. 
On chap. 
On chap. 
On chap. 
On chap. 
On chap. 


i. I, 4, 10, I, 15, 20 
ii., and on vv. 6, 10, 20 
ili. 19 

iv. 3, 7 

v. 8 

vi., and on v. 6 

Vil. 6. 

viii, I, 2, 3 

1X2: ibseeroeare 

x. 2 5: oy sae 
Xl.) 25.7, 12/50 oun 
Xil, ¥,, 3; 7,100 20 ee 


pp. 496—844. 

PAGE 
ADDITIONAL NOTES: 

509 On the lost Commentary of St Hip- 
530 polytus “. >. = "mae Pte He lc 
547 On chap. xiii. 1, 3, 5, 10, 18 
560 On chap. xiv. 4, 40 =) eeeeee 
570 On chap. xv. 6... ene 
580 On chap. xvi, andonv.16 .. . 
594 On chap, xvii. 4, 9, 10,22 «eee 
605 On chap. xviii... «)quneneneine 
618 On chap. Xix.. 22, \:)seneee 
629 On chap. xx.2.. . Pe ny 
646 Excursus on the Millennium = alts 
667 On chap. xxi. 1, 19, 20 . wo 


PASS 


EER BdR EWS. 


INTRODUCTION. 


PAGE 

I. THE TITLE OFTHE EPISTLE . I 

Mie ics GANONIGIEY. on... 2 
Ill. THe AUTHORSHIP OF THE EPIs- 
TEE: : 


- spgeMte 4 
I. The Ptcrnal Bardence fe cial eee ane 
2. The Internal Evidence. . . Jills 
§§ i—iv. Verbal resemblances . 7 
§v. Theuseof Metaphors. . . 12 
§ vi. The Quotations from the Ost 13 
§ vii. Ways of viewing or handling 
religious truth . . 14 
Summary of Internal Evi- 
dence . 16 
3. Examination = the Leading Obje 
tions . . 6 


§ viii. 


I. Tue TITLE OF THE EPISTLE. 


i is certain that the Title which stands 
in our Authorised Version (adopted 

from the Received Greek Text and the 

Vulgate) is not the primitive one. 

In the most ancient existing Greek 
Manuscripts (A, B, and x) the heading is 
simply, To THE HEBREws. The same 
must have been the case in the Alexan- 
drian manuscripts at the end of the second 
century, since we find Origen speaking 
of ‘“‘the Epistle which bears the super- 
scription, Zo the Hebrews.” ‘The Peshito 
Syriac Version, also, which was made not 
long after the middle of the second cen- 
tury, has ‘‘ The Epistle to the Hebrews.” 

It is scarcely necessary, however, to 
appeal to documentary evidence. All 
the most ancient traditions relative to 
this Epistle (see 111. Sect. 1) imply that 
the oldest copies had no author’s name 
prefixed. The writer had seen fit, for 
whatever reason, not to place his name 
at the head of the Epistle; and, although 
the persons to whom it was sent knew 
well from whom it came (see xiii. 183—24), 


New Test—Vot. IV. 


PAGE 
IV. WHERE, AND WHEN, THE EPIs- 


TLE WAS WRITTEN ai fat rics 0, « SE 
V. TO WHOM IT WAS WRITTEN , . 21 
Appendices. 

1. On 2 St Peter ili. 15, 16. 24 
2. Words in St Paul's speeches which 
have been referred to as charac- 

teristic of St Luke. . . 24 
3- Verbal resemblances between the 
(acknowledged) writings of St 

Paul and those of St Luke . . 25 
4. Divergencies alleged by Dr Riehm 
to exist between this Epistle and 

thoseiof St) Paul Ss a, ig) 26 


yet those who first transcribed it imitated 
the writer’s reticence. 

Under these circumstances, it seems 
obviously proper that we should inquire 
into the evidence for the Canonicity of 
the Epistle prior to making any attempt 
to determine (if possible) its authorship. 


II. THE CANONICITY OF THE EPISTLE. 


The inquiry on this point is of a strictly 
historical kind.—Have we good ground 
for affirming that this Epistle stood, in 
primitive times, among the books which 
had authority in determining the Church’s 
faith? and have later ages of the Church 
ratified, by their mature decisions, the 
view that had prevailed in the first age? 

1. As regards the Eastern Church, the 
answers to these questions can be soon 
given. All the evidence we possess tends 
to prove that the Epistle was received as 
canonical from the earliest times by the 
churches of Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt. 
The fact, already alluded to, of its inser- 
tion in the Peshito Version is a very 


A 


2 INTRODUCTION TO 


weighty one. Justin Martyr (a.D. 145) 
quoted it as a Scriptural authority of 
equal rank with the book of Genesis". 
The language of the Epistle is clearly re- 
flected in a fragment of Pinytus of Crete 
(A.D. 170) and ina passage of Theophilus 
of Antioch? (a. p. 180). Irenzus, also 
(whose testimony belongs properly to the 
Eastern Church), has at least two manifest 
allusions to this Epistle’. Clement of 
Alexandria (A.D. 165—220) quotes it 
frequently, and always as of apostolic 
authority. Origen does the same (A.D. 
186—253). We need mention no later 
names. It is undeniabie that in the 
third century the Epistle was received 
as canonical by all the churches of the 
East‘; and that it has continued to be 
so received down to the present day. 

2. On turning to “he Western Church 
we find that we have a somewhat com- 
plicated problem to deal with. 

(2) On the one hand, we have clear 
proof that the Epistle was already looked 
upon as authoritative by the Roman 
Church in the later part of the first 
century. This proof is supplied by a 
Letter which St Clement wrote, as Bishop 
of Rome and in the name of the Roman 
Church, to the Church of Corinth®. In 
this Letter the Epistle to the Hebrews is 
frequently referred to® in precisely the 
-same way as the other Epistles; besides 
which it is evident that the writer’s whole 
way of viewing and expounding religious 
truth had been largely influenced by this 
Epistle. The fact is unquestionable. It 
was observed by Eusebius; who says, 


1 ‘Apol.’ I. 63 (cp. 12). He joins together 
the testimonies of Gen. xviii. 2 and Hebr. iii. 1; 
so making (to adopt Dean Alford’s words) ‘‘ what 
can hardly but be called a canonical use of” the 
Epistle. 

B Dr Westcott, on the ‘Canon of the N. T.;’ 
PP: 172, 3, 208. 

® Compare ‘c. Heer.’ II. xxx. g with Hebr. 
i. 3, and III. xix. 1 with Hebr. iv. 2. 

4 That Marcion (A.D. 140) excluded it from 
his canon, is a fact scarcely worth noticing. He 
rejected three of the four Gospels, the Acts, and 
the Pastoral Epistles ; simply because they were 
opposed to his own teaching. 

® The date of the letter cannot well be later 
than A.D. 96. It may, however, be much eariier. 
Irenzus speaks of Clement as embodying in his 
Letter ‘the teaching (xapddoow) which he had 
an (veworl) received from the Apostles” (Il. 
iii. 

4 ee especially chh. 17, 21, 36, and 43: but 
note also chh. 1, 9, 10, 12, 27, 34, 56 


“He not only borrows many thoughts 
from the Epistle to the Hebrews, but 
uses its very words’.” 

It is certain, then, that, before the end 
of the first century, this Epistle was held 
in the highest honour by the Roman 
Church, and was used with at least as 
much deference as was accorded to 
Epistles of confessedly apostolical origin. 
This is a fact of primary importance, 
which must never be lost sight of in the 
present inquiry. No other Epistle can 
be more distinctly proved to have had a 
place in the primitive canon of the Ro- 
man Church. 

(4) On the other hand, from about the 
end of the second century down to the 
close of the fourth, we find many traces, 
in different parts of the Western Church, 
of the Epistle’s not being regarded as, in 
the full sense of the word, canonical. It 
had a place assigned it in the sacred 
volume which contained the books of the 
New Testament ; but, not being held to 
be apostolical, was not allowed to be of 
binding cogency for the settlement of 
controversy, and, in some cases, was not 
publicly read in the Churches. 

Notwithstanding this, however, the tes- 
timony of the Western Church, as a 
whole, is not doubtful. For, First#ly:— 
We have already seen that the Roman 
Christians, who lived at the time when 
the Epistle was written, received it into 
their canon. It is inconceivable that 
they should have done this, if they had 
not had clear and positive knowledge of 
the author. If, therefore, apostolicity 
was a necessary condition (as the doubt- 
ers maintained) of canonicity, then it fol- 
lowed that, in the judgment of those 
who had the means of knowing, the 
Epistle had been written by an apostle ; 
and their unhesitating reception of it 
cannot be set aside because persons, 
who lived one or two or three hundred 
years later, thought that it was not apos- 
tolic. Secondly:—Whatever may have 
been the extent, to which an opinion 
adverse to the canonicity of the Epistle 
prevailed for a time’, or whatever may 


1 ‘E.H.,’ m1. 38. Dr Westcott remarks: ‘‘It 
is not too much to say, that it [the Ep. to the 
Hebr.] was wholly transfused into Jement’s 
mind” (‘H. of the Canon,’ p. 26). 

? It should be borne in mind that 

(1) Much of the evidence which is brought for. 


THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 3 


have been its origin’, thus much is 
certain, that by the end of the fourth 
century the Epistle was firmly established 
in the Canon of the Western Church. 
The ground, on which this settlement 
was effected, is set forth by St Jerome in 
very memorable words. After remarking 
that the Epistle to the Hebrews was not 
included in the Latin Canon, nor the 
Apocalypse in the Greek, he continues: 
“and yet we receive both; following by 
no means ¢he usage of the present time, 
but the authority of ancient writers, who 
for the most part freely refer to passages 
of both as canonical.” Both Jerome 
and Augustine, we may add, were careful 
to explain that they did not consider it 
possible to determine the authorship with 
absolute certainty. 

The position thus assigned to the 
Epistle was undisturbed for the next 
eleven hundred years. In the early part 
of the sixteenth century, when the 
question of its authorship was again 
raised, and freely discussed by both Ro- 
man and Reformed divines, by far the 
greater part of those, who had doubts as 
to its being St Paul’s, steadily upheld its 
canonicity*, Luther, however, led by 


ward is zegative ; thatis, drawn from the sz/ence of 
Latin writers. But this is a very precarious ground 
of inference. For instance :—we know that early 
in the Fifth Century the Epistle was admitted at 
Rome to be St Paul’s. Yet it is not quoted by 
Innocent, Zosimus, Boniface, Siricius, Celestine, 
nor (in what are held to be his genuine works) 
by Leo the Great ;—the six successive Bishops of 
Rome between A.D. 402 and 461. 

(2) No weight can be attached to the fact that 
Muratori’s Canon does not mention the Epistle. 
It also omits the Epistle to St James and both 
the Epistles of St Peter. In all likelihood, it is 
only a fragment (see Dr Westcott, p. 198). 

(3) When St Jerome says, that ‘‘¢he Latin cus- 
tom does not receive it among the canonical 
Scriptures” (on Isaiah ch. viii), he must be em- 
ploying the term “Latin” in alimitedsense. It 
did not, for instance (see III. 1. 7), include the 
churches of Milan and Brescia. Indeed, in 
another place he himself says; ‘‘though many of 
the Latins doubt concerning it” (on Matt. xxvi). 

1 On this point see Ill, 1. 6. 

2 Erasmus, who argued vehemently against 
the Pauline authorship (see II. 3, § v. 3) wrote: 
“*T do not think tha: the faith is exposed to peril, 
if the whole Church ve mistaken in regard to the 
title of this Epistle, so long as it is settled that 
the Holy Ghost is its principal author; and oz 
this point we are agreed.” 

Calvin wrote: ‘I, indeed, embrace it without 
controversy among the Apostolical Epistles... As 
to the question, Who composed it, we need not 
trouble ourselves much.” 


mistaken views of some passages in the 
Epistle, gave it only a secondary rank 
among the writings of the New Testa- 
ment; and was followed in this by many 
German divines of his own and the next 
age. But soon after the beginning of 
the seventeenth century its authority in 
the German Church was restored, chiefly 
through the labours of John Gerhard; 
who contended that the term “ deutero- 
canonical” should be held to mean simply, 
“of uncertain authorship,” without in any 
way derogating from the canonical dignity 
of the book to which it was applied. 

May we not say, then, that the emer- 
gent testimony of the Western Church, 
though it differ so widely in character 
from that of the Eastern, cannot be looked 


.upon as less valuable? In the East there 


was a general acceptance of the Epistle 
from the first; which has continued with- 
out variation to the present time. In 
the West its authority had been most 
distinctly recognized in the first century’; 
then in the course of the third and fourth 
centuries it passed through a severe ordeal 
of doubt; from which, however, it came 
forth uninjured, and therefore (must we 
not say?) with added lustre. After 1100 
years it was a second time subjected 
to the crucible of doubt; and once 


It will be seen that the principle on which 
these two writers proceeded, when they accepted 
the Epistle as canonical, was far inferior to that 
which had guided St Jerome. He went on his- 
torical and objective grounds; they on critical 
and subjective. 

It is, at the same time, interesting to notice, 
how cordially, both in ancient and modern times, 
persons who had doubts regarding the author- 
ship of the Epistle have confessed its worthiness 
of standing in the Canon. 

Thus Ovigen: ‘‘The thoughts (vonjuara) of the 
Epistle are wonderful, and no way inferior to 
those of the writings which are acknowledged as 
the Apostle’s.” 

Dean Alford (‘ Prol.’ Sect. vi. § 31): ‘‘ Nowhere 
are the main doctrines of the faith more purely 
or more majestically set forth; nowhere Holy 
Scripture urged with greater authority and 
cogency; nowhere those marks, in short, which 
distingrish the first rank of primitive Christian 
writings from the second, more unequivocally 
and continuously present.” 

Delitesch speaks of the Epistle as ‘‘marching 
forth in lonely royal and sacerdotal dignity, like 
the great Melchizedek, of whom its central pore 
tion treats, and like him, a-yeveaddynros.” 

1 Cp. Dr Westcott (as above, p. 199). ‘‘The 
Epistle to the Hebrews is just that of which the 
earliest and most certain traces are found at 
Rome.” 


AZ 


4 INTRODUCTION TO 


more the conscience of the Church de- 
cided that the Epistle had an incontro- 
vertible claim to stand in the Canon of 
the New Testament. 


III. THe AUTHORSHIP OF THE EPISTLE. 


Since the canonicity of the Epistle has 
been established apart from the question 
of its authorship, and since the author 
himself saw fit to withhold his name, it 
might appear to some that there is no 
need to entertain this question ; especially 
when so many have held that it is one to 
which no answer can be given with any 
approach to certainty. 

We are unable to adopt this conclu- 
sion. 


The controversy respecting the author- . 


ship of this Epistle has been one of the 
most remarkable in the whole range of 
biblical criticism ; and therefore its his- 
tory is, in any case, of deep interest. But, 
besides this, the inquiry is one which 
may contribute, in no slight degree, to 
illustrate the Epistle itself. For, if any 
certainty is to be attained as to the 
authorship, it must be chiefly by means 
of the Internal Evidence; and a diligent 
examination of this may be expected to 
throw light on the contents of the Epis- 
tle, even if it should fail to reveal its 
‘ author. 

Before, however, we enter on this in- 
vestigation, we must take a brief survey 
of 


Sect. 1. THE EXTERNAL EVIDENCE. 


1. First of all, a strong presumption 
respecting the author is supplied by the 
early reception of the Epistle among the 
Gentile churches of both the East and 
the West. It was addressed specially, 
“To the Hebrews;” and it entered 
with laboured minuteness into matters 
connected with the Jewish Ritual; no- 
where speaking of the Gentiles as fel- 
low-heirs of God’s promises. Yet, as far 
as we know, no Epistle laid so firm hold 
on the mind of the Roman Church in 
the first century as this did; and by the 
middle of the second century it had 
struck its roots in the Churches of Syria, 
Crete, Palestine, and Egypt. The only 
adequate explanation of all this appears 
to be, that the Roman Church knew the 
Epistle to be the work of an Apostle, 


and that the “Hebrews,” to whom # 
was sent (and to whom the writer was 
undoubtedly known), gavea like account 
of its authorship in different parts of the 
East. If now we ask, what apostle united 
in himself the many diverging qualifica- 
tions, which alone could have gained for 
the Epistle so immediate and so wide 
a circulation, the most obvious answer, 
certainly, is—St Paul. 

2. The earliest traditions we possess 
on this subject, do actually assign the 
Epistle to St Paul. 

Clement of Alexandria’ (a.D. 165— 
220) relates that ‘the blessed presbyter” 
(by whom it is agreed that he meant 
Pantzenus) used to say: “Since the Lord, 
being the Apostle* of the Almighty, was. 
sent to the Hebrews, Paul out of modesty, 
as having been sent to the Gentiles, avoids 
inscribing himself Apostle of the He- 
brews: both because of the reverence due 
to the Lord, and because it was a super- 
erogatory work in him to write to the 
Hebrews, when he was preacher and 
apostle to the Gentiles*.” 

This tradition takes us nearly up to 
the apostolic age. 

Again, a little later, we find Origen 
(A.D. 186—253) writing thus: “If, then, 
any Church holds this Epistle to be Paul’s, 
let it have credit on this account also; 
for not without good reason have the 
men of old time* handed it down as Paul's.” 
Coming from one who was born about 
A.D. 186, this expression, “‘men of old 
time,” takes us back to the age of those 
who might have conversed with Apostles. 

3. Zhe Alexandrian Church, as a 
whole, distinctly assigned the Epistle to 
St Paul. Both Clement and Ongen fre- 
quently refer to the Epistle as “the 
Apostle’s,” or “St Paul’s;” showing what 
the prevalent church-tradition there was. 
Their testimony on this point is rather 
strengthened than weakened by the fact 


1 In Euseb. ‘E. H.,’ vi. 14. 

? Hebr. iii. 1: see above, II. 1, note. 

3 Clement himself supposed that the reason, 
why St Paul had not prefixed his name to the 
Epistle, was, “that he might not at the outset 
repel the Hebrews, who were prejudiced against 
him and viewed him with distrust.’’ (Euseb., as 
above.) Plainly, both he and Pantzenus would 
have thought it, a priori, w#/tkely that Paul 
should have written to the Hebrews: a circum- 
stance, which gives additional force to their his- 
torical testimony. 

4 ol dpxato: dvdpes (in Euseb. ‘E. H.,’ vi. 25} 


‘THE EPISTLE, TO THE ,HEBREWS. 5 


that each of them had a theory of his 
own about the composition of the Epistle’; 
on which point some remarks will have 
to be made when we consider the In- 
ternal Evidence’. The witness borne 
by succeeding Alexandrian writers is free 
from all trace of vacillation or doubt. 
Dionysius (+ 264, 5), Peter, and Alexander, 
quote the Epistle as Paul’s; and Athana- 
sius mentions fourteen Epistles of St Paul 
among those which had been ‘‘ placed in 
the Canon, and handed down, and be- 
lieved to be divine.” 

4. That the same view prevailed in 
the Churches of Vfalestine, Syria, and 
Asia Minor,is not questioned. Weneed 
only mention that Eusebius speaks of 
“fourteen Epistles of St Paul” as “plainly 
and clearly*”’ belonging to the Canon. 
At the same time he states that there 
were some who refused to admit the 
Pauline authorship of the Epistle to the 
Hebrews, because the Roman Church did 
not admit it:—which may fairly warrant 
the inference that they found no eastern 
Church to appeal to. 

There appears to be one, and only 
one, way of accounting for so general an 
agreement as to the authorship of an 
anonymous Epistle. It is this. When 
the Christians, who had escaped to Pella 
before the Siege of Jerusalem, found 
themselves precluded from returning to 
the captured city, they would be likely 
to go and settle, some of them, in Pales- 
tine and Egypt, others, in Syria and Asia 
Minor (cp. Acts vi. 5, 9, Vili. 1, Xi. 19, 20); 
carrying with them their copies of this 


1 Clement, endeavouring to account for ‘‘a 
similarity of complexion,” which he observed 
between the style of this Epistle and that of the 
Acts, conjectured, that the Epistle was written 
by St Paul in Hebrew and translated into Greek 
by St Luke. 

Origen also maintained that the style was un- 
like St Paul’s; but he preferred supposing that 
the ‘‘thoughts” were Paul’s, and that these were 
embodied in language by one who had attended 
his teaching; though it was impossible to say, 
who this was. “As to who wrote the Epistle, 
the truth is known to God: but the information 
that has reached us (7 els judas POacaca laropla) 
is from some, who say that Clement, who became 
Bp of Rome, was the writer, and from others, 
who say that it was Luke, the writer of the Gos- 
fel and the Acts.” That this ‘‘information” 
did not mean ancient tradition is evident from the 
context. It probably refers to what he had heard 
stated by Clement and others. 

2 See below, Sect. 3, § v. 

8 °H. E.,’ Il. 3, mpodnrat kai cages. 


Epistle,—now, after the overthrow of the 
Temple, more precious to them than ever. 
Their statements as to the authorship 
would, of course, be accepted every- 
where. 

5. Before we leave the East, there is 
one more testimony that ought to be 
noticed. It is of an indirect kind, but 
this in no way lessens its interest. 

In the Alexandrian, Vatican, and Si- 
naitic Manuscripts (as also in C, H’ and 
many cursives) the Epistle to the He- 
brews stands immediately after the Epistles 
to the Thessalonians; and this is also 
the place which it occupies in the lists 
put forth by St Athanasius and by the 
Council of Laodicea (A.D. 365)*: prov- 
ing that there was a wide-spread consensus 
among the learned, at any rate, in favour 
of the Pauline authorship. 

The testimony of the Eastern Church, 
then, is consistent and clear. 

6. That of the Western Church is of 
a different character. 

We saw above (il. 2. 4) that the Epistle, 
which had been recognized as authorita- 
tive at Rome in the first century, came at 
a later period to be treated by many as 
of only secondary value. The reason 
which they alleged for this was, that the 


‘Epistle was ‘“‘zot St Paul’s:”—clearly im- 


plying, that as many as held it to be ca- 
nonical did believe it to be St Paul’s; and 
consequently, that the Roman Church of 
the first century had done so. 

The question, then, is: Shall the posi- 
tive testimony of men, who, knowing 
St Paul intimately, were qualified to give 
witness on such a point, be outweighed 
by the doubts of those who lived some 
hundred years later, and therefore were 
not so qualified? To allow this would 
be to violate a fundamental rule of 
evidence. 

If it be demanded, that some expla- 
nation be given of the change of opinion 


1 In H (=the Coislinian Fragment) there is a 


note, which says that the MS. had been ‘‘com- 


pared with the copy in the library of Pamphilus 
at Czesarea, which was written with his own 
hand.” This would take us to A.D. 310. Dr 
Westcott says: ‘‘So much at least is certain, 
that Pamphilus, a man of wide learning and re- 
search, reckoned the Epistle to the Hebrews 
among the writings of St Paul’’ (pp. 361, 2). 

2 Ebrard notices that a still earlier position of 
the Epistle was after the Epistle to the Galatians; 
as appears from the numbering of the Kephalaia 
in the Vatican MS. 


6 INTRODUCTION TO 


which is thus supposed to have occurred 
in the Western Church, we may point in 
reply to the following considerations : 
(1) Philastrius (f about 387) speaks 
of some who denied that it was St Paul’s, 
because they thought the passage vi. 4—6 
favoured the Novatians. It seems pro- 
bable that this had been from the first 
the chief cause of stumbling. During the 
severer persecutions which broke out in 
the second and third centuries, many of 
those, who had fallen away for a time, 
confessed their error and begged to be 
re-admitted to church privileges. This 
was refused them by some rigid secta- 
rians, especially the Novatians. We can 
readily imagine how natural it would be 
for men, under such circumstances, to 
shrink from those solemn words, and to 
wish that the Epistle which contained 
them were not of obligatory authority. 
Why, indeed (it might be argued), should 
it be, when it had not on it the apostle’s 
name? In any case, the Epistle did not 
itself claim to be Paul’s; why, then, 
should this point be insisted upon by any? 
It may help us to realize, in some de- 
gree, the force of what is here alleged, 
if we remember, that this very passage 
(Hebr. vi. 4—6) was one of the chief 
causes of Luther’s being unwilling to 
receive the Epistle as St Paul’s. How 
‘much stronger would the reluctation 
against it be in the minds of those who 
heard the text quoted by Novatians as 
a proof that broken-hearted penitents 
must be excluded for ever—at least from 
communion with the Church upon earth 
—if not also from hope of salvation’ ! 
(2) Such persons could scarcely fail 
to be confirmed in their doubts, if they 
heard that eminent Greek scholars like 
the Alexandrian Clement and Ongen had 
expressed an opinion that the style was 
unlike St Paul’s; or again, that so illus- 
trious a man as Tertullian had actually 
spoken of it as the work of Barnabas’. 


- Philastrius adds that some refused to read 
this Epistle in Church because they thought 
ch. iii. 2 (‘‘faithful to Him that made Him”) 
had a savour of Arianism. 

2 It is noticeable that in the very chapter, from 
which we derive this information (‘de Pudic.,’ 
c. 20), Tertullian is quoting Hebr. vi. 4f. Of 
course, his known Montanistic leanings would 

ive additional weight to any admission of this 
itind coming from him. 

St Jerome speaks of Tertullian’s opinion as if 


Neither would they be indisposed to lay 
stress on the circumstance that, as the 
apostie St John had been directed by 
Christ to write to seven Churches, so the 
Apostle of the Gentiles had written by 
name to seven Churches ; seven being the 
mystical number, in which (as the Mura- 
torian Canon says) the Catholic Church 
is represented’. Some effect, also, must 
have been produced by the style of the 
translation of the Epistle; the “‘o/d Latin” 
form of which (according to Dr West- 
cott*) “exhibits more marked peculiari- 
ties than are found in any of the Pauline 
Epistles ;” while even the Vulgate trans- 
lation exhibits “numerous singularities 
of language and inaccuracies of transla- 
tion.” 

7. On the whole, then, we are able 
to account sufficiently for the altered 
position which the Epistle occupied in 
some parts of the West for about two 
centuries; and to affirm that the testi- 
mony of the Eastern Church and of the 
early Roman Church is no way shaken 
by anything that occurred during that 
interval*, That this was the judgment 
of the Western Church itself, is certain. 
By about the middle of the fourth cen- 
tury we find many Latin writers using 
the Epistle unhesitatingly as St Paul’s. 
So Hilary of Poitiers (+ 368), Lucifer of 
Cagliari (ft 371), Victorinus at Rome, 
Philastrius of Brescia (t 387), S. Ambrose 
of Milan (t 397). The Council of Hippo 
(A.D. 393) and the Third Council of 
Carthage definitely ascribed the Epistle to 
St Paul. In a.p. 405 Pope Innocent I, 
in a letter which he wrote to the Bishop 
of Toulouse, spoke of the “ fourteen 
Epistles of the Apostle Paul.” 


it were peculiar to him, “vel Barnabe juxta 
Tertullianum” (‘ Catal. Scr. E.,’ c. 5); and we 
find no traces of such a view in St Augustine. 
Yet we can scarcely doubt (as Bishop Words- 
worth has remarked) that Tertullian’s statement 
exerted much influence on the course which 
opinion took in the Western Church on this sub- 
ject during the two following centuries. 

1 Slight as this argument is, it seems to have 
had considerable weight with some. It was 
urged by Cyprian, and still more pointedly by 
Victorinus of Pannonia (+ 303). It was thought 
worthy of mention by Jerome and by Isidore of 
Seville. 

? As above, p. 242. 

3 It is obvious that the fact of the Epistle’s 
being without the author’s name adds materi 
to the force of the Jositive evidence; while 
tends to neutralize that which is merely negative. 


THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 7 


There can be little doubt that the 
final settlement of the question was 
largely due to the wisdom and candour 
of the two great Church teachers, Je- 
rome and Augustine. Both of these 
stated clearly their own conviction that 
the Epistle was St Paul’s; yet they fre- 
quently contented themselves with re- 
ferring to it as “the Epistle to the 
Hebrews ;” or, “which is inscribed to 
the Hebrews’.” 

From their time downward, for about 
1100 years, the Eastern and Western 
Churches were in accord on this point. 

As the objections, which have been 
urged against the Pauline authorship of 
the Epistle during the last feur centuries, 
rest almost entirely on grounds of in- 
ternal evidence, we reserve further notice 
of them till we reach the end of the next 
section *. 


Sect. 2. THE INTERNAL EVIDENCE. 


We now come to the ground on which 
the main arguments against the Pauline 
authorship of the Epistle have rested 
both in ancient and in modern times. 
We shall endeavour, therefore, to ex- 
amine this branch of the evidence, con- 
cisely indeed (as our limits require), but 
with thoroughness ; taking note not only 
of words, phrases, modes of expression, 
and whatever else comes under the head 
of style, but also of quotations from the 
Old Testament, characteristic metaphors, 
modes of viewing and stating theological 
truth, and the like®. 

It is important to bear in mind what 
the two fields of comparison are: namely, 
on the one side, this Epistle; on the 
other, not only St Paul’s Epistles, but 
his speeches also, as recorded in the Acts‘. 


1 Z.g. “ Epistola que inscribitur ad Hebreos” 
(Aug. ‘de Civ. D.,’ x. 5). It has been argued 
that such a mode of quotation implies doubt re- 
specting the authorship. All that can properly 
be inferred from it is, that St Augustine, like 
many in modern times, sometimes saw fit to tread 
in the very steps of the writer of the Epistle, and 
to withhold mention of his name. 

2 For the reasons why no reference is made 
here to 2 Pet. iii. 15, 16, see Appendix I. 

3 Valuable help has been derived, in some of 
these branches, from Mr Forster’s ‘ Apostolical 
Authority of the Ep. to the Hebrews.’ 

4 Acts xiii. 16—41; xiv. 15—17; xvii. 22— 
gi; xx. 18—35; xxii. I—21; xxiv. lo—21; xxvi. 
“@—29. Many of the words noted by Delitzsch 


The fidelity with which St Luke repro 
duced these is unquestionable’. Some 
of them, in all probability, he had from 
the Apostle himself*: The difference 
of style observable in these speeches— 
Hebraic, Hellenistic, and Hellenic— 
is itself no slight guarantee of their his- 
torical accuracy. 


$i. Words found in this Epistle and the 
writings or speeches of St Paul, but not 
elsewhere in the New Testament or the 
Sepiuagint. 


aidws, avabewpew, avuTotaxtos, aetbera, 
aroAavors, adapyupos, evédixos, evepyis, 
eparas, ionut, Koopikos, wiunrys®, vexpow, 
opéyou.al, Tapaxon, TAnpodopia, PiAogevia. 


That seventeen words answering to 
the above description should be found © 
in our Epistle, is, of itself, a striking fact. 
But the significance of this fact is vastly 
enlarged, when we look at the words za 
situ, and mark their surroundings. 

1. In both ch. xi 12 and Rom. iv. 
19 we have the participle vevexpwpevos ; 
and in both it is used to describe Abra- 
ham’s bodily condition at the time when 
a child was promised him; while in the 
context of each passage reference is 
made to the promise that Abraham’s 
seed should be as the stars of heaven. 

Note, moreover, that the noun, véxpew- 
ots, is twice used by St Paul (Rom. iv. 19, 
2 Cor. iv. 10), though it is found no- 
where else in the New Testament or the 
Septuagint, and is of rare occurrence in 
secular writers. 

2. In ch. vii. 27, édarag is used of 
Chnist’s “ offering Himself a sacrifice for 
sins once:” and in Rom. vi. 10, of His 
“dying unto sin once.” 

3. The azeiea of ch. iv. 6 follows 


as characteristic of St Luke belong to these 
speeches; so that they are really indications of 
St Paul’s hand. See Appendix II. 

1 See Introd. to ‘ Acts,’ p. 339 f. 

2 So Dr Farrar (‘ Life of St P.,’ I. 157) in re- 
gard to St Stephen’s speech: ‘‘We find little 
difficulty in adopting the conjecture that its 
preservation was due to him [St Paul].” 

3 That is, if we follow the later editors; who 
read (mAwral in 1 Pet. iii. 13. If we follow the 
Received Text of 1 Pet. iii. 13, 20, wzunrys will 
be transferred from § 1 to § 3; but on the other 
hand amexdéyoua: will have to be transferred from 
§3to§1. The werd pzunr7s occurs in St Paul 
five times. 


8 INTRODUCTION TO 


upon the azwria of iii. 19. We have the 
like sequence in Rom. xi. 20o—3o. 

4. Zw of the words in the list given 
above, évd...5 and zapaxoy, occur toge- 
ther in the same verse, ii. 2, along with 
another word, zapaBacts, which is found 
in the New Testament only in this 
Epistle and in St Paul. Ad the three 
words occur in Rom. ili—v. 

5. Other two of the words in this 
list, PrAogevia and agiAdpyupos, are found 
in ch. xiii, 2—5, only six lines apart. 

The former of these had been pre- 
ceded by ¢uAadeAdia (in v. 1); as it is 
also in Rom. xii. 1o—13. ‘The latter, 
adiAapyvpos, occurs also in 1 Tim. iii. 3 
(following upon ¢uAdgevos in v. 2), but 
nowhere else in the whole range of Greek 
literature. 

6. The argument supplied by the 
term évepyjs is greatly strengthened, 
when it is remembered that évépyeta is 
used by St Paul eight times and évépynpa 
twice, though neither of them is found 
elsewhere in the New Testament, or the 
Canonical books of the Old Testament ; 
and that he uses évepyéw, which occurs 
only thrice in the rest of the New Testa- 
ment, no fewer than seventeen times. 

7. The word zAnpodopia occurs in 
two places in our Epistle :— 

vi. 10—12, “ your work and love,;... 
to the assurance of hope ;...through faith 
and patience.” 

x. 22—24, “In assurance of faith;... 
the profession of our ofe...to provoke 
unto ove and to good works.” 

In St Paul, also, it occurs in two 
places :— 

1 Thess. i. 3—5, “‘ your work of faith 
and labour of /ove, and patience of hope... 
in much assurance.” 

Col. i. 27—ii. 5, “ The hope of glory; 
...knit together in /ove,;...the assurance of 
understanding ;...the stedfastness of your 
Saith.” 

Let it be observed, that 

(1) In each of these pairs we have a 
passage which contains these six words, 
—‘work,” “ faith,” “ patience,” “ hope,” 
“love,” “assurance.” 

(2) In all four passages we have what 
has been called “the Pauline triad of 
Christian graces” (Delitzsch) ;—compare 
1 Cor. xiii. 13, Col. i. 4, 1 Thess. v. 8. 

(3) Another of the words in our list, 


, 


f4entys, is found in the first of the four 


passages (Hebr. vi. 12), and in the 
verse which follows the third passage 
(1 Thess. i. 6). 

(4) The like sequence of thought and 
language (laborious work being set forth 
as a model for imitation) is found also 
in 1 Thess. il. 9, 14, 1 Cor. iv. r2—16, 

(5) The word zAnpodopia occurs no- 
where else in Greek literature. 

When we remember that 1 Thess. i. 
3—5, the passage which has presented 
so many striking resemblances to ch. vi. 
1o—r12, lies in the first paragraph of 
what is believed to be the earliest of the 
Pauline Epistles, may we not affirm that 
here, in the heart of our anonymous 
Epistle, we have the very signature of 
St Paul, engraven in the clearest cha- 
racters P 


§ il. Other words common to this Epistle 
and St Paul, but not found elsewhere 
in the New Testament’. 


ayuv, ayioTys, ddoKinos, alpeouat, axaxos, 
avwdedys, aopatos, BeBaiwars, BéBydos, 
Siaxpiois, Sovdcia, exBacis, éxtperouat, 
edeyxos, évdcixvupi, emiovvaywyn, 
Tos, Gappéw, iAacrypiov, Kavxnua, peoirys, 
petexw, oixtippot, omodoyia, ovedurpos, 
maidevT7s, TapaBacis, mpodndos, ovyKepav- 
vupl, TeAeLOTNS, UTEvavTios, UTEpavw, UTO- 
oTacis, UTooTé\Aopat. 


Here, as in § i, if we are to appreciate 
the force of the evidence, we must ex- 
amine the context. 

1. In ch. ii. 15 the term SovAeia 
stands contrasted with the freedom of 
those who through Christ have been 
made children of God. So it does in 
the three places where it is used by St 
Paul, Rom. viii. 15, Gal. iv. 24, v. I. 

In both Rom. viii. 15 and ch. ii. 15 
the badge of this servitude is “fear,” 

2. In ch. iii. 6 xavynua is coupled 


1 This general statement is far from represent- 
ing the full value of the facts included under it. 
For (1) although all the words do actually occur 
in the Septuagint, yet six of them (aydrys, 
&xBaais, éxicvvaywyh, edapetos, mpodnros, svy- 
kepavvuuz) do not occur af all, and eight others 
occur once only, in the canonical books. 

(2) The freguency with which several of the 
words are used by St Paul is not taken account 
of; whereas four of them are used by him four 
times, three five times, 7a, 1S SUX, GOoKiwos 
seven, evapeotos eight, évdcixvums nine, and kat 
xnua no fewer than en times. 


THE EPISTLE TO THE) HEBREWS. 9 


with “hope.” 
REA 

3. The word vimdoracis in ch. ili. 14 
represents the xavynyua THs éAridos of 2. 
6: and in 2 Cor. ix. 4, xi. 17 we have, rH 
UTOTTATE THS KAVXHTEWS. 

4. “Emwvvaywyy occurs in the New 
Testament only in ch. x. 25, and 2 Thess. 
ii. 1. (Zt ts not found in classical Greek, 
and only once in the LXX., 2 Macc. ii. 7.) 
In each case it is followed by a refer- 
ence to the “ day” of God’s visitation. 

In ch. vi. to we have “the Jove 
which ye showed (evedeifacGe)...in that ye 
ministered to the saints.” So in 2 Cor. 
Vill. 24, ix. 1 (consecutive verses) ; “the 
proof (evdseakw) of your Jove...For, as 
touching tke ministering to the saints.” 

6. The word zapafacis occurs in ch. 
ii. 2 and ix. 15. 

In ii. 2 we have ‘{ the word spoken by 
(Sia) angels ;” and in Gal. iil. 19, where 
also wapaBacis occurs, “(the law) or- 
dained by (é:a) angels*:”—while a little 
above this (v. 14) we have, tva tyv éray- 
yeAiav...AdBwper ; as in ch. ix. 15, d7ws 
+. THY érayyediav AaBwow. 

7. In ch. xiii. 13—15 the Hebrews 
are exhorted to “bear the reproach 
(oveducpdv)” which Jesus bore ; and then 
“through Him” to “ offer unto God the 
sacrifice of praise (aivéoews), that is, the 
fruit of lips that give thanks (ouodoyour- 
twv) to God.” Similarly in Rom. xv. 
2—11, Christ is first set forth as our 
pattern in the endurance of ‘‘reproaches”’ 
(overdicpot), and then as having accom- 
plished the promises, which spoke of the 
Gentiles as giving “praise” and “thanks” 
to God (é&opodoyyoopat. ..aivetre). 

In ch. x. 33—36 the mention of “re- 
proaches” is followed by an encourage- 
ment to “ patient endurance” (dopov7). 
So it is in Rom. xv. 3—5. 

8. In xi. 27 we have the oxymoron, 
“as seeing Him that is invisible” (adpa- 
tov). So too in Rom. i. 20. 

g. In ch. xiii. 2t we read, “make 
you perfect in every good work to do Hs 
will, working in you that which is acceft- 


So xavyao$a. in Rom. 


1 The verb xavyao6a: occurs in the New Tes- 
tament 37 times; of which 35 are in St Paul:— 
xavxnos 12 times, of which 11 are in St Paul:— 
xatxnua 11 times, of which ro are in St Paul. 

2 Dr Farrar (‘ Life of St P.,’ 1. 163) in tracing 
the connexion between St Stephen’s speech and 
the writings of St Paul, notices ‘‘the same tra- 
dition ‘Acts vii. 53; Gal. iii. 19).” 


able (eiapeorov) in His sight;” and m 
Rom. xii. 2, “that good and perfect and 
acceptable (eiapectov) will of God.” 

to. The word peoirys, which occurs 
in ch. viii. 6, ix. 15, xii 24, is found 
elsewhere in the New Tes‘ament only 
in Gal. ill. 19, 20, 1 Tim. ii. 5. (In 
the Old Testament only in Job ix. 33.) 

Now observe, that 

(zt) In all the three places of this 
Epistle the Mediator introduces a “new,” 
or “ better” Covenant, in which “ better 
promises” are embodied, and especially 
(ix. 15) the “‘fromise of an eternal 
inheritance.” So in Gal. ul. 14—19 (cp. 
29) a contrast is drawn between the old 
Covenant and one that is established in 
God's promise of a future inheritance. 

(2) In both ix. 15 and Gal. iii. 17—19 
the elder Covenant is represented as a 
temporary provision made for “trans- 
gressions” (zapaBacewr). 

(3) In ix. 15, Gal. i. 13, 1 Tim. i 
6, the Mediator gives Himself as a 
ransom for sinful men. 


§ui. Words in this Epistle whith are 
seldom used in the New Testament by 
any except St Paul, but which he uses 
Frequently or with some peculiarity of 
manner. 

I. «Anows, ill. t. In St Paul xine 
times; elsewhere only in 2 Pet. i. ro. 
In ch. ill. 1 we have xAjoews érovpaviov, 
in Phil. ili. 14, THs avw KAjoews; the 
equivalence of the two expressions be- 
coming evident, when we compare ch. 
Xl. 22, ‘Iepovsadny érovpaviw, with Gal. 
iv. 26, 7 avw ‘IepovoaAnp. 

2. émovpavos is found sx times in 
this Epistle; in St Paul ‘welve,; else- 
where, ovce in St Matthew, and ovce in 
St John. 

3. aytacuds, xii. 14. In St Paul eight 
times ; elsewhere only in 1 Pet. i. 2. 

In 1 Thess. iv. 3 it is contrasted with 
mopveta. The same contrast is found in 
ch. xil. 14—16 (zopvos). 

4. vyns, v. 13. In St Paul sen 
times; els. ¢avice. Inch. v. 12, 13, it is 
used of an infantile state, which needs 
“teaching,” as in Rom. il. 20, 21; and 
is opposed to “perfection,” ch. vi. 1, 
as in Eph. iv. 13, 14. See also § v. 1. 

5. oroxeia, v. 12. In St Paul four 
times; els. only in 2 Pet. iii. ro, 12 (in 
a different application). 


Io 


In ch. v. 12, as in Gal. iv. 1—3, the 
word is associat2d with vyztos. 

6. oxia,used in vill. 5,x. 1,0f the adum- 
brations of truth which were supplied by 
the Law. The word is so used in Col. 
ii. 17; but not elsewhere in the Old 
Testament or the New. 

In both ch. x. 1 and Col. ii. 17 we 
have oxia tév peAdovTuv. 

7. oapxikos, vii. 16. In St Paul eight 
times; els. only in 1 Pet. ii. 11. 

8. amexdéxoua, ix. 28. In St Paul 
six times ; els. only in 1 Pet. i. 20 (see 
on § i, footnote 3, p. 7). 

In ch. ix. 28 it is used of waiting for 
Christ's Second Coming. So it is in 
1 Cor. i. 7, Phil. ili. 20, expressly ; and 
virtually in Rom. viii. 19, 23, 25, Gal. 


¥.-5. 

In Phil. iii. 20 Christ is waited for as 
owryp ; in ch. ix. 28 as bringing cwrnpia, 

9. weptocotéepus, il. I, Xill. 19. In 
St Paul wine times; els. only in Mark 
xv. 14 (where the later edd. have zrepuo- 
ods). 

10. evdvvayow, xi. 34. In St Paul 
six times ; els. only in Acts ix. 22 (where, 
however, St Luke was almost certainly 
making use of the word he had heard 
from St Paul’s own lips; see 1 Tim. i. 
12, 13). Inch. xi. 34 it refers to Divine 

_power received through faith, and is 
contrasted with man’s natural “ weak- 
ness.” So it is in Rom. iv. 19, 20; cp. 
2 Cor. xii. 9, 10, xii. 3, 4 

II. azmoAvrpwots, 1X. 15, xi. 35. In 
St Paul seven times; els. only in St Luke 
xxi. 28. 

In ch. ix. 15 the aoAvrpwors is effected 
through the blood of Christ. So in Eph. 
in: 

12. émayyedia. In the Epistle to the 
Hebrews it occurs fourteen times ; in the 
Epp. to the Rom., Gal., and Eph., 
twenty-two times; in St Paul’s speeches 
(Acts xiii. 23, 32, xxvi. 6) ‘Aree times :— 
in the Gospels and non-Pauline Epp. 
Jive. Cp. above, § ii. 10. 

Obs. In ch. iv. 1, 2, the terms érayye- 
Ata and evg vyeAtlw are co-ordinated; and 
in Acts xiil. 32 we have, evayyeActopeba 
mv érayyeXiav. 

13. xatapyéw, ii. 14. In St Paul 
twenty-five times ; els. only in Luke xiii. 
7 (in a different sense). In the LXX. 
the word occurs nowhere outside Ezra 
iv—vi. Only two instances are given 


INTRODUCTION TO 


of its use in classical Greek. It is, 
therefore, pre-eminently a Pauline <erm. 

In 1 Cor. xv. 26 and 2 Tim. i. ro it 
is used of abolishing death ; and in ch. i. 
14, of bringing to nought “him that had 
the power of death.” 

In ch. ii, 8—14 the writer is com- 
menting upon Ps. viii. 6; so he is like- 
wise in 1 Cor. xv. 25—28. 

14. ovvetdnors, ix. 9, 14, X. 2, 22, Xiil. 
18. In St Paul twenty-three times; els. 
only in John viii. 9, 1 Pet. ii. 19, iii. 
16, 21. (In the LXX. fzwice.) 

In ch. ix. 14 we have, “purify your 
consctence...to serve (harpevew) the living 
God.” In 2 Tim. i. 3, “I thank God, 
whom I serve (hatpetw) with pure con- 
science’.” Cp. also Acts xxiii. 1, 1 Tim. 
lil. 9. 

In ch. xiii. 18 the allusion to “con- 
science” is introduced in an apologetic 
way ;—as in Acts xxiii. 1, xxiv. 16. Cp. 
Rom. ix. 1. 


§iv. Other verbal resemblances. 
(1) Phrases and modes of expression. 


i. 1, “the fathers;” as in Acts xiii. 32, 
xxvi. 6; Rom. ix. 5, xi. 28, xv. 8. 

il. 4, “signs, wonders, and miracles,” 
mentioned as confirmations of apostolic 
authority. Soin 2 Cor. xii. 12. 

ii. 14, dia tod Gavarov; employed ab- 
solutely, as in Col. i. 22, in speaking of 
the efficacy of the death of Christ. 

ii. 17 and v. 1, ta zpos Tov @eov ; asin 
Rom. xv. 17. Not elsewhere. 

iil. 1, “holy brethren;” as in 1 Thess. 
v. 27 (cp. Col. i. 2). Not elsewhere. 

lil. 12, ix. 14, X. 31, xii. 22, “the liv- 
ing God;” as in St Paul’s speech, Acts 
xiv. 15 (nowhere else in St Luke’s Gos- 
pel or in the Acts), and seven times in 
his Epp. Elsewhere in the New Testa- 
ment five times. 

iv. 2, 0 Noyos THs axons. So in 1 Thess. 
ii. 13, Adyos axons. Not elsewhere. 

In 1 Thess. ii. 13 this “word” is 
described as “the word of God which 
worketh effectively (évepyetrat) in” them 
“that believe.’ In ch. iv. 2, faith is 
required as the condition of profiting by 
the word ; while in iv. 12 it is said, “the 


1 Dean Howson mentions ‘‘the emphatic and 
repeated references to conscience” as one of the 
marked peculiarities of the Pastoral Epistles 
(‘ Hulsean L.,’ p. 147). 


THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. II 


word of God is living and effective (évep- 
vis)” 


iv. 11, crovddcwpev...cicehOetv. The 
expression gains more of vivid reality, 
when we call to mind the o7ovdacov 
eXOeiv of 2 Tim. iv. 9, Tit. i. 12. 

iv. 14, X. 19, €xovres ovv...; in gather- 
ing up the result of a previous argument. 
So in 2 Cor. iii. 12 (only). 

vi. 3, éavrep éxitpery o eos. In 1 Cor. 
Xvi. 7, éav éxitpéry 0 Kvupios. Not else- 
where. 

vi. 8, 7s 70 téAos. Similarly, dv ro 
rédos, in 2 Cor. xi. 15, Phil. ii. 19 (cp. 
Rom. vi. 21). 

vi. Q, werreiopeba Se Tept var, ayamn- 
Tol; Cp. Rom, xv. 14, meéemeopat Oe, adeA- 
got pov, Trepi vpav" 5 

ix. 12, and xiii. 12, dia tod idiov aiua- 
tos. Soin Acts xx. 28. Not elsewhere. 

ix. 14, Aarpevew eg Cévr, In 1 Thess. 
iL 9, Sovdevery Ge Lave. Cp. § iil, 14 
above ; and note on ch. iii. 12. 

ix. 26, viv dé (recent edd. vwi Se)... 
ea Gterie In Rom. ii. 21; vovi dé... 
mehavépwrar; Col. i. 26, vevi dé édave- 
pwn ; 2 Tim. i. Io, Eire aaiciatey dé viv; 
Rom. xvi. 26, davepwhevtos dé viv: cp. 
Vit*L- 233. 

Obs. The “now” in ch. ix. 26 is in 
contrast with antecedent “ages ” (aidves). 
So in Col. i. 26 (aidves) ; cp. Rom. xvi. 
26, 2 Tim, i. 10 (xpovor aidvior). 

X. 5, eioepxopmevos cis TOV Koopov; SO in 
Rom. v. 12 (only). 

X. 19 —22, éxovTes...7appyciav...ev TO 
aipart ‘Inood. --Tpooepxwpeba. Soi in Eph. 
iil. 12, & $ éxouev THY Tappyoiay Kai THY 
Tpocayuryv. Cp. Rom. v. 2; Eph. ii. 18, 

x. 26, értyvwow adyOeias. Soin 1 Tim. 
ii. 4, 2 Tim. i 25 7, Titi. 4. 

ma, 4, BXerropeva ; denoting “things 
visible.” So in 2 Cor. iv. 18 , four times. 

Xi. 3, voodpev; of “ discerning 2 the 
relation in which the created universe 
stands to the Creator. Similarly in Rom. 
i. 20, 

xii. 4, mExpts atyaros. Cp. peéxpt Oava- 
tov, Phil. i. 8; péexpe deopav, 2 Tim. 
ii. 9. 

xiii. 7, “who spake unto you the word 
of God.” In Acts xiii. 46, “that the 


1 This resemblance is more than a verbal one. 
**Nothing is more characteristic of St Paul thar 
the habit of giving credit for something to those 

om he wishes to conciliate” (Dean Howson, 
*H. L.,’ p. 32). Cp. also ch. x. 32—34. 


word of God should be spoken unto 
you.” 

xii. 17, Urép Tdv Yuxav por. 
2 Cor. xi rs: 

xi. 18, “ Pray for us;” as in x Thess, 
V. 25, 2 Thess. iii. (cp. Eph. vi. 19, 
Col. iv. 3)’. 

xill. 20, “The God of peace,” only in 
St Paul; Rom. xv. 33, xvi. 20, Phil. iv. 
9, I Thess. v. 23 (in each case, in the 
way of a parting benediction). Cp. 2 Cor. 
xii. 11. 

Obs. In Rom. xv. 33, as here, the 
writer had been asking those whom he 
addressed to pray that he might be 
enabled to visit them. 

xlil. 20, “that brought up (avayaywv) 
from the dead...our Lord Jesus ;” cp. 
Rom. x. 7, “to bring up (avayayeiv) 
Christ from the dead.” 

xii. 21, “every good work.” So in 
2 Cor. ix. 8; Col. i. 10; 1 Tim. v. 10; 
2 Tom, 255 Tit. b 16, Bi tA VE pi 
2 Thess. il. 17; 2 Tim. iil. 17. 

xill. 22, TapaxadG dé vpds, adeAdoi, as 
in Rom. XV. 30, XVL 173 1 Cor. xvi. 15. 

xiii. 22, avéxeoOe; used in asking for 
the forbearance of his readers, as in 
2 Cor. xi. I (cp. vv 4, 19, 20). 

xii, 23, “ Our brother Timothy,” as in 
2 Cor. i. 1; Col. i. 1; Philem. 1. 

Xill. 23, éay tdxvov Epyntar. For the 
phrase see 1 Tim. iii. 14; and for the 
subject-matter comp. 1 Cor. xvi. 10, 
Phil. ii. rg—24, 2 Tim. iv. 9 

xili. 24, “all the saints,” 2 Cor. xii 
135 Phil. iv. 22. 

xiii. 25, “Grace be with you all,” 
in Tit iL 155; cp. Col. iv. 18, 1 Tim, 
vi. 21, 2 Tim. iv. 22. All St Paul’s 
Epistles close with some form of this 
salutation; and his only. 


So in 


» 


(2) Connective particles, grammatical 
forms, rhetorical manner, rhythm of sen- 
tences, &c. 

The resemblances which have been 
hitherto pointed out are, for the most 
part, as weighty as they are plain. It 
may be well to add a few which, if of 
less intrinsic value, possess a special 
argumentative force of their own; since 
they show that the farther our analysis 
of the language of this Epistle goes, the 


1 Delitzsch admits frankly that, towards the 
close of the Epistle, ‘‘we seem to hear S¢ Pasé, 
and no one else.” 


more manifestly does its likeness to that 
of St Paul’s writings stand out to view. 

I. Tovyapoty, xii, 1. Elsewhere (in 
New Test.) only in 1 Thess. iv. 8. 

2. xabarep, iv. 2 (and v. 4, R.T.). 
In St Paul ten times. Not elsewhere. 

In both iv. 2 and vy. 4 it is followed by 
cai; as it is in Rom. iv. 6, 2 Cor. 1. 14, 
1 Thess. iii. 6, iv. 5. 

3. vovi 8, viil. 6, xi. 16 (and in recent 
edd., ix. 26). In St Paul’s Epp. eighteen 
times. The only other places, w here vuvt 
occurs, are in St Paul’s speeches, Acts 
Xxii. I, Xxiv. 13. 

4. 8 Hv airiay (as a connective), il. 1. 
In St Paul ¢hree times. Not elsewhere. 

5. emei followed by a question ( = “for 
otherwise”), x. 2. So in Rom. il. 6, 
1 Cor. xiv. 16, xv. 29 (only). 

A corresponding use of éreé without a 
question occurs in ch. ix. 26; as it does 
in Rom. xi. 6, 22, 1 Cor. v. 10, vil. 14 
(only). 

6. In iv. 8 and Vill. 7 we have the 
sequence, «i yap.. y OvUK av. 

The same occurs ¢hree times in St Paul’s 
Epp. (1 Cor. ii. 8, xi. 31; Gal. i. 10), but 
not elsewhere. 

7. In viii. 4 we have «i pev yap; a 
combination found in 2 Cor. xi. 4 and in 
St Paul’s speech, Acts xxv. 11, but not 

elsewhere. 

' 8. In iii. 7 we have a quotation from 
the O. T. introduced by a xa6us..., with 
an ellipsis preceding it. The same very 
marked peculiarity is found in Rom. xv. 
3, 21 and 1 Cor. 1. 31, ii. g (only). 

9. Invi. 17, vii. 18, we have a neuter 
adjective (with the article) used as an 
abstract noun, with a dependent genitive. 
The same is found in Rom. ii. 4, viii. 3, 
ix. 22; 2 Cor. iv. 17, viii. 8; Phil. iv. 5. 

More particularly; with ch. vii. 18, 70 
airis (=THs capkikys evtodjs, v. 16) 
aobevés, compare Rom. viii. 3, to advvarov 
Tov vomov, ev & nabever dia THS TapKds. 

10. In xiii. 5, apAdpyupos o tporos* 
apkovpevor Tots mapovow (an apparently 
categorical clause, followed by a parti- 
cipial one; both being, in fact, hortatory) ; 
remarkably parallel to Rom. xii. 9, 7 
Gyan avuToKpitos* atoaruyovrTes TO Tovy- 
pov. 

11. Inv. 11, xiii. 18, nets refers to 
the writer singly; as it very frequently 
does in St Paul. 

12. Iniy. 13 there is an unusual con- 


INTRODUCTION TO 


struction; the relative és taking up an 
antecedent avrés with a slight break in- 
tervening. The same is found in Eph. iv. 
15, 16, Col. ii. 10. 

13. In ii 9, iv. 14, xii 2, 24 (cp. 
xlil. 20) the sacred name, ‘Inoois, is made 
(with marked emphasis) to follow a de- 
scriptive clause. So it is in Acts xiii. 23 
and 1 Thess. i. 10 (cp. Rom. i. 3, 4, 

1 Coy vi 7) 

14. In vi. 10, 11, Siaxovijoavtes.. -kal 
diaxovodvres* criGupouiee 5é...axpt TéAous, 
the rapid combination of past, present, 
and future recalls that of 2 Cor. i L. 13, 14, 
emywwokere, eArri~w d€ Ort Kat tus Te 
Aous éexryviicer be, KaBas Kal emeyvuixare, 

15. The use of tives in ili. 16, to 
minimise the statement of Israel’s guilt, 
is strikingly similar to that in Rom iii 
I—4 and 1 Cor. x. 7—10. 

16. In some cases we seem to have 
the very structure (and even the rhythm) 
of St Paul’s sentences reproduced. Thus: 

(z) The balanced clauses of X 39 
vmoorohas eis drwAecav and miorews cis 
mepuroinow Wrxiss. resemble those of Rom. 
vi. 16, duaptias cis Gavarov and vraxoys 
eis Sires aenes while the general structure 
of the verse, ovk...eis dmw@Aetav, GAAa «is 
meputoinow WoxAs, has a close parallel in 
1 Thess. v. 9, ovk...€is opypv, GAN eis repi- 
Toinow owrypias. 

(6) In v. 5 we have, ovrw kal o Xpuc- 
TOS ovx € €auTov edoéace. .GAN (followed by 
a text from the O.'T. -)5 c strikingly parallel 
to Rom. XV. 3; kal yap o Xpioros ovx 
éaut@ ypecev, adda (followed by a text 
from the O. sEa)e 

17. In manner, again, how forcibly 
does the zapoévopos ayarns of x. 24 
recall to memory the ¢irormetoGar yov- 
xélew of 1 Thess. iv. 11, and the rq 
Tiup addydous mporyovmevoc Of Rom. xiL 
Io! 

How similar, too, the paradox in x. 34, 
“Ye took joyfully (uera yapas) the spoiling 
of your goods,” to that in 1 Thess. 1. 6, 
“‘having received the word in much afflic- 
tion with joy (“era xapas) of the Holy 
Ghost,” and in Col. i. 11, “unto all pa- 
tience and long-suffering with joyfulness 
(wera xapas)!” Cp. also St Paul’s words 
in Acts xx. 24. 


§v. Zhe use of Metaphors. 


1. Inv. 12—14 persons of low re 
ligious attainments are spoken of as be 


THE EFISTEE (| TO. THE HEBREWS. 


ing in an infantile state, unfit to partake 
of solid food. Similarly in 1 Cor. iil. 1, 2. 
Cp. § ili. 4. 

2. In each of these passages this do- 
mestic metaphor is followed by ¢wo others; 
one taken from architecture, the other 
from agriculture, See ch. vi. 1, 7, 83 
1 Cor, ili. 6—11. 

3. In xii. 1 life is compared to @ race. 
This is one of St Paul’s characteristic 
metaphors’. See 1 Cor. ix. 24; Gal. v. 7; 
Phil. iii. 14; 2 Tim. iv. 7; Acts xii. 25, 
XX. 24. 

4. Following upon this, in xii. 4, there 
is a metaphor taken from the pugilistic 
games; “the metaphor changing here,” 
Delitzsch observes, “exactly as it does 
in 1 Cor. ix. 24—27.” 

5. In x. 33 the suffering Christians 
are spoken of as “made @ spectacle” 
(Gearpifopevor) ; so they are in 1 Cor. iv. 
9 (O€arpov...eyevnOnpev). 

6. In xiii. 9 we have a nautical me- 
taphor, ‘‘carried away (zrapadepopevor) by 
various and strange teachings ” (cp. ch. vi. 
19), Similarly in Eph. iv. 14, “carried 
about (zepupepopevor) by every wind of 
doctrine.” 

7. Iniv. 12 we have a metaphor such 
as might be used by one who was con- 
versant with medical subjects. It has 
been pointed out* that metaphors of this 
kind are found in St Paul’s Epistles (as 
1 Tim. iv. 2, Kexavtnpiacpévor, 2 Tim. il. 
17). 

§vi. Zhe Quotations from the O. T. 


(2) _ Texts made use of in this Epistle and 
by St Paul. 


ieee ese ile7.- Quoted in chet. 5,'v..5, 
and by St Paul in Acts xiii. 33; cp. Rom. 
eas 

The statements made by St Paul, that 
Ps. 11. 7 had its fulfilment when Christ 
was raised from the dead (Acts xiii. 33), 
and that by His resurrection He was 
“declared to be the Son of God”’ (Rom. 
i. 4), throw much light on the use that is 
made of this passage in ch. i. 5, v. 5. 
They also illustrate the meaning of the 
term “ First-begotten” (namely, “from 
the dead,” Col. i. 18) which occurs in 
ch, i. 6. 


1 It is dwelt upon by Dean Howson, ‘ Meta- 
phors of St Paul,’ p. 137. 

2 See a paper by Dr Plumptre, in ‘The Ex- 
positor’ for August, 1876. 


13 


2. Ps.xcvil. 7 is quoted ini, 6. The 
prefatory words, “‘When, again, He 
bringeth His first-begotten into the 
world (eis rHv oixovumévny),” point to verses 
in the adjacent Psalms, xcvi. 13 and 
xCviil. 9; the language of which is applied 
by St Paul in Acts xvii. 31 (see on i. 6) 
to Christ’s Second Coming (coupled, as 
in ch. 1. 5, 6, with mention of His resur- 
rection). 

3. Ps.cx. 1 is quoted in i. 13, and re- 
ferred to in i. 3, vili- 1,X. 12, xii. 2. St Paul 
quotes it in 1 Cor. xv. 25, and refers to it 
in Rom. viii. 34, Eph. i. 20, Col. iii. 1. 

In Rom. viii. 34 it is said that Christ, 
“at the right hand of God...évruyxavee 
vmep ypav.” The only place outside 
Rom. vili, in which the expression ép- 
Tvyxavew brép occurs, is ch. vil. 25; where 
it is used of Him who is set forth as the 
“priest for ever” of Ps. cx. 

4. Ps, vili. 6 is quoted in ii. 8. So it 
is in 1 Cor. xv. 27, Eph. i 22; cp. also 
Phil) ii. 21, 

In 1 Cor. xv. 27, 28 the same logical 
stress is laid on the “al/ things” of Ps. 
vill. 6 as here in ch. ii. 8. 

In both 1 Cor. xv. 27 and Eph. 1. 22 
this quotation follows upon a reference 
to Ps. cx. 1; as it does in ch. ii. 8. 

5. Gen. xxi. 16 is quoted in vi. 13— 
17, as supplying a ground on which the 
“heirs of promise” might securely rest 
their hope. The same use is made of 
Gen. xxii. 16—18 in Gal. ili. 8—29. 

6. Jer. Xxxi. 31—34 1s quoted in viil. 
8—12 and x.16,17. The same passage 
is plainly referred to in 2 Cor. ill. 3—6 
(cp. also vi. 16). 

7. Deut. xxxii. 35 is quoted in x. 30 
and in Rom. xii. 19. The rendering, 
which differs widely from that of the Sep- 
tuagint, is exactly the same in the two 
passages; and in each case the words, 
“saith the Lord,” are added. Cp. below, 

2). 52 

Ae noun ékdikyous and the verb avr- 
taroootval, contained in this quotation, 
occur also in 2 Thess. i. 6—8'. 

8. Hab. ii. 4 is quoted in x. 38. So 
it is in Rom. i. 17 and Gal. iii, 11°. 


1 Deut. xxxii is quoted by St Paul in two other 
places, Rom. x. 19, xv. 10; but not elsewhere in 
the New Testament. It is also referred to in 
fh (Cost 3 Ae) 

2 The denunciation of umbelief in Hab. i is 
quoted by St Paul in Acts xiii. 41. 


t4 


In Roin. iv. 16—22, where the & 
niotews of the quotation is specially dwelt 
upon*, Abraham’s example is brought 
forward to illustrate the nature of faith; 
and the language which is used concern- 
ing him bears a close resemblance to 
that of ch. xi. 8—1g (see above, $i. 1). 

In Gal. iii, also, Abraham’s faith has 
equal prominence given to it. 

In chh. x, xi, Rom. iv, Gal. iii, faith is 
represented as a firm reliance on God’s 
promise (emayyedia ; see ch. x. 36, xi. 9, 
El, 13, 27; Romx iv..1g; 14, 16, 20/.235 
Gal. nh. 14,)16, 17, 18,19, 2%, 225.29"): 

g. Gen. xxi. 12 is quoted in xi. 18 
and in Rom. ix. 7. 

A verse in the immediate context, Gen. 
xxi. 10, is quoted in Gal. iv. 30; the nar- 
rative in Gen. xxi. 1—12 being, indeed, 
the basis of Gal. iv. 22—31. 

A similar oracle in Gen. xxv. 23 is 
quoted in Rom. ix. rz. 


(2) Remarkable coincidences in the mode 
of citing the O. T. 


1. In iii. 7, “as the Holy Ghost saith*.” 
Cp. Acts xxvill. 25, ‘‘Well spake the 
Holy Ghost...saying.’’ Not elsewhere. 

2. Withiv. 7, “saying zz David.” Cp. 
Rom. ix. 25, ‘‘saying zz Hosea.” See 
also Acts xili. 40. 

3. Inv. 6 we have xa6us kai év érépw 
A€yer; and in Acts xiii. 35, d10 wal & 

— €répw even 

4. In viii. 5, dpa yap, pyot. In 1 Cor. 
vi. 16, évovtar yap, pyoi. 

_ 5. In x. 30 Aéye xvpios is added. 
So in Rom. xii. 19, xiv. 11, 2 Cor. vi. 
17: 

6. In xii. 5 the O.T. text is intro- 
duced by a bold personification: ‘The 
exhortation, which converseth with you as 
with sons; My son, despise not thou....” 
Similarly in Rom. x. 6, “The righteous- 
ness which is of faith speaketh on this 
wise; Say not thou....:” and in Gal. iii. 


1 I say, specially, because this phrase domi- 
nates the whole Epistle; occurring in it eleven 
times. The like may be said in regard to the 
Epistle to the Galatians; in which the phrase 
occurs mine times. The only other place in the 
New Testament where it is found is James ii. 24 
(‘not of faith”’). 

* This supplies an answer to the oft-repeated 
assertion, that the conception of ‘‘ Faith” in this 
Epistle differs from that which belongs to it in 
the Pauline Epistles. 

8 The ellipsis in 6:3, xa0ws has been noticed 
above, § iv. ey 8. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


8, “The Scripture, foreseeing..., preached 
the Gospel beforehand to Abraham.” 

7. Ini. 5, ii. 12, 13, x. 30 we have 
several quotations connected by “And 
again :”’ so in Rom. xv. 10, r1, 12; 1 Cor. 
iil. 20. 


It has, indeed, been objected that the 
quotations in this Epistle are introduced 
by Aéyet, etpynxe, &c. ; while St Paul (it is 
alleged) uses the forms, “it is written,” 
“the Scripture saith,” &c. 

The objection proceeds on the falla« 
cious assumption that, if St Paul sent a 
letter to the Hebrews, he must needs 
write as if he were addressing Gentile 
Christians. But, in fact, there is no 
difficulty whatever in the case. 

1. St Paul often uses the form Aéyet. 
In Rom. x. 16—21, for instance, it oc- 
curs four times within the space of six 
verses. In the Epistle to the Ephesians 
the only two citations that are made are 
introduced by 6:6 A€yet (iv. 8, v. 14). 

2. The form “saith’’ is more usual 
in addressing ews’. Hence in Acts xiii. 
16—43 ‘“‘saith’’ or “said’’ occurs four 
times, and ‘“‘written” only once. In speak 
ing to the Roman Felix, Paul says, “All 
things written in the Law and the Pro- 
phets” (xxiv. 14); but to Agrippa the 
Jew his words are, “Nothing but what 
the Prophets did say” (xxvi. 22). 

This latter form is obviously most in 
harmony with the whole tenor of an Epis- 
tle which begins, ‘God, who of old... 
spake unto the fathers by the prophets ;” 
and which views the word of God as 
“living and operative” (iv. 12), address- 
ing the same warning, age after age, to 
the successive generations of men (ili. 7). 


§ vil. Ways of viewing or handling 
religious truth. 

Many parallelisms to St Paul’s teaching 
have been introduced incidentally under 
the preceding heads*. In addition to 
these the following (which are, however, 
but a sample) deserve to be noticed: 

1. In i. 2—6 a remarkable descrip- 
tion of Christ, as Son of God, stands in 
immediate connexion with mention of 
His sacrificial work. 


1 Cp. Dr Townson, ‘ Works, I. 91—102. 
2 See especially § i. 2, 6; § ii. 1, 5,9; iii. 6, 
10, II, 13; § iv. (1) freq.; § vi. throughout. 


THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 


Similarly in Col. i. 13—17; the lan- 
guage employed in the two cases having 
a striking resemblance’. 

2. Inii. 9 we read that Christ “tasted 
of death for every man (urép tavtés).” 
So in 1 Tim. ii. 6, He “gave Himself a 
ransom for all (vtép wavtwv);” in 2 Cor. 
v. 15, “one died for all (uxép rdvtwv);” 
in Rom. viii. 32, He was “delivered up 
Jor us all (urép npav TavTwv).” 

This wonderful arrangement had its 
origin in “the grace of God;” cp. Rom. 
We Bayly, 20, Zl 

3. In i. ro, 11, Christ is “the Cap- 
tain’’ of “many sons” of God, who are 
“His brethren.” In Rom. vill. 29 He is 
“the first-born among many brethren.” 

4. In ii. to, 14 the “many sons,” 
whom God is “leading to g/ory,” are 
represented as having previously been 
“subject to dondage through fear of 
death.” So in Rom. viii. 14f., the “sovs 
of God,” who are heirs of “g/ory” (v. 17), 
were once burdened with “the spirit of 
bondage” causing them ‘“‘to fear.” 

5. In ii. 17 it is said that it behoved 
Jesus, for the due discharge of His office, 
“to be made like (ouowyvar) to His 
brethren.” In Rom. vii. 3 (with a similar 
connexion of thought), “God sent His 
Son in the likeness (év owovwmarr) of sinful 
flesh ;” and in Phil. ii. 6, 7 Jesus “was 
made in the likeness (év opowparr) of 
men.” 

6. The case of those who fell in the 
wilderness is enlarged upon (with much 
similarity of treatment) in ii. 7—19 and 
¥ Cor x 5 —12. 

4. Inch.v. 7—9 the “obedience” of 
Christ has the same prominence given to 
it which it has in Phil. ii. 6, 7. See also 
Rom. v. 19. 

8. In ix. 15 Christ’s atoning death is 


1 “Tt is universally acknowledged that the 
Christology of the Ep. to the Hebr. is on all 
essential points in agreement with that of St 
Paul. This agreement is so great and so evident 
that even Késtlin and Ritschl are obliged to ad- 
mit that the Christology of our author presup- 
poses the Pauline higher conception of the idea 
of the Son of God, and that here at any rate there ts 
unmistakeably a direct dependence of our author 
upon the Apostle.” So Dr Riehm, ‘ Der Lehrbe- 
griff des Hebraerbriefes,’ p. 385. The divergencies 
which this candid and painstaking writer thinks 
he sees between our Epistle and St Paul’s 
writings, admit, in most cases, of very easy expla- 
gation. Some of the more important of these 
are noticed in App. IV. 


15 


represented as having a retrospective 
efficacy. So in Rom. ili. 257. 

g- In x. 25 the day of our Lord’s 
coming to Judgement is spoken of, ab- 
solutely, as ‘the day.” Soin 1 Cor. iii. 
13; cp. 1 Thess. v. 4. 

to. The thought that ‘God is faith- 
ful” is used in the way of consolation in 
Rees has tuts ini Corys 6, “X.) 13, 
t Thess. v. 24, 2 Thess. iii. 3. 

tr. In xi. 7 we have, “heir of the 
righteousness which is by (or, according 
to) faith.” This effect of faith, as placing 
a man in his proper relation to God, is 
(it needs scarcely be said) often insisted 
on by St Paul. See Rom. iii. 22, iv. 
1I—13; Phil. ili. 9, &c. 

1z. The mention of zopvos in xii. 16 
is followed in v. 17 by a reference to the 
forfeited inheritance. The same sequence 
is found in 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10, Eph. v. 5. 

13. In xill. 4, 5 unchastity and co- 
vetousness are placed side by side, as in 
t Cor. v. 10, 11, vi. 9, Eph. v. 3, 5, Col. 
iil. 5. 

14. In xil. 22 Mount Sinai and the 
Heavenly Jerusalem stand contrasted as 
the respective homes and centres of the 
Legal and Evangelical Covenants. Simi- 
larly in Gal. iv. 25, 26°. 

15. In ii. 15 f, iv. 11, the history of 
Israel in the Wilderness is urged as a 
typical warning to Christians. So in 
1 Cor. xX. I—12. 

16. Inxiii. 16, ‘““beneficence and com- 
munication (kowwvia)” are spoken of as 
“sacrifices,’’ with which ‘God is well- 
pleased (evapeoretrat).”” 

In Phil. iv. r4—18 St Paul speaks of 
the gifts, by which the Philippians “‘com- 
municated” with him (cvyxowwrvycarres, 
v. 14, CP. exowdvycev, V. 15), as “a sacri- 
fice well-pleasing (edapeorov) to God.” 
The word xowvwria is used with this same 
specific meaning in Rom. xy. 26, 2 Cor. 
ix. 13; but not elsewhere. 

17. More particularly as regards the 


1 Delitzsch refers to Acts xiii. 38, 39, as “a 
remarkable parallel passage.” This also belongs 
to St Paul. 

2 The vividness of the description in ch. xii. 
18—21 is only natural, if St Paul were the writer ; 
as we know that he spent a considerable time in 
Arabia shortly after his conversion (Gal. i. 17). 
There, no doubt, he learnt to realize the truth, 
that Jerusalem, regarded as the centre of the 
Levitical system, was but the successor of Mount 
Sinai, on which the Tabernacle was first erected. 


16 


position occupied by the Law in the his- 
tory of Redemption, the following points 
deserve to be noticed: 

(a) It was only temporary and pro- 
visional, ix. 9, 10 ; so Gal. ili. 19; 

(2) with carnal ordinances, vii. 16, 
ix. aes comp. Gal. iii. 3, Col. ii, 2o— 
23 

(0) in the nature of rudimental dis- 
cipline (crorxeia) suited to infants, v. 12— 
14, vi. 1; comp. Gal. iv. 1, 3, 9 (arouxeta, 
which occurs also in Col. ii. 20): 

(d) bringing the fact of man’s sin- 
fulness more clearly before the mind, 
X. 3 (avapvyots apaptidr) ; comp. Rom. 
iii. 20 (émtyvwos apaprtias), vil. 7": 

(e) weak and unprofitable, as re- 
garded deliverance from sin, vii. 18 (a- 
abevés kai dvpeN€s) 5 ; comp. Gal. ill. 21, 
iv. 9 (do0evq Kai rrwxa), Rom. viil. 3 
(joOever): 

(f) leaving men in a state of bond- 
age and alarm, ii. 15; comp. Rom. vill. 
15; Gal. iv. 3, 9, 39: 

(g) “a shadow of good things to 
come,’ Xx. 1; soin Col. i. 17 “a shadow 
of things to come.” 

(Z) the atoning blood of the sacri- 
fices being a type of the blood of Christ, 
whereby He “obtained eternal redemp- 
tion (azoAvrpwow) for us,” ix. 12; comp. 
Rom. iii. 24, 25, Eph. i. 7, Col. 1. 14 
(azrohitpwors, in each case): 

(¢) Christ, the antitype, being both 
offerer and offering, ix. 12, 14; comp. 
Eph. v. 2, Gal. i. 4, ii. 20, 1 Tim. i. 6, 
Tit. ii. 14. 

(2) When Christ came, the office of 
the Law was abrogated, vii. 18; comp. 
Gal. iii. 23, 24: 

(7) and God’s law was written on 
men’s hearts, vill. 10, x. 16; cp. 2 Cor. 
Tiina D3: 

18. The argument of the Epistle to 
the Hebrews culminates in the thought 
of Christ, the Son of God, seated at the 
right hand of God, interceding for us, 
Vil. 25 (evTvyxdvev), vill. 1: so does that 
of the Epistle to the Romans, Rom. viii. 
34 (evrvyxaver). 


1 In the Epistle to the Romans, the Law is 
dealt with chiefly as a rule of action; in that to 
the Hebrews, as a system by which Israel was to 
be preserved in communion with God. Each of 
the above expressions, therefore, is appropriate 
to the persons addressed. The primary aim of 
the Law is in each case represented as being to 
quicken the sense of sin. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


§ viii. Summary of the Internal Evidence, 

It is not easy to express in words the 
value of the above numerous positive 
lines of evidence. The coincidences 
which have been pointed out, in the use 
of words and phrases, in modes of enun- 
ciating or illustrating religious truth, in 
the subject-matter of the Epistle,—would 
be most remarkable, if they were simply 
looked at, one by one, in succession. But, 
in fact, they are so interwoven with each 
other, as (from the nature of convergent 
evidence) to preclude all possibility of 
doubt. The supposition that St Luke or 
Clement of Rome, Barnabas or Apollos, 
should, first of all, have so analysed the 
Apostle’ S writings as to gain command 
over this vast array of characteristic 
words, turns of expression, associations 
of thought, and modes of Scriptural ex- 
position ; then, have set to work to re- 
combine these into an Epistle which he 
meant should pass for his own; and /asi/y, 
should have succeeded so perfectly that 
the Epistle reads like a grand original 
composition, the product of one powerful 
mind: this must, surely, appear absolutely 
incredible. Consequently, on internal 
grounds, it is nothing less than certain 
that St Paul was the writer. 

We are warranted, therefore, in assert- 
ing that the external and the internal 
evidence conspire in establishing the 
Pauline authorship of this Epistle. 

Since, however, from the earliest times 
there have been various arguments urged, 
by men of real eminence, against this 
view, it seems right that the chief of 
these objections should be here briefly 
noticed. 


EXAMINATION OF LEADING 
OBJECTIONS. 


§i. Undoubtedly, one of the earliest ~ 
difficulties was the fact that the Epistle 
had not St Pauls name prefixed. 

1. We have seen above, how Panzetius 
and Clement attempted to explain this 
fact. Panzetius thought that as the writer 
meant to exhibit our Lord as “the Afostle 
of our profession,’ he reverentially re- 
frained from speaking of himself as an 
apostle; more especially, since he himself 
had been appointed “the Apostle of the 
Gentiles.” 

Clement, again, accounted for it by 


SECT. 3. 


THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 


supposing that the Apostle prudently re- 
frained from obtruding on the Hebrews 
a name which, he knew, was unwelcome 
to many of them. 

There may be a residuum of truth in 
each of these explanations’. 

2. A more important consideration, 
however, is the following . 

St Paul had just reached the end of 
an imprisonment which had lasted four 
years. The cause of this detention had 
been a charge, brought against him by 
the Jews of Jerusalem, that “he taught 
men everywhere against the people, and 
the Law, and this place’’ (Acts xxi. 28). 

If then, at such time, he felt bound 
to write to the Hebrews a discourse like 
the present?, in which he boldly and 
clearly maintained the abolition of the 
legal ordinances, how must he proceed? 
Was it not a plain duty in him to abstain, 
as far as was possible, from everything 
that might furnish his opponents with 
grounds for bringing a fresh charge a- 
gainst him*? 

3. The full account of the matter, 
however, appears to be this. The 
Apostle’s intention was to ground his 
appeal throughout upon ¢he word of God 
Himself. Therefore he strikes the key- 
note of his discourse at the outset thus :— 

God, who had spoken to them in old 
times by the prophets, now spoke by the 
Son to whom the prophets had given 
witness. 

Then follows a string of testimonies; 
taken especially from the Psalms, which 
were continually sung in the Temple. 
One of these, the cxth, which runs through 
the whole discussion, contains the most 
emphatic oracle of the Old Testament,— 


1 As regards the latter, note the apologetic 
character of ch. xiii. 18. It should be borne in 
mind, that his name ‘‘Saul” had long fallen 
into disuse, even in Jerusalem (Acts xv. 25); and 
that the name “Paul” specially marked him out 
as the apostle of the Gentiles (see note on Acts 


= See the note on ch. xiii. 22. 

8 The severity of proceedings against persons 
who wrote on public matters, under the Empire, 
is rightly urged by Dr Biesenthal, ‘ Das Trost- 
schreiben,’ ss. 3—19. He adds, ‘‘What did 
Paul lose by writing the Epistle anonymously? 
His friends would recognize the author and 
lovingly welcome it, as the poet says, 

Ut titulo careas, ipso noscere colore; 

Dissimulare velis, te liquet esse meum. 
(Ovid, ‘ Trist.’ 1. 61, 2).” 


New Test—Vot. IV. 


17 


the word of the Divine oath which con- 
stituted the everlasting Priest. Another, 
the xcvth, furnishes the trumpet-like 
summons (thrice repeated, ill. 7, 15, iv. 
7), “To day, if ye will hear Ais vozce.” 
He, whose voice once filled even Moses 
with fear, now speaks to us “from heaven” 
(xil. 25). What reason, then, was there 
for concentrating their attention on Jesus, 
their “ Apostle and High-priest,” their 
“ Mediator,” the “ Author and Perfecter 
of faith”! 

This sustained concentration of mental 
gaze on the “faithful Witness” in heaven 
may well be held to explain, what it 
abundantly justifies, the withdrawal of 
the writer’s personality into the back- 
ground’. 

§ u. Again; it was thought, that St 
Paul, the Apostle of the Gentiles, would 
not be likely to write to the Hebrews. 

Yet he was most anxious to preach at 
Jerusalem (Acts ix. 29, xxii. 19); and 
always, wherever he came, addressed 
himself to “the Jew first” (cp. Rom. i. 
16). For a whole year before his visit 
to Jerusalem he had been engaged in 
working out a plan, by which he hoped 
to show his love to the mother Church 
(2 Cor. ix. 2). For his brethren’s sake 
he would even have been content to be 
“anathema from Christ.” Of his z¢//ing- 
ness, then, to undertake the task we may 
be certain; and, that in actually under- 
taking it he would not be overstepping 
the limits of his apostolical commission, 
is evident from Acts ix. 15. (See below, 
v. 6.) 

§ 1. An objection which had great 
weight in ancient times, as it has also had 
in modern’, rests on ch. ii. 3. It is said, 
that St Paul never could have written, 
‘*and was confirmed unto us by them that 
heard it.” But this assertion is altogether 
a mistake. In addressing the Christians 
of Judea, St Paul could not have selected 
a more correct way of representing the 
facts of the case. He had not supplied 
them with the historical evidence of the 
death and resurrection-life of Jesus. In 
speaking to the Jews of Pisidian Antioch, 


1 Compare Owen, ‘ Prel. Exerc.’ 11. § 193 Dr 
Irons, ‘Bamp. Lect.,’ p. 468. 

2 It is noticed by Euthalius in the Fifth 
Century, and by Primasius in the Sixth. It had 
much influence with Calvin, and has been pro 
nounced by a recent writer to be “‘decisive.” ~ 


18 


Paul prefaced his own declaration of the 
Gospel to them by saying, that Jesus 
was “seen many days of them which 
came up with Him from Galilee, who 
are His witnesses unto the people” (Acts 
xili. 31, 32; compare Luke xxiv. 48; 
Acts i. 22, li. 32). The passage, there- 
fore, which has caused so many to stum- 
ble, is in full accordance with St Paul’s 
known mode of address’. 

§ iv. Another objection, which has 
had no little influence both in ancient 
and modern times’, was drawn from ch. 
vi. 4—6, x. 26, 27, xii. 17. None who 
weigh these passages soberly, remember- 
ing, (1) what was implied by men’s apos- 
tatizing from a Church which had re- 
ceived those Pentecostal gifts, (2) how 
intensely fanatical the unbelieving Jews 
had by this time become, will feel any 
difficulty in them. The utterance of 
severe truths was, in such a case, a 
proof of the tenderest compassion. 

§ v. It is objected that Clement of 
Alexandria and Origen pronounced the 
style to be unlike Paul’s; and that so 
learned and acute a scholar as Erasmus 
spoke yet more strongly on this point. 
The influence exercised by these really 
eminent men has been so great in the 
matter before us, that it is necessary to 
examine the grounds on which they pro- 
ceeded in forming their judgment. 

1. Clement supposed that the Epistle 
had been written in Hebrew, and trans- 
lated into Greek by St Luke ; “ whence,” 
he says, “there is found the same com- 
plexion of style in this Epistle and the 
Acts.” On this it is to be observed 

(z) That almost all in modern times 
allow the evidence of the language itself 
to be fatal to Clement’s conjecture of a 
Hebrew original*; which, indeed, even 
Origen passed over without notice. 

(6) St Luke’s general style is much 


1 Consider also what was said to St Paul by 
our Lord Himself (Acts xxii. 18); ‘they will 
not receive ¢iy testimony concerning Me.” 

2 See above, IIt. 1. 6. 

3 Dr Biesenthal (a. a.) does not appear to have 
done anything to diminish the weight of the diffi- 
culties, which have been often uiged; e.g. Whatan 
enormous distance is there between guaev, ad’ 
Gy Exaber, riy Sraxotp (ch. v. 8) and }3P~2 “Wd 
Yiow! See also the renderings of zroAuuepds 
cal wohurpérws (i. 1), dey dpjxey ait@ avuTb- 
raxtov (ii. 8), werpromaGeiy (v. 2), evAaBelas (v. 7, 
xii. 28}, rdy ddparov ws dpay (xi. 27), etc. 


{INTRODUCTION TO 


more Hebraic than that of St Paul or of ~ 
this Epistle, and the book of Acts 
becomes /ess Hebraic in its second half; 
that is, when the narrative begins to 
record the doings and speeches of St 
Paul’. When so accomplished a critic 
as Delitzsch* has argued in favour of the 
Lucan authorship of this Epistle from 
words found in those speeches, it is no 
disrespect to Clement to suppose that he 
may have been alike inadvertent. 

(c) That there are some noticeable 
verbal coincidences between St Luke’s 
writings and this Epistle, is true. But 
so there are between those writings and 
St Paul’s Epistles*. The fact was noticed 
by Chrysostom ; who ascribed it to the 
influence which St Paul’s master-mind 
had exerted on his fellow-labourer. 

2. We are able to deal more definitely 
with Ovigen’s decision ; for he has told 
us the ground on which his opinion 
rested. He appealed to 2 Cor. xi. 6, ef 
Se Kai iduitys Adyw, GAN ov ywwoe; and 
he inferred from this passage that St 
Paul was unable to write pure Greek. 
Whereas 

(a) The words only imply that Paul 
was willing to concede, for the time, what 
his opponents had said of him (x. 10): 
“ His speech (Adyos) is contemptible.” 
Throughout the chapter he is writing- 
with a calm and loving, but dignified, 
irony *. 

(2) He could well afford to grant that 
he had given them occasion to think him 
idwitnv Adyw, “unversed in the art of 
speech” —zn their sense of the term. We 
know that, when St Paul came to Corinth, 
he deliberately resolved to avoid ‘‘excel- 
lency of speech (Adyov) or of wisdom” 
(x Cor. ii. 1); not to employ the “ per- 
suasive words of man’s wisdom” (ii. 4) ; 
but to “speak in words which the Holy 
Spirit taught” (ii. 13). In a correspond- 
ing sense of the term, we may allow that 
Paul was idwirns Ady in the Epistle to 
the Hebrews ; abstaining here from Rab- 
binic lore (not, certainly, that he was 


1 These speeches occupy about one sixth part 
of chh. xiii—xxviii; besides which many of the 
narratives must have come from St Pau? him- 
self (e.g. xiii, I—xvi. 9; xvii. I—xx, 3). 

2 See above, p. 7, note 4. 

8 See Appendix III. 

4 So St Augustine and St Chrysostom under- 
stood the Apostle’s language. 


THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 


without it), as at Corinth he had ab- 
stained from Hellenic philosophy and 
rhetoric. 

(c) If it be needful to bring forward a 
counterpoise to Origen’s great name, we 
have it in St Chrysostom. He, the pupil 
of Libanius, and the greatest of Christian 
Greek orators, spoke with admiration 
of St Paul’s style, and accepted the 
Epistle to the Hebrews as undoubtedly 
his. 

3. Erasmus,—a man, like Origen, of 
immense learning,—whose opinion, pro- 
bably, influenced a large number of both 
Roman Catholic and Protestant divines, 
wrote thus of the Epistle to the Hebrews : 
“There still remains an argument of the 
most conclusive kind, the style and cha- 
racter of its diction; which has no affinity 
with St Paul’s...The divergence is not 
only in words or figures of speech; it 
differs in all features (omnibus notis dis- 
sidet).” After the evidence which has 
been produced above, no comment on 
this can be thought necessary. 

§$ vi. In recent times, thease who ob- 
ject to the Pauline authorship on the 
ground of style have greatly modified 
their position. It is allowed that there 
is a very striking similarity between the 
language of this Epistle and that of St 
Paul; but it is urged (1) that words not 
used by St Paul occur in this Epistle, 
while some which he uses frequently do 
not occur; (2) that the language indi- 
cates familiarity with the writings of Philo 
of Alexandria ; (3) that a more rhetorical 
form of writing is found in this than in 
St Paul’s Epistles. 

A few words will suffice regarding 
each of these points. 

1. When Paul was writing to the He- 
brew Christians on the relation between 
the Legal Constitution and the Gospel, 
it could not fail that his topics, and con- 
sequently the terms he employed, would 
differ materially from those which formed 
the staple of letters written to Gentile 
Churches. It is surely very idle, then, 
to rest any argument as to style on the 
fact that St Paul nowhere uses the words 
“priest” or “high-priest,” or that the 
word “justify” does not occur in our 
Epistle. 

In the Epistle to the Romans St Paul 
uses the word “Law” seventy-five times, 
because 4e wanted it; in the Second 


IQ - 


Epistle to the Corinthians vot once, be- 
cause his subject did not require it, Noone 
supposes that this furnishes the faintest 
presumption against the Pauline author- 
ship of either of these Epistles. 

If the word d:xarow does not occur in 
this Epistle, its absence has no bearing 
whatever on the authorship of the Epistle; 
for it is alike absent from 2nd Corinth- 
ians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 
1st and 2nd Thessalonians, and 2nd 
Timothy. The term was needed by the 
writer in the Epistle to the Romans; but 
in the Epistle to the Hebrews his stand- 
point was different, and he used the 
more appropriate words xaapifw, te- 
Aetow’. 

2. That St Paul was not likely to 
have been familiar with Philo’s writings, 
is assumed without any warrant. Facts 
point plainly the other way. 

(2) Before his conversion, Paul had 
been a zealous associate of the opponents 
of Stephen; among whom were included 
“ Alexandrians” (Acts vi. 9). 

(2) During his fortnight’s sojourn at 
Jerusalem, in A.D. 37, “he disputed a- 
gainst the Hellenists” (Acts ix. 29) single- 
handed. ‘This implies that he was well 
acquainted with Hellenistic modes of 
theologizing ; among which Philo’s was 
at that time pre-eminent’. 

(c) Tarsus, to which he next retired, 
was reckoned inferior neither to Alexan- 
dria nor to Athens as a school of philo- 
sophy*. He had thus a further oppor- 
tunity of preparing for future labour by 
surveying afresh the whole field of 
Hellenistic thought. 

(Zz) When he was summoned away 
from Tarsus, it was that he might in- 
struct the Hellenists who had joined 
the Church at Antioch. 

(e) Many noticeable points of con- 
tact with Philo’s writings, similar to 


1 It is evident that ‘‘justification” nows from 
Christ as i\aor7piov, in Rom. iii. 24, in the same 
way that ‘‘purification from sin” and ‘‘restora- 
tion to communion with God” do in Hebrews: 
and that in Rom. iv. 1—8 the ‘‘justified” man is 
he, whose iniquities are forgiven (d¢levra:), as 
the “perfected” of Hebr. x. 14—18 are they 
who receive ‘“‘remission”’ (dgecis) of their ini- 
quities. Comp. App. IV. 

2 Philo was an old man, when he headed the 
deputation to Caligula in A. D. 39, 40. 

3 See the passage of Strabo in Howson and 
Conyb., I. p. 103. 


B2 


20 


those which are found:in our Epistle, 
occur in the Pauline Epistles’. 

If, then, the second generation of 
Christians at Jerusalem were in danger 
of having their faith weakened by an 
infusion of Alexandrian mysticism, and 
St Paul saw fit to write an admonitory 
Letter to them, what could be more 
probable than that his language would 
exhibit some coincidences’ with that of 
the writer, who had done most to shape 
and to consolidate that subtle system 
of error? 

Philo’s teaching was, in fact, opposed 
to the whole tenor of Divine Revelation. 
He nowhere recognized the need of an 
Atonement for sin. With him the true 
High-priest is the Divine Reason (Adyos), 
which he speaks of as the Son of God; 
in which the ideal Universe is contained; 
and which mediates between God and the 
material Universe. With him Melchize- 
dek is a type of “right reason” (dp60s 
Adyos); and sacrifices have efficacy just 
so far as they are expressions of moral 
virtues in the offerers. The Levitical 
system and the temple, as witnessing to 
such sacrifices, will, he declares, be pre- 
served so long as the race of men con- 
tinues ; being co-eval with the world. 

St Paul deals with these erroneous 
views, as he did with those of the Stoics 
-and Epicureans on Mars’ Hill; that is, 
he supplies the positive truth, which 
they denied or misapprehended. 

3. If there bea somewhat more stately 
and elaborated style observable in this 


1 See, ¢.g., the commentators on Rom. i. 
23—25, ix. 14, xiv. 73 1 Cor. xv. 46, 47; 2 Cor. 
iii. 3, iv. 43 Gal. iv. 22—31; Col. i. 15, ete. 

* It should be remarked, however, that many 
words are quoted’ as Philonian, which belong to 
Hellenistic literature at large. Thus in a list 
given in the ‘Expositor’ (1875, p- 336), the fol- 
lowing seven terms stand consecutively ;—doparos 
(found in LXX., Josephus, Plato, &c.), eloayew 
(frequent in LXX. and in classical Greek), ava- 
kawlfew (LXX., Joseph.), éxoueva (LX X.), mpo- 
xeto@at (LXX., Joseph., and classical writers), 
dGuwpos (LXX. freq.), vrorré\Nowa (LXX., 

oseph., Classics; and St Paul, Acts xx. 20). 

he term alrios cwrnplas (ch. v. 9) is found in 
Philo; but it also occurs twice in Josephus, and 
once in Diodorus Siculus. [Io\vuep@s and odv- 
tpérws are conjoined in Philo; but so are 7rodv- 
pepys and mo\vtpores in two passages of Maxi- 
mus Tyrius. If the contrast between vjmioe 
and 7é\ecor, and the comparison of simple spirit- 
ual diet to milk (v. 12, vi. 1), be found in Philo, 
so also are they in another Hellenistic writer, — 
St Paul (1 Cor. ii. 6, iii. 1, 2). 


INTRODUCTION TO 


Epistle, this is only what might be ex- 
pected from the nature of the case, 
Many of St Paul’s Epistles were written 
rapidly, to meet emergent needs, while 
he was “daily” burdened with “the 
care of all the churches.” We are not 
surprised at finding some difference of 
style between these and the other Epistles 
which were written in the comparative 
leisure and seclusion of the Captivity. 
But when he addressed the Hebrews 
there was abundant reason why his writing 
should exhibit a yet more marked di- 
versity. 

He was now putting into form his 
ripest thoughts on a subject which could 
never have been absent from his mind 
for thirty years,—the relation of the 
Legal to the Evangelical Dispensation. 
Some aspects of the question had been 
dealt with in other Epistles; but he was 
now called upon to supply an answer 
to the central question, “On what grounds 
do you require us, Jews, to relinquish 
that Levitical system, which was ordained 
by God Himself to be the key-stone of 
Israel’s national constitution, and which 
has now lasted 1500 years?” We know 
well with what deep reverence St Paul 
would in any case approach this subject’; 
and the first verse of the Epistle tells us 
that he meant to look the difficulty full 
in the face. We cannot doubt, therefore, 
that he would bring the whole energy of 
his mind to bear upon so important a 
work. 

He was not only seeking to re-animate 
the faith of the Hebrew Christians ;— 
though that, unquestionably, was his 
primary aim, and a very momentous 
one he would feel it to be*;—but his 
task was one of still greater solemnity. 
For, while he addressed himself exclu- 
sively to the Hebrews, he was in fact 
vindicating his conduct as Apostle of the 
Gentiles; showing that the Gospel which 
he had preached, instead of derogating 
from the honour of the elder Dispen 
sation, reflected rays of glory upon it; 
filling its histories and types, its psalms 
and prophecies, with a mysterious and 
wide-reaching significancy, which con- 
ferred upon them an unimagined worth 
and dignity*, Nor was this all. For, 


1 See Rom. ix. 1—5. 
2 See below, v. 6. 
3 “Here,” says Mr Dale, ‘‘in the Epistle te 


THE EPISTLE TO) THE HEBREWS. 


in laying this “ Apology for the Gospel” 
before the Hebrews, he was also provid- 
ing a store of most precious theological 
truth for the Catholic Church of all ages ; 
supplying it with an Organon for the 
interpretation of the Old Testament ; 
and showing how firmly its foundations 
had been laid in the Divine purpose, 
which had worked onward in gradual 
self-revelation from the beginning of hu- 
man history. 

Is it in any way strange,—is it not 
rather most natural,—that an Epistle, 
whose aims were so lofty, should have 
had extraordinary pains bestowed on its 
composition’? 

That such a variation of style was 
not beyond St Paul’s ability is shown by 
his Speeches and Epistles’*. 


the Hebrews, I see an ancient faith, out of which 
the life has gone, being carried to its sepulchre ; 
and a Christian writer stops the funeral proces- 
sion, touches the bier, and the lips of the dead 
religion open and bear testimony to the greatness 
and glory of the Lord Jesus Christ.” (‘The 
Jewish Temple,’ &c., 1865.) 

1 If Horace’s ‘Epistle to Augustus’ be com- 
pared with the Epistles of the First Book, it will 
be found to be not only more methodical in its 
structure, but more stately in manner, more 
rhythmical, and (in parts) more elaborately rheto- 
rical. How strong a contrast, for instance, do 
vv. 219—259 present to the general style of 
Book I. 

2 I may be allowed to refer on this point to 
one or two witnesses. 

Dr Farrar speaks of St Paul’s address on 
Mars’ Hill as exhibiting ‘‘a power of reasoning 
and eloquence to which they [the Athenians] 
could not be insensible,” and notices ‘‘the con- 
summate skill with which it was framed,” and 
**the pregnant meanings infused into zs 2oble and 
powerful sentences.” (‘L. of St Paul,’ 1. 544, 6.) 
He also observes that St Paul ‘‘could, when he 
chose, wield a style of remarkable finish and 
eloquence” (p. 623). 

Dean Alford says of the rst Ep. to the Corin- 
thians, that it ‘‘ranks, perhaps, the foremost of 
all as to sublimity, and earnest and impassioned 
eloquence.” He describes 1 Cor. xilias “a pure 
and perfect gem; perhaps, the noblest assem- 
blage of beautiful thoughts in beautiful language 
extant in this our world.” ‘“ About the whole 
Epistle,” he adds, ‘‘there is a character of lofty 
and sustained solemnity.” (‘Proleg.’ Sect. vil.) 
Yet this Epistle, it should be observed, was 
written in the midst of many and pressing en- 
gagements (xvi. 9). 

Dr Davidson speaks of the great variety of 
style and diction in St Paul’s Epistles, as what 
‘might be expected from the many-sided man, 
who stands before us. The Epistles,” he says, 
‘tare wonderfully adapted, in tone and contents,” 
to the circumstances of the individuals or com- 
munities to whom they were sent. (‘Introd. to 
N. T.,’ Vol. 111.) 


21 


We see, then, that the things which 
have been urged against the hypothesis 
of the Pauline authorship of this Epistle, 
are, on the contrary, in perfect harmony 
with it; some of them, indeed, supply- 
ing confirmatory proofs of it. There is, 
therefore, nothing to set against what 
has been alleged in the way of Internal 
Evidence (under which head all these 
objections fall). 


IV. WHERE, AND WHEN, THE EPISTLE 
WAS WRITTEN. 


The expression used in xiii. 24, “ They 
of Italy salute you,” suggests to us, 
where the writer was. For, just as, when 
St Paul was wnting from Ephesus (1 Cor. 
xvi. 8), he forwarded greetings from the 
churches of the Asian province, of 
which Ephesus was the chief city,—“ the 
churches of Asia salute you” (v. 19) ;— 
so, if he were writing from Rome, it 
would be natural for him to send greet- 
ings from those who represented the 
churches of Italy’. 

But, if he wrote from Rome, the 
obvious inference from xii. 23 is, that 
the Epistle was finished shortly before 
the close of the Apostle’s first imprison- 
ment ; that is, in A.D. 65. 

It is a wonderful sight, which is thus 
brought before us. Paul, who has been 
above four years a Roman prisoner, sits 
surrounded by proofs of the greatness of 
the city which called itself ‘ Eternal ;” 
but the eye of his faith penetrates far 
beyond the range of all that visible 
grandeur, and sees it scattered “like 
chaff from the summer threshing-floor ” 
(see the notes on ch. xii. 28); while in its 
stead there is established “an immove- 
able kingdom,” of which he and his suf- 
fering fellow-Christians are the possessors. 


V. To WHOM IT WAS WRITTEN. 


The most prevalent opinion has been, 
that the Hebrews addressed in this 
Epistle were the Christians of Palestine; 
especially, therefore, those of Jerusalem’. 


1 The expression of amd r7s “IraXlas corre- 

sponds in form to the of ao rjs ‘lommns of Acts 
X. 23. 
2 *the references to the theatre and the games 
(x. 32, xii. I—3) are no way inconsistent with this 
view. Few intelligent Jews could be ignorant of 
what went on at Cesarea. 


22 


This view is supported by the following 
considerations :— 

1. The whole tenor of the Epistle 
implies that the persons, to whom it was 
written, lived under the shadow of the 
Temple services. 

2. Tonone, so well as to them, would 
the words in ii. 3 apply. The Apostles 
remained in Jerusalem for several years ; 
and James the Just had continued to 
reside there for thirty-two years. (His 
martyrdom took place A.D. 62.) 

3. These “Hebrews” had suffered 
persecution at an early period (x. 32— 
34). So had the Jerusalem Christians : 
Acts vili. 1—3, xii. I—5; cp. 1 Thess. il. 
14. 

4. They were in danger of relapsing 
into Judaism (ch. iii. 12—15, iv. 11, vi. 
4—6, x. 28, 29). Nowhere was this 
danger so great as at Jerusalem (see 
note on xiii. 9). The nature of the 
“zeal,” which prevailed among the 
Christians there, is shown by the fact 
that they spoke of Paul as one who 
“taught all the Jews, which were among 
the Gentiles, apostasy from Moses’” (Acts 
xxi. 21). On such men the deepening 
fanaticism of the Jerusalem Jews could 
scarcely fail to exert a perilous influence. 
The elder generation of Christians was 
fast passing away (cp. ch. xiil. 7). The 

. younger generation looked around them, 
and saw no signs of Christ’s coming. The 
Temple yet stood in its glory. Might it 
not, after all, be the Divine purpose to 
continue it, for some time to come, as 
the visible centre of Messiah’s kingdom ? 
If so, instead of provoking the furious 
bigotry which had lately put to death 
so holy a man as James, would it not be 
better to look out for some way of effect- 
ing a fusion of the Law and the Gospel? 
While the latter contributed the inward 
spiritual life, might not the former supply 
the bodily framework ? 

No other Church was thus tempted to 
fall away into an adoption of the Leviti- 
cal system. 

5. The expression, “ That I may be 
restored to you” (see the note on xiii. 
19), implies that something had occurred, 


1 Grograclay drs Mwoéws. It is a significant 
fact that the Zédzonites rejected all St Paul’s 
‘ pistles on this very ground; ‘‘declaring him to 
‘be an apostate from the Law” (Euseb., ‘E. H.’ 111. 


Se 


INTRODUCTION TO 


which had broken off the connexion be- 
tween the writer of the Epistle and these 
“Hebrews.” Such had been the case 
with St Paul. When, after long and 
careful preparation, he had brought up 
to Jerusalem the offerings by which the 
Gentile Churches testified their loyal re- 
gard for the parent Church,—just as his 
purpose seemed to have been attained, 
he was suddenly swept away from the 
scene, and handed over to an imprison- 
ment which was to last for more than 
four years. But his deep affection for the 
mother Church remained unchanged ; nor 
can we doubt that the warmest desire of 
his heart was to establish a solid union 
between the Gentile and Hebrew Chris- 
tians. 

6. There are many special circum- 
stances in St Paul’s character and history 
which make it highly probable that he 
would wish to write such an Epistle as 
this to the Christians of Jerusalem. 

(2) He could never forget how he had 
once “devastated” the Church there. 
Up to the last, when his memory reverted 
to those days, he felt himself to be “the 
chief of sinners” (rt Tim. i, 12—15). 
He could not but long to make some 
amends for the injuries he had inflicted 
on the Churches of Judea. 

(6) Very early in his career he had 
given proof of his earnest desire to preach 
at Jerusalem (Acts ix. 26—30):—a work 
for which, indeed, he appeared to be 
singularly qualified; since he was familiar 
not only with the traditional system of 
the rabbins, as expounded by Gamaliel, 
but also with the views of the more intel- 
lectual Jewish schools, the Cilician and 
Alexandrian’. 

(c) The prophetic words uttered by 
the Lord Himself concerning him (Acis 
ix. 15) gave him an assured hope that he 
should yet be able to perform some great 
work for Israel’s edification :—“ He is a 
chosen vessel unto me to bear My name 
before nations, and kings, and the sons of 
Israel.” Would it not have been sur- 
prising, if he who had written so much 
for the instruction of the Gentile Churches 
had had no “word of exhortation” to 
send to ‘the Hebrews ”?—none, even 
now when the “pillar” of the Church 
had been removed and “the enemy was 
pouring in like a flood” upon it? 

1 See above, p. 19. 


THE, EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 


(2) Must not the Apostle’s spirit have 
been stirred to its very depths when he 
reflected on the circumstances of St 
James’s death? James, che Just, had been 
put to death by the High-priest, as a vz0- 
lator of the Law ;—he, the man who had 
been so anxious to conciliate his country- 
men by observing the Law! Was not the 
thought of this, joined with the memory 
of all that had issued from his own at- 
tempts at conciliation, sufficient to per- 
suade Paul, that it was high time for him, 
the Apostle of Christ, to put forth all his 
powers in an endeavour to set forth fully 
and clearly the true relation in which 
Christians stood to the Law’? 


We conclude, then, that the view, which 
has been most generally entertained, has 


1 Tt is observable that many of the details in 
the Epistle gain greatly in force when they are 
thought of in connexion with Jerusalem: «¢.g. 
Ps. xcv (chh. iii, iv,) was a warning to all not to 
think of Jerusalem as God’s ‘‘resting-place ;” 
the allegory of ch. vi. 7, 8, reproduced Isaiah’s 
parable to the ‘‘inhabitants of Jerusalem ” (Isai. 
v. 3); Ps. cx had supplied the basis of our Lord’s 
parting words to the Pharisees of Jerusalem (St 
Matt. xxii. 41—46); while ch. x. 25, xiii. 14 are 
pointed allusions to the approaching ‘‘fatal day” 
of Jerusalem’s overthrow. 


23 


also the strongest grounds of probability 
in its favour ;—that the “‘ Hebrews,” to 
whom this Epistle was in the first in- 
stance addressed, were the Christian 
Jews of Jerusalem. 

St Paul’s imprisonment had seemed 
to frustrate all the loving plans he had 
formed for the edification of the Hebrew 
Church. But his enforced seclusion 
was over-ruled, in fact, to a higher good. 
He was thus enabled to bestow on them 
the most precious of gifts; an Epistle, 
which, taking them by the hand and lead- 
ing them through the various parts of the 
Old Testament scriptures, showed them 
everywhere “visions of God,”—the hea- 
vens opened, and Jesus, the Son of God, 
at the right hand of God ;—and then 
urged them to abandon their reliance 
on shadows, and to live as befitted 
priests of the Living God, who already 
by faith possessed a share in the King- 
dom of eternal realities, 

About five years after the date of this 
Epistle, the Temple was burnt, and the 
Levitical service ‘‘ vanished away.” How 
inestimably precious a treasure would 
this Epistle then become to the scattered 
Hebrew Christians ! 


APPENDICES. 


L On 2°PEr. 1. 16; 20. 


As it cannot be affirmed that the writing 
spoken of in wv. 15 is certainly the Epistle 
to the Hebrews, it has been thought most 
consistent with reverence not to use this pas- 
sage at all in the way of evidence. Now, 
however, when that Epistle has been proved 
on other grounds to be St Paul’s, we not only 
may, but are bound to, ask, whether it be not 
the one which is referred to in that striking 
testimony of St Peter. 

The following reasons are strongly in favour 
of such a view. 

x. St Peter, writing to Israelites, speaks 
of one special Epistle addressed to them by St 
Paul, and contrasts this with ‘‘all his (other) 
Epistles.” Undoubtedly this cannot be under- 
stood of any other Epistle so naturally as of 
this “‘to the Hebrews.” 

2. The description, ‘‘according to the 
wisdom given to him,” falls in exactly with 
this supposition. Nowhere else do we meet 
with so large an outpouring of that ‘‘ wisdom,” 
which St Paul uttered among Christians of 
_ ripe attainments (rédewor, I Cor. il. 6; cp. 
Heb. vi. 1). The very word, dvovonra, here 
used by St Peter, reminds us of the ducep- 
pnveuros Of Heb. v. 11. 

3. Passages like ch. vi. 4—6 and x. 26— 
31, were obviously liable to be misunderstood, 
and ‘‘wrested” by the ‘ignorant and un- 
stable to their own destruction.” 

4. No other Epistle of St Paul supplies so 
forcible an exhortation to ‘‘ count the long- 


if. 


suffering of God to ove salvation.” This 
thought runs through the admonitory portion 
of the Epistle. From the beginning a says) 
God, ‘‘the rock of their salvation” (Ps. xcv. 
1), had been inviting His people to ‘hear 
His voice.”” Age after age the call had been 
renewed with unwearied patience. It still 
spoke to them from heaven in tones of the 
tenderest loving-kindness (xii. 25); and He 
who so spoke would, after ‘a little while” 
(x. 37), bring ‘‘ salvation” to ‘them that wait 
for Him” (ix. 28). 

The oojection that St Peter wrote to 
Israelites of the Dispersion, while the He- 
brews to whom this Epistle was written 
were probably those of Judza, is of no 
material weight. We cannot doubt that a 
letter written by St Paul to the Judean 
churches would soon be circulated among 
the Jewish Christians of Asia Minor. 

The facts, which thus emerge to view, are 
of great interest. 

On the one hand, St Paul writing, towards 
the close of his career, to the ‘‘ Hebrews,” 
suppresses his own name, and pointedly refers 
to St Peter and the Eleven as Christ’s chosen 
“witnesses” (ii. 3). On the other hand, 
St Peter, knowing that he was soon to depart 
this life (2 Pet. i. 14), commends the wisdom 
of his ‘‘ beloved brother Paul,” as shown in 
his Epistles :—one of which Epistles recorded 
Peter’s own faulty conduct at Antioch (Gal. 
ii. rr f.) and Paul's reproof of him. 


Worps IN ST PAUL’S SPEECHES WHICH HAVE BEEN REFERRED TO AS 


CHARACTERISTIC OF ST LUKE. 


The following instances are taken from a 
commentary written by a German critic,— 
Dr Delitzsch,—who is second to none of his 
countrymen in learning, acuteness, candour, 
and piety. 

1. Invol. I. p. 104 (E. Transl.) we read, 
“ 8:auapripecOa, of specially frequent occur- 
rence in St Luke, e.g. Acts xx. 23, xxiii. rr.” 
—But xx. 23 is part of St Paul’s address at 
Miletus. The word occurs in that address 
three times (vv. 21, 23, 24), as well as in 
3 Thess. iv. 6; 1 Tim. v.21; 2 Tim. ii. 14, 
fv. x. The other passage, xxiii. rz, contains 


the words spoken by our Lord to Paul in the 
night-vision at Jerusalem; the account of 
which St Luke must certainly have received 
from St Paul. 

2. At p.140, dev, ‘six times in Hebrews, 
and in Acts xxvi. 19; nowhere in St Paul’s 
Epistles.’—But xxvi. 19 is part of St Paul's 
speech before Festus. 

3. At p. 231, the ‘“‘construction of sre 
xeioOa,” in ch. v. 2, is **found nowhere 2 af 
in New Testament, except in Acts xxviii. 20.” 
—But these are St Paul’s words. 

4 In vol. I. p. 31, Acts xxvi. 7 is quoted 


INTRODUCTION. APPENDICES. 


in support of the statement that Narpeva is “ot 
special frequency in the writings of St Luke.” 
—But these are St Pauls words; as are also 
Acts xxiv. 14, xxvii. 23, where the verb oc- 
curs. A comparison of these two last pas- 
sages with Rom. i. 9 and 2 Tim. i. 3, sup- 
plies an excellent illustration of the accuracy 
with which St Luke reported St Paul’s 
speechcs. 

Acts xxiv. 14, Aarpevo TO TaTpo Ocp 
(followed in v. 16 by dmpookoroy ouvetdnoty). 

2 Tim. i. 3, TG Ged, @ AaTpevw amo Tpo- 
yover ev kabapa ovverdjoer. 

Acts xxvii. 23, Tod ©cod, od eim, 
Aarpevo. 

Rom. i. 9, 6 @eds, @ kat Aarpevo. 


\ 


Kat 


5. Il. 81, xeporointos “is used by St 
Luke in two places and in a similar connexion, 
Acts vii. 48 and xvii. 24.”—But xvii. 24 is in 
St Paul's speech at Athens; and vii. 48 is in 
St Stephen’s speech, the report of which is 
thought by many (see above, p. 7) to have 
been furnished by St Paul himself. 


III. 


25 


6. II. 121, dpeais is ‘‘a term of frequent 
occurrence in St Luke.” Yet St Luke uses it 
only in places where he is reporting the words 
of others; and two of these, Acts xiii. 38, 
Xxvi. 18, are in St Paul’s speeches. The word 
is also found in Eph. i. 7, Col. i. 14. 

7. WU. 188. On the tipwpia of x. 29 
reference is made to the riywepeicbar of Acts 
Xxii. 5, xxvi. 11;—both of which are St Paul’s 
words. 

8. I. 214. The use of paprupeiobar in 
xi. 2 is said to be ‘characteristic of St 
Luke,” one of the places quoted in support 
of this statement being Acts xxii. 12 ;—which 
belongs to St Paul. ‘The same use is found in 
Rom. iii. 21, 1 Tim. v. fo. 

9. Il. 242, Acts xili. 35, part of St Paul’s 
speech, is referred to as showing that 8:6 kat 
is characteristic of St Luke. 

Io. II. 396. In comparing the two read- 
ings in ch, xiii. 18, it is said that mesOopue6a is 
‘¢more in St Luke’s style” than in St Paul’s; 
the proof of this assertion being Acts xxvi. 26: 
—which belongs to St Paul. 


VERBAL RESEMBLANCES BETWEEN THE (ACKNOWLEDGED) WRITINGS OF 


St PAUL AND THOSE OF ST LUKE. 


The following words used by St Paul are 
found also in St Luke’s writings, but not else- 
where in the New Testament. 


Gdndos, aidvidios, uixuadoricew, dvaxpivery, 
avaXiokew, avactarovy, dvatidecOa, avects, 
dvonros, avota, avratodisovat, avtarroxpiveo Oat, 
avrixetoOa, dmetOns, ameihn, amooracia, apo- 
Tpiav, areviterv, ayapiotos, BapBapos, *Biwti- 
xos, Bubilew, Siatpeiv, StamopeverOa, dveppn- 
vevew, SuvaotHs, eykaxeiv (OF, exkakeiv), ek- 
Sidxeww, evdokos, Evvopes, cLamooréAdw, e£ap- 
titw, e&ovbeveiv, eEovoratew, emavaravecOat, 
€néxa, emipeeiaba, epioravat, Caypeiv, nov- 
xatew, novxia, rev, *iditns, Kakovdpyos, 
xarayyéA\ewv, Kkatakiovv, KatevOvve, *xatn- 
xeiv, kivOuvev@, Kpararovabat, xupteverv, On, 
peOiotaverv, peOvoxecOat, pepis, petadidovat, 
%*. , ’ * , > 

vowodioackahos, voodilerOa, *Eevia, oikovo= 
pita, opobupador, omracia, oovoTns, Tayis, Tav- 
oniia, Tavoupyia, *mapayyeXia, *rapayepata, 
mapoéweoba, mappno.atesOa, *mepiepyos, 
=\npogopeiv, mopbciv, *mpoeureiv, mpoideiv, 
MpoxarayyeAXew, mpoxomrew, *mpoopicery, mpo- 
MeEtHs, WvKVOs, omovdaiws, oToLyelv, cvyKabi- 
ew, ovykdeiev, ovyxaipew, cvpmapayiveo Oat, 
ouptapadapBavew, cvvavtiAapBaveo bat, ovv- 
Secpos, *ovvexdnpos, cvverdévar, ouvvevdokeir, 
suvoxn, UBpis, UmnKoos, *vramiaceww, vorepnua, 
gGiravOparia, pirapyupos, hopos, xapiter Oat, 
xaptrovy, *yetporovetv'. 

In addition to these words (103 in number) 


1 The thirteen words marked by an asterisk 
do not occur in the Septuagint Version, or in the 
Apocrypha. 


we have remarkable coincidences of expres- 
sion, such as the following : 


I. (€ov ro mvevpart, in Rom. xii. rr, and 
Acts xviii. 25. 

2. mAnpovy thy Stakoviav, in Col. iv. 17 
(cp. 2 Tim. iv. 5), and Acts xii. 25. 

3- aidvidios emorn, Luke xxi. 34, aidvi- 
dios epiorarat, Thess. v. 3. 

4. goBovpevor pymos..., in St Paul three 
times ; elsewhere only in Acts xxvii. 29. 

5. The expression droBaivew rwi ets Te 
used in Phil. i. 19 (cp. Job xiii, 16, LXX.) 
occurs elsewhere in the New Testament only 
in Luke xxi. 13. 

6. mopOéwm is used in Gal. i. 13, 23, ot 
Saul’s devastating the Church; and so it is in 
Acts ix. 21. 

7. Compare also Phil. iv. 3, 4 with Luke 
x. 20; 1 Cor. xvi. 9, 2 Cor. ii. 12, Col. iv. 
3, with Acts xiv. 27; 2 Cor. viii. 13 with 
Luke xxi. 4; &c.! 


We are not called upon to explain these 
resemblances in detail. In general, they are 
sufficiently accounted for by the long and 


1 If we descend to minuter points, we may 
Notice that mevodvye and mayrws occur only in 
St Paul and St Luke; and that Winer remarks 
(p. 446, ed. Moulton), “ Zuke and Pau/—but 
still more the Epzstle to the Hebrews—are pecu- 
liarly fond of the participial construction.” At 
p. 35 Winer classes together, on the ground of 
Hiellenistic education, ‘‘ Paul, Luke (especially 
in the second part of the Acts), John, and the 
author of the Epistle to the Hebrews.” 


26 


intimate companionship of the Apostle and 
the ‘‘ beloved physician'.” 


1 St Chrysostom (‘in Matth.’ H. Iv.) assumed 
that St Luke ‘‘imitated his master.” Doubt- 
less, two such minds would in some degree 
influence each other; but St Paul’s was the 
more original and energetic intellect, St Luke’s 
the more receptive. 

With regard to 1 Cor. xi. 23 f., Alford re- 
marks: ‘‘ The similarity between this account of 
the Institution and that in St Luke’s Gospel is 
only what might be expected on the supposition 


INTRODUCTION. APPENDICES. 


The important point is, that the fact of 
there being a certain resemblance between the 
language of the Epistle to the Hebrews and 
the writings of St Luke is no way opposed to 
a belief in the Pauline authorship of that 
Epistle. Rather, the evidence of this author- 
ship would be less clear, if such resemblance 
were wanting. 


of a special revelation made to Paul, of which 
that Evangelist, being Paul’s companion, in cer- 
tain parts of his history availed himself.” 


IV. ON SOME DIVERGENCIES ALLEGED BY DR RIEHM TO EXIST BETWEEN 
THIS EPISTLE AND THOSE OF ST PAUL. 


1. ‘St Paul regards Judaism almost ex- 
clusively as a Law which man has to fulfil; 
while this Epistle views it as a system provided 
by God for maintaining communion between 
Himself and the Covenant people.’’ ‘ Lehrb, 
d. Hebr.,’ S. 225. 


Ans. Itis evident that the term Fudaism, 
as here used, is ambiguous; the Jews of the 
Dispersion putting forward widely different 
views from those which were most prominent 
at Jerusalem. The Jews at Rome, for in- 
stance, were not likely to obtrude on their 
neighbours the claims of the Levitical priest- 
hood and sacrifices; as those at Jerusalem did. 
Their contention was that through the moral 
and religious training of the Law they had at- 
tained to a state of ‘‘righteousness” before 
God, 


The Apostle was aware of this difference, 
’ and framed his Letters to the Romans and to 
the Hebrews accordingly. 


2. ‘St Paul treats the [Moral] Law as 
‘holy, and just, and good;’ but failing through 
man’s sinfulness. This Epistle represents the 
[Levitical] Law itself as defective; because 
unable to remove the sins which hindered men 
from communion with God.” S. 226. 

Ans. The ambiguity here is patent. There 
is no opposition whatever between the two 
views. Neither the Moral, nor the Levitical, 
Law could ‘‘give life” (Gal. iii. 21), Both 
of them tended to deepen men’s sense of sin 
(Rom. iii. 20, vil. 7; Hebr. x. 3). 


3. ‘St Paul speaks of the Law as placing 
men under ‘bondage’ (Gal. v. 1); from which 
Christ delivers them into a state of ‘freedom.’ 
But this idea of ‘freedom’ is nowhere found 
in the Epistle to the Hebrews.” S. 231. 

Ans, It is represented in this Epistle by the 
term rappyoia; which in Levit. xxvi. 13 stands 
in antithesis to ‘‘bondmen” and ‘bands of 
your yoke,” and in 2 Cor. iii. 12 corresponds 
to the éAevOepia of v. 17. In ch. iii. 6 this 
sappyaia is antithetic to the dSovdeia of ch. ii. 
ts. Inch. x. 19 it proceeds from the dears, 
which was procured by the death of Christ. 


4. ‘Paul urges that the Promise qas 
given before the Law and could not be invali- 
dated by it (Gal. iii. 17). This Epistle, on 
the contrary, says, that the Promise qwas given 
after the Law (Heb. vii. 28).” S. 232. 

Ans. This rests entirely on a misconcep- 
tion. Our Epistle (ch. vi. 13—18) dwells, nc 
less strongly than Gal. iti. 14—17, on the 
‘‘immutability” of the promise made to Abra 
ham. The ‘word of the oath,” in ch. vii. 2% 
refers to the publication of the great oracle, 
Ps. cx; which took place after the Lega’ 
Dispensation had been ages in existence. Cor 
sequently, ch. vii. 28, instead of reversi g 
the argument of Gal. ili. 17, supplements :.ad 
confirms it}. 


5- ‘St Paul lays great stress on the Resur- 
rection of Christ, while he makes express men- 
tion of the Ascension only in Eph. iv. ro and 
1 Tim. iii. 16. In our Epistle the Resurrec- 
tion of Christ is mentioned only in ch. xiii. 20, 
while the Ascension is several times spoken of 
(WI 20; AX..11,,24).” 2S. 4974 

Ans, The prominence given in this Epistle 
to our Lord’s Aigh-priestly work naturally 
led the writer to speak of His session in glory; 
the thought of which, moreover, was the best 
antidote to that ‘‘offence of the Cross,” which 
continually beset the Jew. 

The language of 1 Cor. xv. 25—27, Eph. 
i, 20—22, is derived from the very same pas- 
sages, Ps. viii. 6, cx. 1, that are so much 
dwelt upon in this Epistle. 


6. ‘¢Christ’s offering of Himself is not 
represented by St Paul specifically as a sin- 
offering; not even in Eph. v. 2, since the phrase 
eis Oopny rv@dias is never used of a sin-offer- 
IDES Ose. 

Ans. If the allegation had been true, the 
more specific reference would have been only 
what was natural in writing to the Hebrews. 
But it is not true. The term eis dcpny eve- 
dias is used of the sin-offering in Lev. iv. 31. 


1 This it does in any case; but more espe 
cially, if what is suggested in the note on vi. 19 
(Obs. 2) be correct. 


INTRODUCTION. APPENDICES. 


7. ‘St Paul frequently sets forth Christ’s 
death as a wearious endurance of the penalty 
of sin;—a view which is only alluded to in 
our Epistle.” S. 638. 

Ans. The Hebrews knew well that the 
root-idea of sacrificial atonement (of which 
this Epistle is full) was a vicarious death. 
‘There was no need to enunciate that truth in 
writing to them. 

In ch. ix. 28 we read, ‘‘Christ was once 
offered, to bear the sins of many;” the latter 
clause being a quotation from Isai. liii, 12. 
Did any Jew require to be expressly told that 
that chapter gave a picture of vicarious suffer- 
ing? 

8. ‘*The idea of xara\Xayn is absent from 
our Epistle; which does not view the death of 
Christ as a vicarious enduring of the wrath of 
God.” S. 638. 

Ans. St Paul’s statements are that ‘‘we 
shall be saved from wrath through Christ” 
(Rom. v. 9); and that ‘Jesus delivereth us 
from the wrath to come” (1 Thess. i. 10). 
This is identical with the teaching of our 
Epistle; which is, that the sacrifice of Christ 
is the only means by which any can escape 
the ‘“‘fery jealousy, which shall consume the 
adversaries”* (ch. x. 27). Indeed, the thought 
of deliverance from wrath is implied in the 
very word ikacxec@a (ch. ii. 17); see Num. 
«vi. 46 (=xvil. 11), “‘make atonement (é&i\a- 
oa) for them, for there is wrath gone out 
from the Lord.” 


g. ‘‘According to our Epistle Christ’s 
oblation was completed only when He entered 
heaven ;—a representation wholly alien to St 
Paul.” S. 639. 

4ns. And also alien to our Epistle; which 
teaches that ‘‘we are sanctified through the 
offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for 
all” (ch. x. 10). If this Epistle represents the 
saving efficacy of that one oblation as being 
now dispensed by the ascended Saviour, so 
does St Paul (Rom. v. 10, viii. 343 Col. iii, 
3, 4)- 


to. ‘The idea of reXevody [as used in He- 
brews] is sought in vain in the Pauline E- 
pistles.” S. 641. 

4ns. Naturally; for it is correlated to the 
idea of the high-priestly work of Christ 
(reXciwors being used by the LXX., where 
A.V. has ‘‘consecration,” in Exod. xxix. 22, 
26, 27, 31, 34; Lev. vii. 37, viii. 22, 28, 29, 
31, 33)- 

With the Hebrew Christians the great ques- 
tion of all did not present itself in this form, 
“May we hope through Christ to be accepted 
as righteous at the bar of Divine Justice?” 
but rather in this; ‘‘ Are we enabled by Christ 
to approach the throne of Divine Holiness as 
duly consecrated worshippers?” (Cp. ch. xii. 
28, 29.) 


a1. “St Paul [in writing to Gentilechurches] 


27 


associates the idea of ‘vocation’ with the ideas 
contained in mpodects, mpoywaoxew, mpoopi- 
(ew, exhéyecOa, aipeicOa, eEatpeioOa, &c.; 
which are absent from this Epistle.” S. 823. 
Ans. The explanation is easy. The call- 
ing of the Gentiles was a surprising ‘‘mystery ” 
(Eph. iti. 3—6), which had been hid in God’s 
“eternal purpose” (mpdéects, ib. v. 11): 
while the Hebrews were familiar with the 
thought that God had ‘‘chosen” their fathers 
(eehe£aro, Deut. iv. 37, vii. 7, xiv. 2, &c.). 


12. ‘We have not in this Epistle the Pau- 
line contrast between ‘faith’ and ‘the Law,’ 
or, ‘the works of the Law;’ nor yet the Paue 
line connexion between faith and righteousness 
(7 ék mictews Sixatocivn).” Ss. 832—840. 

Ans. (1) Since the very same may be said 
of r and 2 Cor., Eph., Coloss., rand 2 Thess., 
1 and 2 Tim., there is obviously a fallacy lurk- 
ing under the term ‘ Pauline,” as here employ- 
ed. The fact, that St Paul used the above 
terms when he needed them, no way obliged 
him to use them when his subject did not re- 
quire them. 

<2) The fault of the Hebrew Christians 
does not appear to have been in the way of 
seeking to justify themselves by their own 
moral efforts. On the contrary, they were 
rather in danger of falling into lassitude and 
vwOporns (cp. ch. vi. 12, X. 35, 36, xii. 1, 2); 
and this, because they had allowed their “zeal 
for the Law,” as a ceremonial system (Acts 
XxI. 20), to obscure their view of the grandeur 
and absolute completeness of Christ’s media- 
torial work. 

(3) Different, however, as the specific form 
of their spiritual malady was, the means of 
Tecovery is sought in an application of the 
same principle, which was appealed to in the 
Epistles to the Romans and Galatians. The 
prophetic text, from which the oft-repeated ee 
miotews Of those Epistles was derived, is 
quoted in this Epistle also! (see above, p. 13); 
and faith is set forth prominently as that by 
which all ‘‘the righteous men” from the be- 
ginning, whose “‘spirits are now made perfect” 
(xii. 23), were enabled to “please God” (xi. 6). 


13. ‘According to St Paul, believers are 
placed in an inward, mystical, vital, connexion 
with Christ; of which few traces occur in 
this Epistle. Indeed the expressions év Xpic- 
to, €v Kupia, which are so frequent in St 
Paul, nowhere occur in it.” S. 841 f. 

Ans, Thethought of this mystical connexion 
of believers with Christ pervades our Epistle; 


1 Dr Riehm, indeed, says that while the words 
éx mlorews are connected with the predicate in 
our Epistle, they form part of the subject in 
Rom. i. 17, Gal. iii. 11. But this is incorrect. 
The words éx mlorews fyoerat in Gal. iii. 11 are 
not less closely bound together than are the 
words év mioret §@ in ii. 20. 


for it is part of its fundamental idea—the 
high-priestly relation of Christ to His people. 

On the day of Atonement the Levitical 
high-priest confessed the sins of the people. 
When he put on his usual ministerial robes, 
the names of the twelve tribes, engraven on 
his breast-plate and on the shoulder-pieces of 
the ephod, signified that in his person all 
Israel was viewed as standing before the Lord; 
privileged to draw near to Him as His accept- 
ed and sanctified people. 


INTRODUCTION. APPENDICES. 


What was set forth figuratively in the case 
of the typical high-priest became a reality in 
Christ. Accordingly, in our Epistle believers 
are spoken of as ‘‘partakers of Christ” (iii, 
14). He is to them the author and cause 
faeos) of salvation. By His one offering of 

imself they are perfected for ever (x. 14). 
‘In virtue of His blood” they ‘‘have boldness 
to enter into the holiest” (x. 19).—All this 
involves (for it wholly depends upon) their 
“inward, mystical, vital, union with Him.” 


THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE 


TO THE 


HEBREWS. 


CHAPTER I. 


1 Christ in these last times coming to us from 
the Father, 4 ts preferred above the angels, 
both in person and office. 


TITLE. In the oldest MSS. the Title is 
simply “To THE HEBREWS.” See Introd. 
ch. I. 


Cuap, 1. In the introductory verses (1—3) 
a foundation is laid for all the arguments and 
exhortations which are to follow. God has 
now spoken to us by His Son, who 

(1) Is higher than the angels (i. 4—13), 
and has exalted our human nature above the 
angelic (ii. s—18): 

(z) Is more glorious than Moses or 
Joshua (iii. r—iv. 13): 

(3) Is the one eternal High-priest, in 
whom the great oracle of Ps. cx. 4 is ful- 
filled (ch. vii), and the blessings figuratively 
suggested by the Levitical pmesthood are 
realized os I—x. 25). 

Therefore how attentively ought we to 
listen to His voice (ii. r—4, iii. 7—15, iv. 
I, 2, II, Xli. s—29); waiting in patient faith 
for the fulfilment of His promises (vi. 12—20, 
X. 36—xil. 3, xili. 7, 8); assured of His com- 
passion (ii. 17, 18, iv. 14—16, v. 7—9, Vi. 20, 
vil. 25, X. 22, Xil. 2, 24), and diligently im- 
proving the grace which He bestows (vi. 1—12, 
X. 23—35, Xli. 3—17, 28, 29, xili. r—17)! 

1. at sundry times| This is only an ap- 
proximation to the meaning of the expressive, 
but quite inimitable, adverb used in the ori- 
ginal (lit. ‘‘ many-portion-wise”). The reve- 
lations of God’s mind and will which were 
made through the prophets, from Moses to 
Malachi, were limited and partial; presenting 
the ‘‘ manifold wisdom of God” (Eph. iii. 10) 
in fragments. In Christ these imperfect, and 
sometimes not easily reconcileable, portions 
were gathered up into unity. ‘The blessings 
of the Abrahamic Covenant and the curses of 
the Law; the Aaronic High-priest and the 
Priest after the order of Melchizedek; the 
Righteous Servant of God in His suffering 
and in His exaltation; these all became in- 
telligible for the first time when they found 


OD, who at sundry times ana 

in divers manners spake in time 

past unto the fathers by the prophets, 
2 Hath in these last days spoken 


their interpretation in the person and work of 
Christ. 


in divers manners] In various forms, or by- 
various methods, the Moral Law spoke to the 
conscience directly, the Ceremonial Law in- 
directly, saying, ‘‘ Be ye holy;” ‘“‘ Hear my 
voice, and I will be your God” ( Jer. vii. 22, 23). 
‘The numerous “visions” and ‘‘dark speeches’** 
(Num. xii. 6, 8) of prophecy, and the more 
explicit teaching of the Psalms, were evidences 
of the unwearied versatility with which Divine 
mercy devised expedients for keeping Israel in 
the paths of obedience. 

in time past) Rather, of old. Four cen- 
turies and a half had now elapsed since the 
latest of the prophetic books was written. 

. the fathers] Absolutely; a respectful way 
of speaking: as in John vii. 22, Acts xiii. 32, 
xxvi. 6, Rom. ix. 5, xl. 28, xv. 8, 2 Pet. iil. 4. 
The writer wishes it to be understood from the 
outset how entirely he is in accord with the 
ancient Church. 

by the prophets] Lit. ‘in the prophets” 
(and so in v, 2, “in His Son”); in and 
through their personality. 

In 2 S. xxiil. 2 the LXX. has, “the Spirit 
of the Lord spake in me.” Cp. 2 Cor. xiii. 3, 
‘“‘a proof of Christ speaking in me.” 


2. in these last days} In these our days, 
which are what prophecy styled “the last 
days” (Gen. xlix. 1; Deut. xxxi. 29; Isai. ii. 
2; Dan. ii. 28). Another reading, “at the end 
of these days,” would seem to mean “‘at the 
end of this present dispensation ;” the Legal 
period not being formally brought to an end 
so long as the Levitical priesthood and the- 
Temple continued to exist. 

by his Son] Here, as in ch. v. 8, vii. 28, the 
noun is used without the article, as being 
virtually a proper name; ‘‘by Him who is 
Son” (cp. the Hebrew of Ps. ii. 12); who by 


His identity of nature with the Father_is 
qualified to be a perfect_expounder of the- 


30 


© Wis 7. 
6 


HEBREWS. I. 


unto us by Ais Son, whom he hath 
appointed heir of all things, by whom 
also he made the worlds ; 

@Who being the brightness of 
his glory, and the express image of 
his person, and upholding all things 


by the word of his power, when he. 


had by himself purged our sins, sat 


Father’s will. 
a aa 
hath appointed| Rather, ‘appointed ;” in 
His pre-mundane counsel. All things were 
created ‘‘ for” Christ—that He should be 
their proprietor—as well as ‘‘4y Him” (Col. 
i. 16). ‘The first clause thus stands in co- 
ordination with the three which follow; all of 
them referring to Christ’s eternal Sonship. 
heir] Sole proprietor and lord. 

by whom] Or, ‘through whom;” by whose 
agency. Cp. Johni. 2, 3; 1 Cor. viii. 6; Col. 
i. 16. 

also) This marks an advance; from the 
purpose to its realization. He who, in His 
eternal purpose, had constituted the Son ‘‘heir 
of all things,” put forth His creative power 
in forming the universe through the agency of 
His Son. 

the worlds] The word properly denotes 
‘* ages,” or long periods of time. Here, and in 
x1. 3 (cp. Wisdom xiii. 9), it is more fitly 
rendered ‘‘ worlds ;” without, however, elimi- 
nating the idea of time. Whatever of creative 
power the various portions of the universe 
needed to be put forth during the long ages of. 
their duration resided in the Son. 

8. being] In His essential nature; irre- 
spectively of time. Similarly, in Phil. i. 6, 
when the Apostle is preparing to speak of the 
humiliation of Christ, he begins; ‘‘ who, being 
in the form of God.” Compare also Col. i. 
14—17 (where the order of the contrasted 
terms is different). 

the brightness] Or, “‘effulgence ;” issuing 
srom ‘the Father’s glory,” as ‘‘ Light from 
Light.” (See Additional Note.) The glory 
must here be the uncreated glory, in which 
the Godhead has its eternal self-manifestation. 

the express image] Or, ‘‘the exact impress.” 
Cp. 2 Cor, iv. 4; Col. 1. 15. 

his person] Rather, His substance (or 
“‘subsistence”’) ;—-His_ essential nature; in 
contrast with the ‘‘ glory” of the preceding 
clause. 

upholding all things] Sustaining all the 
parts of the universe, or even ‘‘ bearing them 
along” in their several courses. (See note be- 
low.) Cp. Col. i. 17. 

the word| ‘The ‘‘uttered word.” ‘The per- 
sonal WorD upholds the universe by the power 
of His spoken word, which is the continuous 
utterance of His will. 


Cp. Matt. xi. 27; Johni. 18, 


” 


[v. 3—5- 


down on the right hand of the Ma- 
jesty on high ; 

4 Being made so much better than 
the angels, as he hath by inherit 
ance obtained a more excellent name 
than they. 

5 For unto which of the angels 
said he at any time, Thou art my 





Ly himself] For the Word, made flesh, 
offered up Himself; being priest and victim 
in one (ix. 12, 14, 26). The words “by 
Himself” have good MS. and patristic au- 
thority, and are in both the Syriac versions 
as well as the Itala; but are omitted by most 
recent editors. (Delitzsch, however, retains 
them.) Anyhow, the Sequence of the clauses 
implies that the work of ‘‘ta a the 
sin of the world” was one to which no crea- 
ure was equal. He effected it, by whom 
the universe was at first formed and has all 
along been upheld. 

purged our sins] or (better reading), ‘* made 
purification of sins;” so as to do away with the 
pollution which the sins of men had brought 
into the world. The same noun is used in 
Exod. xxix. 36, ‘‘a sin-offering for atonement.” 
The corresponding verb is used in Lev. xvi. 
19, 30. 

sat down] As one who was invested with 
sovereign power, Ps. cx. 1. See v. 13, viii. 1, 
Xs 

on high| The words are the same as in Ps, 
xciii. 4 LXX. (cp. Ps. xviii. 18). 


4. Being made| Or, ‘‘ Having become ;”— 
through the exaltation which followed on the 
completion of His atoning work. 

better than] Or, ‘‘superior to.” Compare 
Eph. i. 20, 21. ‘‘He does not say, ‘greater,’ or 
‘more honoured ;’ in order that none might 
think he was speaking of Him and them as 
beings of the same kind” (Athanasius). 

hath by inheritance obtained] Rather, hath 
for his inheritance; in sole and per- 
petual possession. The word is rb mac 
used of Israel’s holding the land of Canaan 
under the indefeasible title of God’s gift. 

a more excellent name} This Name includes 
not only the “Son” and ‘ First-born” of 
vv. 5, 6, but also the “God” and ‘Lord ” of 
vv. 8,10. Comp. Phil. ii. 9. 

The comparison instituted between Christ 
and the angels (i. 4—ii. 18) enables the writer 
to meet the two most rooted of Jewish pre- 
judices; which led them to rebel (x) agaiitst, 
the idea of the Incarnation, and (2) against 
that of a suffering Messiah. The former of 
these points is dealt with in vv. s—13, the 
latter in ii. s—16, 

5. The angels, as a class, are designated 
“sons of God” in Job xxxviii. 7 (and so the 
Israelites, Deut. xxxii. 19, Ps. Ixxxii. 6). 


v. 6—9.] 


Son, this day have I begotten thee? 
And again, I will be to him a Father, 
and he shall be to me a Son? 

6 And again, when he bringeth in 
the first-begotten into the world, he 
saith, And let all the angels of God 
worship him. 

7 And of the angels he saith, 


But in Ps. ii. 7 the title is assigned to one 
person as His special prerogative. That the 
person so addressed was Messiah (not David), 
was admitted by the Jews. Indeed, both the 
name ‘“ Messiah” and the title ‘‘Son of God” 
were originally derived from this Psalm. 
That the ‘‘Son” spoken of in Ps. ii. 12 was 
Divine, is plain from the last words, ‘‘ Blessed 
are all they that put their trust in Him.” It 
is evident from Matt. xxvi. 63—66, John v. 
18 (cp. ix. 35—38, x. 33), that the Jews 
understood the ‘*Son of God” to be Himself 
God. 

No angel ever had this unique appellation, 
“the Son of God.” 

this day] According to Acts xili. 33, the 
day of Christ’s Resurrection is referred to in 
this passage; as being the day on which Jesus 
was definitively “declared” to be the ‘‘Son of 
God” (Rom. i. 4), and constituted “the first- 
begotten from the dead” (Col. i. 18; Rev. 
eg) 

And again} The promises in 2 S. vii. 
I2—16, 1 Chro. xvii. r1—z4, are in their 
nature absolute (cp. Ps. Ixxxix. 30—33; 
CXxxii. 12), and far transcend anything that 
was, or could be, realized by Solomon; as when 
it is said, ‘+I will settle him in my house and in 
my kingdom for ever” (x Chro. xvii. 14). The 
overthrow of Solomon’s temple and royalty 
showed that he was no more than a historical 
foreshadowing of the rightful Heir (Ezek. 
XXi. 26, 27), who should be both ‘‘Son of 
David” and ‘Son of God” (Rom. i. 3, 4). 
Compare 2 S. vii. 25-29 with Isai. ix. 6, 7. 


6. And again, when he| Rather, But 
when, again, He; the ‘“‘ but” having a dis- 
tinctly adversative power. Not only is it true 
that no angel can be thought of as holding the 
sovereignty which was promised to the ‘‘Son,” 
but, on the contrary, they are bidden to wor- 
ship Him. The word ‘ again” thus becomes 
practically equivalent to ‘‘ on the other hand.” 

bringeth...into| The reference is to the 
future introduction of the Divine King (His 
* firstborn,” Ps, Ixxxix. 27) into actual posses- 
sion of His earthly kingdom. It is the word 
used, in Exod. xiii. 5, rz and Deut. vi. ro, xi. 29, 
of God’s bringing Israel into possession of the 
Promised Land (as their inheritance, Deut. ix. 
4—6). This of itself decides against translating 
(with Chrys, Ambrose, and many moderns) 


HEBREWS, I. 


Who maketh his angels spirits, ana 
his ministers a flame of fire. 

8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy 
throne, O God, is for ever and ever: 
a sceptre of ‘righteousness is the! 
sceptre of thy kingdom. 

g Thou hast loved righteousness, 
and hated iniquity; therefore God, 


“But when He again bringeth.” (See note 
below. 

the world] the habitable earth. The word 
is the same as in ii. 5, but zo as in x. 5, John 
i.9. The word is also used by St Paul in Acts 
XVil, 31, and in a way that throws much light 
upon the present verse, For, when he says, 
** God will judge the world in righteousness by 
that man whom He hath ordained; whereof 
He hath given assurance to all men in that He 
raised Him from the dead,” he clearly (1) quotes 
Ps. xcvi. 13, XCvill. 9 of Christ’s second Ad- 
vent, and also (2) places this fact in the closest 
connexion with Christ’s resurrection (which in 
the text is pointed to by the term “firstborn,” 
see on v. 5). We may infer, therefore, that 
the quotation, which follows, is substantially a 
reference to Ps. xcvii. 7; though in form it 
agrees with the words inserted by the LXX. 
in Deut. xxxii. 43 (See Additional Note), 


7. of the] Rather, in regard to the 
(and so in v. 8, ‘in regard to the Son”). 

spirits] So in v.14. But the parallelism 
(‘‘a flame of fire’) requires here the ren- 
dering, ‘‘ winds;” which also harmonises best 
with the Psalm itself. The angels, in per= 
forming God's commands, wield mighty na- 
tural agencies, the storm-wind or the ‘flame 
of fire” (the words used in Acts vii. 30, of 
the angel at Sinai). They are as the scorch- 
ing ‘‘ fire that goeth before Him” (Ps. xcvii. 
3), when He comes forth to judge the world. 
(See Additional Note.) 


8. the Son] ‘The characteristics of the 
‘‘ King” addressed in Ps, xlv show that He 
can be none other than the ‘‘Son” of Ps. ii 
and 2 S. vii; for He (1) is anointed by God 
(cp. Ps. ii. 2); (2) is exalted above ‘* His 
fellows” (cp. Ps. 11. 1o—12); (3) has an 
eternal throne (cp. 2 S. vil. 13); (4) is Him- 
self Divine (cp. Ps. ii. 12). Such a throne 
had been all along set before the mind of the 
Israelite; see Exod. xv. 18; 1 S. vill. 7; 
Ps. Ixxxix. 36, 37; Isai. vi. 1—5; Lam. v, 
16—19; Ezek. i. 26—28. 

Thy throne, O God] See note on Ps. xlv. 6. 

of righteousness| Befitting Him whose style 
was to be “‘ King of righteousness ” (vii. 2). 


9. therefore] Cp, Phil. ii. 9, ‘‘ Wherefore 
also God hath highly exalted Him” (lit. 
‘‘super-exalted ;” the word used in Ps, Xcvii. 9). 


Gr, 
rightness 
or, 
straight- 
"ESS. 


® Psal. 102. 
Tai u.4. ginning hast laid the foundation of 


HEBREWS.*T. 


even thy God, hath anointed thee 
with the oil of gladness above thy 
fellows. 


10 And, *Thou, Lord, in the be- 


the earth; and the heavens are the 
works of thine hands : 
11 They shall perish; but thou 
remainest ; and they all shall wax old 
as doth a garment ; 
12 And as a vesture shalt thou 





thy God] On the day of His resurrection, 
Jesus said, ‘‘I ascend unto my Father and 
your Father, to my God and your God” 
(John xx. 17). And St Peter, when about to 
speak of the power of Christ’s resurrection, 
begins (1 Ep. i. 3) ‘‘ Blessed be the God and 
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” 

the oil of gladness| By which the Priestly 
King was consecrated, and which He in turn 
was to pour out upon His people (Isai. Ixi. 
I—3). Comp. note on Ps. xlv. 7. 

thy fellows | Whom He condescended to 
associate with Himself by ‘‘partaking” of 
their nature (compare ii. 14). Among them 
He stood pre-eminent, “fairer than the chil- 
dren of men” (Ps. xlv. 2), ‘‘ filled” with the 
joy of God’s countenance (Acts ii. 28), as 
befitted the one everlasting High-priest. (Com- 
pare note on x. 21.) 


10. Ps.ciiis the prayer of one who, amidst 
the overthrow of the Davidic kingdom, longed 
for the great event to which Pss. xcvi—xcviii 
refer ;—the coming in of Messiah’s kingdom, 
when He should ‘‘appear in His glory” (wv. 
16), and kings and nations should serve Him 
(vv. 15,22). Before, however, that kingdom, 
in which righteousness should have an abiding 
home (ep. 2 Pet. iii. 13), could be inaugurated, 
the heavens and earth, which had been framed 
to be the scene of man’s probation, should 
“‘wax old” and be “changed” (vv. 11, 12). 
His kingdom, on the contrary, should be im- 
moveable (cp. ch. xii. 26—28, Isai. li. 5—8, 
Dan. vii. 14). Though heaven and earth 
passed away, His word of promise should 
stand; ‘the children of His servants should 
continue, and their seed should be established 
before Him” (v. 28). To “appear” thus 
‘tin glory,” to ‘‘create” a people for His 
praise (wv. 18), and to receive the homage of 
the nations, belonged, according to the whole 
analogy of the Old Testament scriptures, to 
Messiah. Comp. Matt. xxiv. 35. 

Thou, Lord] So the LXX.; inserting the 
word ‘‘ Lord,” in accordance with vv. 1, 12 
of the Psalm. The whole Psalm (as the title 
Says), was ‘‘ poured out before the Lord;” and 
the name “Lord” occurs in vv. 15, 16, 
18, 19, 21, 22. He, who would manifest 


[v. 1o—14. 


fold them up, and they shall be 
changed : but thou art the same, and 
thy years shall not fail. 

13 But to which of the angels 
said he at any time, “Sit on my right }; 


« Psal mee 


hand, until I make thine enemies thy — = 


footstool ? 

14 Are they not all ministering 
spirits, sent forth to minister for 
them who shall be heirs of salva- 
tion? 


Himself in glory upon earth,—of whom, when 
thus manifested, it might be said, ‘Thy years 
are throughout all generations” (v. 24), “‘ Thy 
years shall have no end” (v. 27),—was the 
very same that had “laid the foundation of 
the earth,” and had ‘‘ made the heavens.” Cp. 
v. 2 above. 


11. They shall perish] ‘The material world 
is only as the scaffolding used during the 
building up of God’s eternal temple. When 
this shall be complete, the scaffolding, being 
no longer needed, shall pass away. 


12. fold them up| So the LXX. (bor- 
rowing, probably, from Isai. xxxiv. 4). The 
Hebrew has, ‘‘ change them;” pointing to a 
work similar to that by which, when ‘this 
corruptible shall put on incorruption,” we shall 
‘be changed” (1 Cor. xv. 51, 52). 


13. to which] Rather (asin vv. 7, 8, in 
contrast with v. 5), in regard to which 

Sit on] Ps.cx.1; quoted again in x. 12, 13 
(cp. i. 3, vili, 1, xii. 2). No created being 
could thus share the throne of the Eternal. 
By this verse our Lord finally silenced His 
Jewish adversaries eee Xxil. 41—46). It 
is quoted by St Paul, x Cor. xv. 25; and by 
St Peter, Acts ii. 34. A later verse in this 
Psalm is the basis on which the main argu- 
ment of our Epistle rests. (See ch. v. 6, 10, 
Vi. 20, Vil. I—24.) 

until I make] Rather, “until I have made.” 


14. ministering} Not, ruling; cp. v. 7, 
‘© His ministers.” 

sent forth] Continually—ever afresh—sent 
forth (pres. part.) on His errands (cp. Gen. 
xxiv. 7; Exod. xxiii. 20). 

to minister for} Rather, unto service, 
on account of. Their office is to act as 
God’s ministers. In the discharge of this their 
office they are ever performing deeds of lowly, 
diligent, service on behalf of men who, to the 
end of their days on earth, are only “ qwaiting 
for” God’s ‘‘salvation” (cp. Gen. xxviii. 12, 
xlix. 18). The words rendered, ‘‘ unto sere 
vice,” are used in Acts xi. 29 and 1 Cor, xvi. 
15, of ministering to the temporal needs of 
‘the saints” at Jerusalem (cp. 2 Cor. viii. 4, 


v. 1.] 


1X. 1, 12) So then,—the Angels are God’s 
almoners to His poor human children. 

who shall be beirs| ‘‘who are hereafter to 
inherit,” or, to obtain Jasting possession of (see 
on wv. 4). 

salvation] ‘The all-including term, under 
which prophecy had spoken of the blessings 
of Messiah’s kingdom (see Ps. xcvi. 2, xcvili. 


HEBREWS. II. 


2, 3; cp. I Pet. i. 10,11). This ‘‘salvation” 
would endure after the heavens had “vanishel 
away ” (Isai. li. 6, 8). 

The emphatic word ‘‘salvation” (wit! 
which ch, ix also terminates) furnishes th:: 
key-note to the following chapter (v. 3, ‘st 
great salvation ;” v. 10, ‘* captain of their sal- 
vation ”). 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Cuap. 1. 3, 6, 7. 


3. The word dmavyacpa, which is here 
used, occurs in Wisd. vii. 26; where wisdom 
is spoken of as ‘‘the brightness (or, radiance) 
of the eternal light.” 

3. Schottgen quotes the Rabbinic treatise, 
Sohar-Chadash, as saying “The blessed Creator 


by His strength sustains (or carries, bap) the 
worlds” (MDdIYN, =Tods aidvas). 


6. The language used of our Lord’s first 
Advent is, that He came into the world (rov 
xoopor, ch. x. 5); not that He was introduced into 
possession of the earth (rny oikoupemmy). This 
latter is to take place at His second Advent, 
which is the subject of Ps. xcvii. 1, 5, 6; 
cp. xcviii. 2, 4. The word otxovpeévy is the 
one used in Ps. xcvi. 10, xCvii. 4, XCViil. 7, 
9. Cp. Introd. 111. Sect. 2, § vi. 

The word vmepvyace is used in Phil. ii. 9 
to describe the exaltation of Jesus; and in 
Ps. xcvii. 9 we have imepuabns imép mavtas 
tous Oeous. 

6. The words quoted in the text are 
identical with the second clause of Deut. 


CHAPTER II. 


1 We ought to be obedient to Christ Fesus, 
5 and that because he vouchsafed to take our 
nature upon him, 14 as it was necessary. 


Cuap. II. Salvation achieved by the Son 
of God, who is incomparably superior to the 
angels,—that has been set forth in ch. i. The 
point next to be expounded (see on i. 4) will 
be, that, in order to accomplish this work, the 
Saviour became truly Son of man, and for a 
while was ‘‘made lower than the angels;” 
humbled even to the ‘suffering of death.” 
Before, however, he speaks on this topic (vv. 
5—18), the writer inserts a practical reflexion: 
—How diligently ought we to listen to the 
words of such a Saviour (vv. 1—4)! 


1. Therefore] Since He, by whom God 
has spoken to us (i. 1), is so immeasurably 
exalted. 

the more earnest heed| Or, “more abundant 


New Test.—Votr. IV. 


XXXIil. 43, aS given in the Vatican MS, of the 
Septuagint. (The Alexandrine has vioi fou 
ayyeAo.) The Seventy, by inserting this clause 
(adapted from Ps. xcvii. 7), meant, no doubt, 
to indicate that they took the concluding verse 
of the great prophetic ode to refer to the 
establishment of Messiah’s kingdom. That 
they were right in so doing, we know from 
St Paul’s quoting the verse in Rom. xv. to, 
as well as from his here adopting their modi- 
fication of Ps. xcvii. 7. 

Observe that, in the Seventy’s paraphrase 
of Deut. xxxii. 43, while the commencing 
words, evgpavOnre ovpavoi, ate exactly as in 
Isai. xliv. 23 (cp. xlix, 13), they yet corre- 
spond to the ev@pavOnrecav oi ovpavoi of Ps. 
XCVi. II. 


7. Thus the expression ‘flaming fire” 
serves to link together the Psalms that are 
quoted i vv. 6, 7 (Ps. xcvii. 3, pnbm... WX = 


Civ. 4, pnd ws). Another phrase in verse 1 
of Ps. civ, 197) 337, is found also in Ps. xlv. 
4 (as well as in Ps. xcvi. 6) ;—supplying a link 
between the quotations in vv. 6—9. 


HEREFORE we ought to 
give the more earnest heed 
to the things which we have heard 


33 


>1Gr. ree 


lest at any time we should tlet them oS 


slip. 


heed.” ‘The Hebrews knew how solemnly 
Moses had entreated Israel to obey the law ; 
far more weighty was the obligation that was 
now laid on them by the Gospel. 

the things which we have heard| Lit. ‘‘the 
things that have been heard;” which God has 
‘“spoken to us by His Son” (i. 1). Cp. 2 Tim, 
iv. 17, ‘‘that all the Gentiles might ear” 
(the Gospel message). So in iv. 2, “the 
word of hearing ” is parallel to ‘‘ glad tidings.” 

lest at any time...| Rather, “lest perad- 
venture we drift away (from them).” 
The verb occurs in Prov. iii. 21: where it 
seems to mean, fo /et oneself drift away from 
an object so as to lose sight of it; asa careless 
boatman might float past his destination,— 
perhaps, to fall into rapids, 


Cc 


eaking 
vessels, 


HEBREWS. II. |v. 2—7. 


2 For if the word spoken by angels 
was stedfast, and every transgression 
and disobedience received a just re- 
compence of reward ; 

3 How shall we escape, if we neg- 
lect so great salvation; which at the 
first began to be spoken by the Lord, 
and was confirmed unto us by them 
that heard him, 

4 God also bearing them witness, 
both with signs and wonders, and 





2. dy angels| through angels, as agents 
(see on Acts vii. 53; Gal. iii 19). Similarly 
inv. 3; ‘“*through the Lord.” 

was stedfast] Rather, was found stedfast. 
It was proved, in actual experience, to be so, 
by the punishments which overtook the men 
who violated it (as in Num. xiv, xvi, xxv). 

disobedienee| Or, *‘ refusal to obey ;” a term 
which implies high-handed, contumacious, 
disobedience (cp. Deut. xvii. 12 ; Isai. Ixv. 12; 
Matt. xviti. 17). ‘The term “transgression ” 
is more general. 


3. eseape|—the penalty which must fall on 
those who refuse to hear God’s word. Man 
cannot be neutral in tne presence of God's 
word. Comp. xii. 25; Rom. ii. 3. 

so great| If the state of mankind was such 
that only the Son of God could save them, 
what hope can there be for any who neglect 
the salvation which He effected? Cp. on i. 14. 

began to be spoken] He, who was the sole 
‘author of salvation” (ch. v. 9), was also its 
first preacher; announcing it both during His 
earthly ministry (Matt. ix. 35, Luke viii. 1, 
John vi. 39—58), and more formally after 
His resurrection (Mark xvi. 16, Luke xxiv. 
46, 47). 

confirmed) On the Day of Pentecost the 
Apostles were enabled to testify of Christ in 
such a way that thousands in Jerusalem be- 
lieved on Him. 

unto us] the Hebrews. The writer had 
already associated himself with his readers in 
vv. I, 2; as he does also in vi. 1, x. 25, xii. I. 
Probably some of those to whom he was writ- 
ing had been present when Peter spoke of the 
things which he “had seen and heard” (Acts 
iv. 20). Paul himself, the pupil of Gamaliel, 
was very likely to have been so. 

Obs. St Paul at Antioch of Pisidia, in ad- 
dressing Jews, makes a similar appeal to the 
testimony of those who ‘‘came up with Jesus 
from Galilee to Jerusalem:—<qho are His 
witnesses,” he says, “unto the people” (Acts 
xiii. 31). Cp, Introd. m1. Sect. 8, § iii. 


4. beaing them witness] Or, “bearing 
witness with them ;” cp. Mark xvi. 20. 
signs,..wonders,.,miracles] As in Acts ii. 


~~ 


with divers miracles, and ' gifts of Or 
the Holy Ghost, according to his 
own will? 

5 For unto the angels hath he not 
put in subjection the world to come, 
whereof we speak. 

6 But one in a certain place tes- 
tified, saying, *What is man, that ¢ Pst 
thou art mindful of him? or the son, 
of man, that thou visitest him ? little” 

7 Thou madest him !a little lower ZE% 






22 (cp. 2 Cor. xii. 12). The wonders” 
may, perhaps, refer to such cases as the deaths 
of Ananias and Sapphira, and the infliction of 
blindness on Simon Magus. 

gifts| Lit. (as marg.) ‘distributions ;” 
referring to the variety of the spiritual gifts 
that were imparted (1 Cor. xii. 11; cp. Rom. 
xii. 3). 

nee to his own will] This clause 
points to the wonderful nature of the fact here 
spoken of; that God should thus have taken 
men to be fellow-workers with Himself (cp. 
1 Cor. 1. 1, &c.). Strange indeed; but He 
had so willed it,—in pursuance of His “eternal 
purpose” regarding mankind (Eph. iii. 10, 11). 


5. For unto...) Rather, ‘‘ For not unto 
angels did He subject.” God had em- 
ployed angels to propound His Law; but 
after the Incarnation the angels stood in a 
different relation to men. Men were now 
associated with the Lord of Glory as the 
angels could not be. Such has been His will :— 
For not to angels did He, in His revealed 
word, subject that future world, of which we 
are now speaking ;—that new earth, to which 
Ps. xcvii refers (see on i. 6), in which God 
will “make known,” in its full development, 
His great ‘‘ salvation” (Ps. xcviii. 2). Comp. 
1 Cor. vi. 3. 

to come] ‘‘that shall be;” the same word 
as in i. 14 (‘‘shall be”), vi. 5, ix. 11, x. 1, 
xili. 14. 


6. But] God has not subjected the world 
to come to angels; But, on the contrary, to 
man: as appears from Ps. viii, which speaks 
of a// as subordinated to man ;—to man, who 
had become inferior to angels, but should 
eventually surpass them; being ‘crowned 
with glory and honour.” 

testified| The Psalmist bore witness to the 
great revealed truth, that here on our earth, and 
by means of that human nature which is now 
so humiliated, God would manifest His glory 
in a higher way than it had been exhibited 
in the heavens or among the hosts of heaven. 
Is this future exaltation of man incredible? 
No; for we already see One, who wears our 
nature,—who endured the deepest suffering of 


v, 8, 9.] 


than the angels ; thou crownedst him 
with glory and honour, and didst 
set him over the works of thy 
hands : 

8 Thou hast put all things in sub- 
jection under his feet. or in that 
he put all in subjection under him, 
he left nothing that is not put under 


which that nature is capable,—“‘ crowned with 
glory and honour.” What has been accom- 
plished in Him is a pledge that God’s purpose 
regarding our race shall not miscarry. As 
Jesus is already exalted above the angels, so 
in due time shall they be, whose nature He has 
assumed.—The argument drawn from the 
Psalm holds good whatever meaning be given 
to the fiith verse, ‘‘ Thou madest him a little 
lower... ;” but is much the more forcible 
when the proper meaning of Aumiliation is 
given to the verb which is rendered ‘‘ made 
lower.” (See Additional Note.) 


7. the works of thy hands| Including, as 
v. 3 of the Psalm expressly says, the heavens 
(cp. Ps. cii. 25, quoted in ch. i. 10); so that 

e ‘* all” of the next clause is unlimited. 


8. For} This looks back to vv. 5, 6. 
Not to angels is that future world to be sub- 
jected, but, on the contrary, as Ps. viii testifies, 
to man. For, in that (according to the Psalm) 
God “subjected a//” to man, “ He left no- 
thing unsubjected to him.” Thus the holy 
angels will be of lower rank than the beings 
whose nature has been so glorified by the 
Incarnation ; and the evil angels will no longer 
be left at large, unrestrained and ‘insubordi- 
nate” (which is the strict meaning of the word 
here rendered “‘unsubjected;” see 1 Tim. i. 9, 
‘ disobedient,” Tit. i. 6, 10, “‘unruly”’). The 
“enemy,” who had so long held the children 
of men in ‘‘ bondage” (v. 15), will then be 
“quelled ” (Ps. viii. 2), ‘‘ bruised under the 
feet” of God’s elect (Rom. xvi. 20; 1 Cor. 
Xv. 26, 27). 

But now...] Such had been the prospect 
held out by the Psalm. But what do we ac- 
tually see, when we look at man’s present con- 
dition? So far as visible facts go, man is yet 
in a state of degradation. The “enemy and 
self-avenger” (Ps. vill. 2) is not yet quelled. 
With the eye of faith, however (v. 9), ‘““we 
behold Jesus,” the Son of man, already pos- 
sessed of the universal dominion which in this 
Psalm is attributed to man. 


9. made...Jower| Clearly the word here 
denotes the obscuration of a prior dignity,— 
the transcendent dignity of the ‘Son of God.” 

for the suffering| Rather, because of 
the suffering. This clause is to be read 
with what follows (so Theophylact, Estius, 
Luther, Calvin, and nearly all recent com- 


HEBREWS. II. 


him. But now we see not yet all 
things put under him. 

But we see Jesus, who was 
made a little lower than the angels 


' for the suffering of death, crowned !0r, &. 


with glory and honour; that he by 
the grace of God should taste death 
for every man. 


mentators). The first half of the verse may 
be rendered thus: But Him that was fora 
short time made lower than the angels, 
(even) Jesus, (Him) we behold crowned, 
because of the suffering of death, with 
glory and konour. The words of the 
Psalm which spoke of man’s being “made 
lower than the angels,” were eminently, and 
in the most pathetic sense, applicable to Jesus; 
but in Him (most joyful paradox!) the 
“diminution” formed the very ground of His 
exaltation. Compare Phil. ii. 9: ‘‘ Wherefore 
also (because He had emptied Himself of 
glury, v. 7) God hath highly exalted Him.” 
The position of the Name, ‘* Jesus” (cp. iii. 
I, Vi. 20, Xli. 2, 24, XI. 20) gives it great 
emphasis ; ‘* Jesus,”—the Nazarene (Acts ii. 
22), ‘* whom Israel crucified” (ib. v. 36). 

the suffering of death |—that kind of suffer- 
ing, which belongs to death, which is involved 
in the act of dying (the noun “suffering” 
being here intransitive, as in the next verse). 
The same contrast of “glory” and ‘‘suffer- 
ing” occurs in Rom, vill. 17, 18, 1 Pet. i. 11, 
IV Masav. te 

that be...| This is to be taken as a com- 
ment on the whole scene which has just been 
presented to the eye of faith. The Son of 
God had been humbled even to death-suffer- 
ing, and then on that very account had been 
crowned with glory. What was the purpose 
of this great mystery? It was, that so, by 
the grace of God, He might taste death 
on behalf of every man. This was the ex- 
planation of that strange fact. The arrange- 
ment had its origin in the spontaneous action 
of Eternal Love,—*‘ the grace of God” (Rom 
v. 15; Tit. il-11r). To work out that pur- 
pose of Eternal Love,—‘‘ the will of God” (ch. 
X. 7, 9),—-Was the end for which Jesus be- 
came man. In Him the “grace of God” 
was manifested (John i. 14, 17). Not, there- 
fore, in consequence of some arbitrary decree, 
hurling against an innocent being the punish- 
ment which was due to the guilty, but in 
pursuance of the “‘ grace” of which He Him- 
self was the exponent, did Jesus “‘ taste death 
for every man.” (On a various reading here, 
see Additional Note.) 

taste death, Drinking that mystenous cup 
of bitter agony, which at length issued in 
death. 

for every man] Rather, en behalf of 


cz 


36 


HEBREWS. 


10 For it became him, for whom 
are all things, and by whom are all 
things, in bringing many sons unto 


every man; so that His death-suffering had 
beneficial consequences, which were available 
for every individual of the race. Comp. John 
xi. 50, 2 Cor. v. 15; where the same pre- 
position is used (see Additional Note). 


10. In saying that God permitted Christ 
to die on behalf of man, do we attribute to 
Him anything that is unseemly or unfitting? 
No. If He, who is the Fina/, as He is the 
Efficient, Cause of ‘‘all things,” —for whom and 
by whom they exist,—determined to raise 
many (Rom. v. 19) from among mankind to 
be His sons, partakers of His own glory (comp. 
Ps. viii. 1, 5), it became Him, it befitted His 
wisdom and goodness, to provide, that He 
who was to be ‘the Captain (or, Author) 
of their salvation” should be qualified for His 
high office “by means of sufferings.’ ‘The 
salvation, which He was to bestow on them, 
was not to be accomplished by an exercise of 
power merely. The ability, which He would 
give them to become ‘‘ sons of God” (John i. 
12), was of a spiritual kind; carrying along 
with it filial obedience. Was it not ‘ fitting,” 
then, that. He should exhibit in His own per- 
son the type of character to which they were 
to be conformed (Rom. viii. 29)? Only in 
virtue of His absolute perfection of obedience 
could He win salvation for men (cp. ch. v. 
8); was it not “fitting” that such obedience 
should be exhibited in His endurance of that 
death which was the penalty of man’s dis- 
obedience? How otherwise could He be in a 
complete sense ‘the First-born among many 
brethren” (Rom. viii. 29)? To secure this 
end, then, the infinitely wise and good God 
“withheld not His own Son” from suffering, 
“but gave Him up for us all” (ab. v. 32). 
There was no reason, therefore, why the Jew 
should shrink, as he did, from the thought of 
a ‘‘suffering Messiah” (Acts xxvi. 23). 

in bringing] Or, ‘seeing that He brought.” 
His purpose of bringing many to “glory ” 
had been already intimated in Ps. viii. 

to make...perfect) ‘To raise Him to that 
glorious completeness, which would fully 
qualify Him for His work (v. 9); and so, to 
consecrate Him, as the same word is rendered 
in vil. 28 (‘the Son, who is consecrated,” and 
invested with plenary authority as High- 
priest, ‘‘for evermore”). So the word is 
used in Lev. xxi. ro, ‘‘He that is HIGH- 
PRIEST among bis brethren (see on xX. 21), 
upon whose head the holy oil was poured, 
and that was consecrated to put on the gar- 
ments” (which were ‘for Aonour and glory,” 
Exod. xxviii. 2, LXX.). Cp. Lev. viii. 33, 
xvi. 32. That we are to attach this idea of 
**consecration” to the word in the present 


be lv. 10, T8. 


glory, to make the captain of their 
salvation perfect through sufferings. 
11 For both he that sanctifieth and 


passage seems evident from the ‘sanctify ” of 
v.11. Inch. v. 9, also, there is an immediate 
transition from the menticn of His ‘being 
made perfect,” to His being viewed as High- 
riest. 

captain] The same word occurs in xii. 2 
(‘‘ Author”), Acts iil. 15 (‘* Prince of life”), 
v. 31 (‘‘Prince and Saviour”). He opens the 
way, by which His people march to salvation. 
He advances before them as their High-priest ; 
they follow Him, a priestly host, clad in the 
‘* beauties of holiness” (Ps. cx. 1—4). 

through sufferings| Through them, because 
in the endurance of them He exhibited that 
perfect obedience, by which God was for ever 
glorified (cp. John x. 17, xvii. 4, 5). Had 
He ascended at once to heaven from the 
Mount of Transfiguration, there would have 
been no such vindication of God's wisdom in 
creating man or of His holiness in saving 
man. 


11. Wonderful as this Divine arrangement. 
was, yet it was fitting. ‘‘ For both He that 
sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all 
of one,” or ‘from one;” from one Father (cp. 
John xx. 17). Infinitely as the Son of God— 
in His whole Divine-human personality — is. 
exalted above the ‘‘many sons,” yet is this 
title ‘sons of God” no mere figure of speech. 
They are really ‘‘born of God” (John i. 13); 
really to share in ‘‘ His eternal glory” (1 Pet. 
v. 10; cp. 2 Thess. ii. 14). The Consecra- 
tion Prayer offered by our Lord, before He 
went forth to “taste death for every man,” 
is addressed to the Father (John xvii. 1, 
5, II, 21, 24, 25; in v. 11, ‘* Holy Father; ” 
in v. 25, “ Righteous Father”). In it, speak- 
ing of His disciples, He says, ‘* Thine they 
were, and Thou gavest them Me...And for their 
sakes 1 sanctify Myself that they also may be 
truly sanctified.’ Compare 1 Pet. i. 3: ‘* The 
God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ... 
hath begotten us again to a lively hope by the 
resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.” 

sanctifieth | through the efficacy of His all- 
perfect self-oblation (cp. x. 10, 14). In chh. 
X. 29, xiii. 12, this sanctification is spoken of 
as effected by ‘‘ the blood” of Jesus; so that 
it might be thought to refer simply to the 
removal of the guilt of sin, which shut men 
out from communion with Ged. But that 
we are not to take this narrow view is evident 
from ix. 13, 14; Where the ‘“sanctifieth to. 
the purifying of the flesh” has for its cor- 
relate, ‘‘cleanse your conscience from dead 
works to serve the living God.” Real sancti- 
fication implies admission to real communion 
with God; which can be only through the 
Holy Ghost imparted by Christ to His people. ~ 


v. 12—14.| 


they who are sanctified are all of one: 
for which cause he is not ashamed to 
call them brethren, 

12 Saying, I will declare thy name 
unto my brethren, in the midst of the 
church will I sing praise unto thee. 


for which cause| Becar3e those whom He 
is sanctifying and leading to salvation are 
“from one” Father with Himself. The ex- 
pression, ‘‘ He is not ashamed to call them 
brethren,” points (as in xi. 16) to the infinite 
disparity there is between them and Him in 
regard of His Divine nature. 

12. Saying] Ps. xxii. 22. Our Lord ap- 
propriated this Psalm to Himself, while He 
‘was sounding the lowest depths of suffering 
(Matt. xxvii. 46). The verse here quoted 
occurs immediately after the Sufferer has 
been delivered. In it He claims the “great 
congregation” (cp. v. Io, ‘‘many sons”) as 
His brethren. So the risen Saviour at once 
on Easter Morning said, ‘‘Go, tell My dre- 
thren” (Matt. xxviii. 10); “Go to My bre- 
thren, and say unto them, I ascend unto My 
Father and your Father” (John xx. 17). He 
nowhere so addressed His disciples until He 
had become “the First-born from the dead.” 
‘Then, and not before, they were made ‘‘sons,” 
“heirs of God through Christ” (Gal. iv. 5, 7). 

I will declare thy name] So in John xvii. 
26, “1 have made known unto them Thy 
Name, and will make it known ;” even that 
Name, which He had used in His suffering, 
My God (Ps. xxii. 1, 2, 10); which it was 
said God’s ‘‘ First-born” would use: ‘‘ He 
shall call me, Thou art My Father, My God, 
and My strong salvation” (Ps. 1xxxix. 25, 26). 
That ‘‘Name” had been His support, as it 
is the support of every one who obeys His 
voice (Isai. 1. ro, “let him trust in the Name 
of the Lord”). 

will I sing praise unto thee] Returning 
thanks to God now, as truly as before He 
had offered supplication to Him. So fully 
did He manifest the spirit of filial dependence. 


13. And again] ‘The two next passages 
refer, not to the special statement at the end 
of v. 11, which has been substantiated by the 
first quotation; but to the general assertion, 
+¢ He that sanctifieth and they that are sancti- 
fied are all of One.” ‘They exhibit (in pro- 
phetic type) the ‘‘ Captain of salvation” 
standing among those whom God had given 
him, and professing His entire dependence on 
Grd. 

I will put my trust in him] The words 
occur in three places (in the LXX.): 2 S. 
Xxii. 3, Isai. viii. 17, xil. 2. Many commen- 
tators suppose the reference to be to Ps. xviii., 
which is certainly Messianic (see Rom. xv, 8, 
9), and in many ways strongly resembles Ps. 


HEBREWS. 


Tf. 


and the children which God hath * 
given me. 

14 Forasmuch then as the children 
are partakers of flesh and blood, he 


xxii (see below). It is more probable, how- 
ever, that the words are taken from Isai. viii. 
17; so that here, as in x. 30, we have quota- 
tions from two consecutive verses separated 
by ‘And again.” It should be borne in mind, 
that from ch. vi onward Isaiah is to be viewed 
as the “ Apostle,” or Envoy, of “the Lord of 
Hosts” to Israel; and not only so, but as 
specially consecrated to the office by an act in 
which he was “purged” from sin (vi. 6—9), 
as the high-priest was, symbolically, on the 
Day of Atonement. He stands, then, as the 
Apostle and High-priest of the new Israel; of 
those who are God’s ‘‘ disciples” (viii. 16, 
cp. liv. 13), who worship Him in holy fear, 
and find Him “a sanctuary,” or fountain of 
sanctification, to them, when both the houses 
of Israel stumble through unbelief (ib. 13—15). 
He whose name, Isaiah, signifies ‘‘ the salva- 
tion of the Lord,” confesses in the midst of 
this new community, of which he is commis- 
sioned to be the leader, that he is supported 
wholly by faith in his God. He uses the 
same language of dependence which is em- 
ployed by the Church a little afterwards 
(xii. 2). 

Obs. 1. In the hour of deepest darkness 
He who was to be ‘the Lord’s salvation to 
the whole earth” (Isai. xlix. 6) received, from 
those who were putting Him to death be- . 
cause He said “I am the Son of God,” this 
testimony : “‘ He trusted in God that He would 
deliver Him” (Matt. xxvii. 43). 

Obs. 2. In John vi. 37—46 the union of 
Divine, saving, power in Jesus with creaturely 
dependence is made singularly clear; and the 
ideas represented by the two passages quoted 
here from Isai. viii are both distinctly insisted 
on: (1) Jesus is the Author of ‘ everlasting 
life,” but it is to those who are taught of God, 
who have /earned of the Father, v. 453; (2) 
He is the “ bread of life” to all who come to 
Him; but it is added, ‘“‘all that the Father 
giveth me shall come to me” (wv. 35, 37)- 

Behold...) See the note on Isai. viii. 18. 
In His consecration-prayer (cp. on wv. 11) 
Jesus repeatedly speaks of those who believed 
on Him, as ‘“‘given” Him by the Father (St 
John xvii. 6, 9, 11, 12, 24),—who had also 
given to Him ‘‘ power over all flesh” (v. 2; 
cp. v. 28). 

14. the children] Those to whom God 
promised to be ‘‘a sanctuary ” (Isai. vili. 14) ; 
and for whom the mysterious names of Isaiah’s 
sons predicted a “return” from captivity and 


37 


13 And again, I will put my ? Peal se 
trust in him. And again, ¢ Behold 1 tau. 9 


38 


HEBREWS. 


also himself likewise took part of the 
same ; that through death he might 


death, that is, the devil ; 


the spoiling of their enemies. How was this 
promise of deliverance and sanctification to be 
made good? The prophetic word supplied 
an answer (ix. 4—6). The oppressor’s yoke 
should be broken by one, who should be 
bestowed upon Israel;—‘‘a child”’and yet “‘the 
Mighty God.” 

Already, therefore, in mystic scene, it had 
been declared that a spiritual Israel should be 
raised up, to whom, after the sanctuary at Je- 
rusalem was laid desolate, ‘‘the Lord Him- 
self’ would be a fountain of sanctification. 
Seven centuries and a half before the birth 
of Christ, Isaiah had spoken of that ‘holy 
seed” as already ‘“‘ given” to him. God’s 
promise, then, was clear ;—a sanctified Israel 
was to spring forth from the carnal Israel. 
The ‘‘children given by God” were ‘“ par- 
takers of” human nature; forasmuch, then, 
as this nature must be sanctified, He Himself, 
the Sanctifier, ‘‘ became flesh and dwelt among 
us;”—" Son” of God, yet ‘‘ given” by God 
for man’s salvation (John iii. 16). 

are partakers...took part] ‘Two different 
verbs. They were sharers of blood and 
flesh (corr. R.), which belonged in common 
to the race. He, of His free choice, took part 
in these; so making mankind His brethren. 
He was thus able to perform towards them a 
brother’s part, —redeeming them from bondage 
to the great oppressor (Lev. xxv. 47—49). 

he also himself likewise| Rather, he also in 
like manner ;—with such close correspond- 
ence that in all substantial points He was 
made like unto ‘“‘ His brethren” (for sin is not 
of the substance of human nature); and so, 
although He was not, like them, subject to 
death, yet He was capable of dying. 

destroy] Rather, bring to nought; 
frustrating his policy and utterly disabling 
him (the verb is the same that is used 
int) Tr. Cor: 1.285exv-0 26} o2 eee 
1 John iii. 8). When Jesus by His ‘ obe- 
dience unto death” had made reparation to 
the majesty of the Divine Law for man’s 
sin, the devil lost his power as accuser (Rev. 
xii. 10), and death, instead of being terrible, 
became to the faithful a messenger of peace. 
Sin, the sting of death, being ‘‘ taken away ” 
(John i. 29), death was no longer able to 
injure such as were in Christ. 

had the power of death| or, ‘‘held the 
empire of death;” seeming to be absolute 
ruler over this earth, which by his malice he 
had turned into a ‘region of death-shade” 
(Isai. ix, 2). Was not every human being 
who died, or who, while living, cowered 
before the thought of death, a proof of Sa- 


ii, [v. 15, 16. 


15 And deliver them who througt ! Sr. 


fear of death were all their lifetime Ao 
destroy him that had the power of subject to bondage. 


g 


16 For verily the took not on him "2 


he taketh 





tan’s triumph? When Jesus Himself died on 
the cross, did not the empire of death appear 
to be definitively and irreversibly established ? 
Yet by that very death Satan was for ever 
disabled and his triumph proved to be illu- 
sory. From that moment ‘grace reigned 
through righteousness unto eternal life” (Rom. 
v. 21). ‘* Jesus Christ the Righteous” was 
man’s ‘advocate with the Father” (1 John 
ii. 1);—who could “lay anything to the 
charge” of those, whom He claimed as His 
own (Rom. viii. 33), who through Him were 
‘sanctified ” (v. 11)? 


15. And deliver them who] Rather, and 
might release all those, who (lit. those, 
as many as). 

all their lifetime] The expression in the 
original (a very unusual on appears to mean 
‘‘throughout the whole of their (so-called) 
living.” (See Additional Note.) 

subject to bondage liable to that bondage, 
which follows from the sense of unforgiven 
sin. This description was applicable to many 
even of the Old Testament saints. They did 
not as yet possess the ‘spirit of adoption” 
(Gal. iv. 3—7, 24). 


16. he took not on him...) Rather, He 
layeth not hold of angels, but He lay- 
eth hold of Abraham’s seed. ‘The verb 
is the same that is used in Matt. xiv. 31; 
where “ Jesus stretched forth His hand and 
laid hold of” Peter, to save him from perishing 
in the waters. In ch. viii. 9 (= Jer. xxxi. 32) 
it is used of God’s /aying hold of Israel’s hand, 
reclaiming him out of the bondage of Egypt. 
(Additional Note.) The connexion between 
this and the two preceding verses will, therefore, 
be of this kind. Jesus took part in blood and 
flesh, thus becoming capable of death; His 
purpose being that by death He might atone 
for man’s sin, and so liberate those who were 
in continual fear of death. This was fitting ; 
“for verily,” if we refer to Scripture (to 
which the present tense points, as in v, rr), 
we find that such is the character of those, on 
whom the Divine Saviour lays His hand, 
claiming them as His own. Those, whom He 
rescues, are not angels ; whose simply spiritual 
nature allowed of no such penalty as death, 
and therefore of no such redemption as is 
effected by a payment of that penalty. Not 
angels, but ‘‘ Abraham’s seed,” does He “ lay 
hold of” (Isai. xli. 8, 9, see the note there) ; 
and says to them ‘ Fear not; for | am 
with thee” (ib. 10, 13, 14). This ‘‘laying 
hold of” Abraham’s seed was signified by 
that typical drama on Mount Moriah, in 






v. 17, 18.] 


the nature of angels; but he took on 
bim the seed of Abraham. 

17 Wherefore in all things it be- 
noved him to be made like unto 
his brethren, that he might be a 
merciful and faithful high priest in 


rE BREWS. “TE. 


things pertaining to God, to make 
reconciliation for the sins of the 
people. 

18 For in that he himself hath 
suffered being tempted, he is able to 
succour them that are tempted. 





which God interposed to rescue Isaac from 
death by means of a substituted victim. 

Obs. 1. ‘Thus the very thing in which men 
were ‘‘made lower than the angels,” their 
mortality (see Additional Note on wv. 7), was 
that which made their salvation possible. 

Obs. 2. As in Abraham’s seed ‘‘all thé 
nations of the earth were to be blessed,” so He 
who “laid His” redeeming ‘‘hand ” on Abra- 
ham’s seed did thereby, virtually, rescue from 
bondage all mankind (cp. Gal. ili. 7, 29). 


17. Wherefore] Lit. ‘‘ Whence;” showing 
that vv. 17, 18 flow from wv. 16 in the way 
of consequence. Since He claims a right to 
rescue Abraham’s seed,—to redeem them as 
His brethren,—it behoved Him, for the full and 
effective discharge of the work He had under- 
taken, to de made in all things (iv. 15) /ike 
unto them; not only taking upon Him ‘the 
form of a servant,” but also submitting ‘to 
death” (Phil. ii. 7, 8). 

be| or, ‘‘become;” through the process of 
trial to which He was subjected (ch. v. 8). 

merciful and faithful] A double qualifica- 
tion: (1) aving compassion for the weaknesses 
of men; (2) and yet faithful (or, ‘trust- 
worthy”) in regard to all that was requisite 
for procuring reconciliation between the holy 
God and sinful men. His faithfulness to God, 
which had been proved by His enduring the 
extremity of suffering, also assured men that 
they might rely on Him as faithful to their 
interests. In Him ‘‘mercy and truth met to- 
gether” (Ps. Ixxxv. 103 cp. 1xxxix. 1, 2, 14). 

high priest] "The Greek word occurs only 
once in the O.T., in Levit. iv. 3 (the Hebrew 
word there being simply ‘“‘ priest”). Comp. 
on x. 21. The idea of His high-priestly func- 
tions had been already presented in v. 11; 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Cuap. 


7. ‘‘Madest him a little lower than the 
angels.” The two principal questions are, (1) 
whether Bpayv 7 here denotes ‘a little (in 
degree),” or, ‘‘a little time:” and (2) what is 
the nature of the humiliation (é\arrwors) 
here spoken of. 

I, Although Spayv 7 is capable of either 
meaning, yet it more frequently signifies ‘‘ for 
a short time.” So it is used in a passage 
which well illustrates the text,—x Pet. v. 10, 

_“ The God of all grace, who hath called us to 
His eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that 
ye have suffered a while, make you perfect.” 


the sacrifice being Himself (vv. 9, 14). 

in things pertaining to God] As in ch. v. 1, 
Exod. xviii. 19, LXX. (‘‘Be thou for the 
people to God-ward, that thou mayest bring 
the causes unto God”), 

to make reconciliation for| In the original, 
one word; the same that occurs in Ps. lxv. 
3; where it stands for the Hebrew word 
which is commonly rendered “‘ make an atone- 
ment for,” but in Dan. ix. 24, ‘‘make re- 
conciliation for.” (See Note below.) Only 
by atoning for sin could He restore man to 
his proper relation to God. 

of the people| Levit. xvi. 24 (on the Day 
of Atonement); comp. ch. vii. 27. 


18. He is qualified to be both “ merciful 
and faithful:” for He is able both to pity 
those that are tempted and to give them real 
help:—the ground of each qualification being 
given in the clause, ‘‘in that He hath suf- 
fered, being Himself tempted.” Inthat He 
Himself was subjected to temptation, He can 
sympathize. In that He continued firm under 
the utmost pressure of temptation, and ‘‘suf- 
fered” (in the same absolute sense as in ix. 26, 
xill. 12), He is ‘‘ perfected” as the “ Captain 
of our salvation” (v. 10). Comp. 1 Pet. iii. 18 ; 
‘« Christ hath once suffered for sins...to bring 
us to God.” We are not, therefore, to di- 
lute ‘‘ He is able to succour” into ‘‘ He sas 
learnt to succour,” but to give the word 
“able” its full force; as in vii. 25, ‘‘ He is 
able to save to the uttermost.” Compare 
iv. I5. 

them that are tempted] A description of 
mankind at large; who are all undergoing pro- 
bation. Yet the thought was one that would 
be specially welcome to the Hebrew Chris- 
tians in their existing trials. 


Le 7 MO MON LON Le MAM MLSs: LO, lize 


The Hebrew word also (Ov!) often has this 
meaning (e.g. Ps. xxxvii. 10, Hos. i. 4). 

II. The humiliation, or privation, or di- 
minution (compare the strikingly similar ‘ de- 
minutio capitis’ of Roman Law), would seem 
to refer to man’s mortality. This holds 
good, whether we look to the Septuagintal 
‘¢madest him lower than the angels,” or to the 
Hebrew, ‘“‘Thou madest him fall short of 
God.” For (x) in Luke xx. 35, 36 the 
‘‘children of the resurrection ” are described 
as ‘‘equal to the angels” because they ‘“ cay 
no more die;” and (2) in Rom. iii. 23 it is aai 


40 


HEBREWS. II. 


ot fallen men that they all “come short of 
(vorepotvra) the glory of God” (vorepew 
in the LXX. frequently representing the word 
<DN, which is used in Ps. viii. 5). In wv. 9 of 
this cl.z>oter it is plain that the ‘“ being made 
lower” must signify 4umiliation ;—a humilia- 
tion which involved ‘‘ the suffering of death.”’ 

Both the Hebrew and the Greek verbs are 
privative in meaning, and therefore not 
suited to be used of God's forming man 
originally in an irferior state. But they en- 
tirely fall in with the thought of his sinking 
into an abnormal and degraded state. 


8. Two different verbs in vv. 8, 9 are both 
rendered by ‘‘see,”in A. V. The verb in v. 
8 (dpapev) is the common verb for seeing 
with the eye. That in v. 9 (Bdéropev) is 
often used of mental perception (as in ili. 19, 
x. 25; Rom. vii. 23). 


9. Instead of ydpire Gcod, ‘* by the grace 
of God,” Origen and other early writers, both 
Greek and Latin, read ywpis Geov, ‘apart 
from God.” To this various senses have 
been given—as, ‘‘deserted of God;” or, “ with- 
out affecting the Godhead ;” or, ‘ (for all,) 
God alone except.” Theodore of Mopsuestia 
went so far as to declare the reading yapere 
@cov to be unmeaning. Yet it is now accepted 
by almost all the critical editors. 

9. The controversy as to whether vzép, 
in cases like this, be equivalent to dvri, may 
be fairly solved thus. The prepositions of 
themselves suggest different ideas; but'to die 
‘‘on behalf of a person” readily suggests the 
idea of dying ‘‘in his stead.” This is evi- 


. dent from the use of the verbs umepOvnoKo 


and vreparobvncke in classical Greek. ‘Thus 
in Eurip. ‘ Alc.’ 698 we have vmepOvnckev 
oéOcv to represent the same act which in 446 
had been described by ré6ynxev avr’ €uov. 

When we hear of ‘‘one man’s dying for 
(urép) the people, that the whole nation perish 
not” (John xi. 50, cp. xviii. 14), it is difficult 
to avoid the thought of a vicarious death. 

When it is urged, ‘that, if He died for 
(érép) all, then all died” (2 Cor. v. 15), we 
naturally add, ‘‘yes, died representatively in 
Him their substitute.” 

Yet a comparison of two such passages as 
2 S. xviii. 33 and John xiii. 37 may show that 
each preposition still retains its own distinct 
phase of meaning. 


10. It is observable that 

(1) In ch. v. 7—g9 Christ’s ‘‘ being made 
perfect” is antithetic to “‘in the days of His 
Jesh” (which itself is meant to illustrate His 
ability to “‘sympathise with our infirmities,” 
ch. iv. 15). 

(2) In vii. 28 it is antithetic to ‘‘men that 
bave infirmities.” 

{t is probable, therefore, that the reXeiwors 
of ii. 10 is antithetic to the €Aarraais of v. 9; 
and so, as the latter consisted in His assuming 


a nature that was capable of dying, the former 
must consist in that nature being transfused 
with ‘‘the power of an endless life,”—the 
basis of His priesthood (ch. vii. 16). 


11. The preposition (ex) is the one used 
in John i. 13 (“born...e¢f God”), vi. 46 (‘save 
He that is of God’), 1 Cor. i. 30 (‘* of Him are 
ye in Christ Jesus”), 1 John iv. 4 (‘ye are 
of God, little children’’). 


13. Psalm xviii speaks of One who was 
raised out of the depths of suffering, from the 
midst of the “snares” of death and Hades, to 
be the ‘‘head of the nations” (v. 44);—One, 
who was righteous and pure before God (vv. 
20, 24) and in whom God ‘‘had delight” (v. 
19); but who ascribed His ‘salvation’ to 
God (vv. 2, 35, 46), calling Him ‘My 
God” (vv. 2, 6, 21, 28, 29), and professing 
that He would “give thanks” to Him 
‘among the nations” (v. 49). 


15. To (qv has this phase of meaning in the 
well-known ris 8 oidev, ei To Ghv KA. 5 
“Who knows if that we call living be not in 
truth death, and that we call death be not in 
truth living?” Compare also 2 Macc. vii. 9; 
where 16 zrapov {py is in contrast with the (ay 
of eternity. 


16. The view here taken of the word ém- 
AauBaveobac may be confirmed, both from 
classical Greek, and by means of the LXX. 
(assisted by the Hebrew). 

I. In Plato, ‘ Legg.’ x11. § 7, the word is 
used in the sense of claiming as one’s own 
(Liddell and S-ott), and in Lysias, ‘in Timon.’ 
p. 98 (as is pointed out to me by Rev. J. P. 
Tweed), it is used in the sense of ‘* laying one’s 
hand on a person in the way of claiming a 
right to rescue him from violence or imprison - 
ment” (in the words of the editor of the 
‘Oratt. Att.’ “aliquem injecté manu vindi- 
care et raptori ereptum ire”). It is evident 
that this technical sense gives a greatly in- 
creased force to the évoxyor dovdelas Of v. 15. 

II. The Hebrew verb, for which the 
LXX. uses émiAapRavecOa in Jer. xxxi. 32 
(Hebr. viii. 9), is PMN. This is used in Lev. 
Xxv. 35, where the Israelite is bidden to “ re- 
lieve” or lay a strengthening hand on, the poor 
brother (cp. Hebr. ii. 11, 17), whose “ hand 
faileth,’—who is too feeble to help kimself. 
But here the LXX. has dvriAnwn, the same 
word asin Isai. xli.9. (Observe too that ¢Bon- 
O@noa occurs twice immediately afterwards, 
a 10, 13; aS BonOyoa does in Hebr. ii. 
18. 

Inferentially, indeed, the expression con- 
tains the thought of ‘‘taking on Him the nature” 
of those whom He would rescue:—for only 
thus could He be so identified with them, 
that He could claim them as His own. 


17. The word used of the Leviticai priest’s 
“making reconciliation ” is €&:AdoxeoOat. 
word here used is {AdoxecA ~~*ich elsewhere 


v. I, 2.] 


is used only of God’s “showing mercy” or 
“forgiving,” but never (as here) with an 
accusative after it. In Dan. ix. 24, however, 
we have the expression é&:Aaocao Gat adixias in 
the description of Messiah’s work. It would 


4 


CHAPTER III. 
1 Christ is more worthy than Moses, 7 there- 
fore if we believe not in him, we shall be 
ae Se rae punishment than hardhearted 


“> HEREF ORE, holy brethren, 
partakers of the heavenly call- 

Cuap. III. In chh. i and ii it has been 
shown from the O. T., frst, that Messiah was 
immeasurably superior in dignity to the angels, 
through whom the law was given; and se- 
condly, that He was to take part in man’s 
mature and suffer in it for man’s salvation. 
Thus He is qualified to stand between God 
and man; making atonement to God for the 
sin of man, and sanctifying man that He may 
draw near to God, In other words, man has 
in Him precisely what he needed, a ‘‘ merciful 
and faithful High-priest” (ii. 17). 

Here, then, we have reached the principal 
topic of the Epistle, the High-priesthood of 
Christ. Before this, however, is discussed, 
another preliminary remark must be made. 
The thought might occur to a Hebrew ; “ But, 
granting all that has been urged concerning 
Christ, must we not still recognize the au- 
thority of the Law, given by Moses as God's 
envoy,—which Law is, in fact, our title-deed 
to the possession of the Holy Land?” This is 
disposed of in chh. iii, iv; where it is shown 
that Moses was but ‘fa servant in God's 
house,” bearing witness to One who should 
come after him; and that Canaan was only a 
type of the Rest which is in reserve for the 
people of God. If they who disbelieved God’s 
word as given by Moses were excluded from 
Canaan, how careful should we be not to 
neglect the Gospel message! how earnest in 
*tholding fast our (covenant) profession” 
(iv. 14)! looking to Christ not only as God’s 
High-priest, to procure forgiveness of sins, but 


also as God’s Envoy, whose voice we are to 
obey. 


1. holy brethren...| members of the family, 
which Christ, the firstborn from the dead, 
has sanctified (ii. ro, 11); and who are 
“‘called” to be heirs of a heavenly inheritance 
(ix. 15 ; cp. Eph. i. 18 ; Phil. iii. 14). 

consider| or ‘‘contemplate;”—fix your 
minds on Him. 

Apostle and High Priest|—in one. Moses 
had been God’s ‘‘apostle” (Exod. iii. ro—16), 
to lead Israel out of Egypt and to give them 
God’s covenant; but the maintenance of the 
Covenant was provided for through the high- 


HEBREWS. III. 


seem, therefore, that the Apostle had em; loyed 
a form of words, which befitted only the Me- 
diator between God and man;—on man’s part 
seeking for, on God’s part bestowing, expia- 
tion of sins. 


ing, consider the Apostle and High 
Priest of our profession, Christ 
Jesus; 

2 Who was faithful to him that , 


41 


‘appointed him, as also Moses was seae, 


faithful in all his house. 8 


priesthood, which was for the ‘‘ sanctification” 
of the people. The *‘heavenly ” covenazt 
was mediated by Christ; who was not only 
** Apostle” (John x. 36, xvii. 3), to offer to 
men the terms of eternal life, but ‘ High- 
priest ” also, to sanctify His redeemed people, 
and in such wise to maintain their communion 
with God, that the Covenant of Life should 
be perpetual. 

profession] AS in iv. 14, x: 23. It is the 
correlative of ‘‘ covenant.” God of His own 
grace establishes His immutable Covenant ; 
but man on his side must assent to, and accept, 
the terms of the Covenant. At Sinai God had 
said ‘* If ye will 4ear my voice, ye shall be to 
me a special people” (Exod. xix. 5). The 
people's ‘‘ profession ” (by which they ‘* passed 
into the covenant,” Deut. xxix. 12) was, “‘ All 
that the Lord saith we will do, and we will 
hear” (Exod. xxiv. 7). In. the baptismal 
covenant the act that ratifies our ‘*‘ profession ” 
is, the ‘‘ answer of a good conscience towards 
God ;” which was made possible for us 
‘through the resurrection of Jesus Christ 
from the dead” (1 Pet. iii. 21). 

Christ Jesus| The correct reading appears 
to be, Jesus (alone, as in iv. 14, Vi. 20, Vii. 
22, X. Ig, Xii. 2, 24, Xili. 12). 

2. Who was| Rather, Who is; or, ‘ As 

ing.” 

faithful] Both in revealing, and in perform- 
ing, His Father’s will (John x. 18, xil. 49, 50, 
Xvii. 4, 8). 

appointed| Lit. ‘“‘made;” as ini S. xii. 
6, ‘* The Lord that made Moses and Aaron.” 
Neither an envoy nor a high-priest can be 
self-constituted (comp. ch. v. 4). 

in all bis house} God’s house (or house- 
hold). Quoted from Num. xii. 7; where 
Moses is spoken of as superior to any of the 
prophets. They had only subordinate parts 
of God’s will made known to them, and that 
obscurely; but with Moses God spake ‘“‘ face 
to face,” so that he ‘‘ beheld the similitude of 
the Lord,” and had a pattern of the true 
House and Temple of God shown to him on 
mount Sinai. That pattern he reproduced 
faithfully in the Tabernacle, which he cone 


al. Is 


HEBREWS. III. 


3 For this man was counted wor- 
thy of more glory than Moses, in- 
asniuch as he who hath builded the 
house hath more honour than the 
house. 

4 For every house is builded by 


lv. 3—5. 


some man; but he that built all things 
is God. 

5 And Moses verily was faithful 
in all his house, as a servant, for a tes- 
timony of those things which were to 
be spoken after ; 





structed and fitted up ;—‘‘according to all that 
the Lord commanded, so did he ” (Exod. xl. 16 
—29). The two ideas, ‘‘ house” and ‘‘ house- 
hold,” so run into one another, that we may 
say, the Tabernacle built by Moses symbolized 
the congregation of Israel. Compare Exod. 
xxv. 8, where God says, ‘‘ Let them make me 
a sanctuary, that I may dwell [not, in it, but] 
among them.” In allthe arrangements respect- 
ing this household, Moses acted as a faithful 
steward of God’s mysteries (cp. Vili. 5, ix. 
19). Jesus likewise was faithful in regard of 
‘all God’s House ;” but this House was the 
spiritual, ‘‘ heavenly,” Temple, which He built, 
which He sanctified, over which He is set as 
High-priest (ch. x. 21). 

Obs. 1. In Exod. xxix. 42—46 God's 
‘« dwelling ” among Israel is closely connected 
with Aaron’s entering upon his priestly func- 
tions. So the Church of God, in which He 
dwells by His Spirit, was not ‘constituted, 
until Jesus had been consecrated High-priest 
(Acts il. 33). 

Obs. 2. The history of Israel’s ‘‘ call” to 
occupy Canaan and of their disobedience (the 
subject of vv. 7—19) follows immediately 
_ after the narrative which is here referred to 
(see Num. xiii, xiv). 


3. For] Consider Him; ‘ for” well does 
Fle deserve all your attention. 

For this man...] ‘‘For He hath been 
accounted ;” both in the prophecies concern- 
ing Him, and in God’s actual exaltation of 
Him (ii. 9). (1) In prophecy, it was foretold, 
that He should build the Temple of the Lord, 
and should dear the glory, and should ‘sit and 
rule upon His throne,” and should be ‘‘a 
Priest upon His throne” (Zech. vi. 12, 13). (2) 
Actually, He has been seated ‘‘ at the right 
hand of the majesty on high” (i. 3), in the 
glory which He had ‘‘ with the Father before 
the world was” (John xvii. 5); and this as 
the reward of His work (ch. xii. 2). 

Obs. In Rev. v. 12 millions of angels are 
heard saying. ‘‘ Worthy is the Lamb that was 
slain to receive. ..honour and glory and blessing.” 

more glory] Rather, ‘‘a higher glory” (Vulg. 
‘“amplioris gloriz”); comp. xi. 4 (sore ex- 
cellent), Luke xi. 31, 32 (greater). 

than Moses} Soin 2 Cor. iii. 7—iv. 6 we 
have a contrast between the ‘‘glory”’ of Moses 
and that of Christ. After his descent from 
the Mount temporary rays of light shone from 
the face of Moses; but Christ is ‘‘the image 


of God,” and ‘‘ in His face ” is given ‘‘ the light 
of the knowledge of the glory of God.” 

masmuch as| Or, ‘according as.” The dif= 
ference between Jesus and Moses is not one of 
degree merely, but of kind. Moses was, in- 
deed, faithful in regard to the whole of that 
house, which he erected, by God’s command 
to be the outward means by which God would 
‘‘dwell” among Israel. But that house was, 
confessedly, typical only. The true ‘* House 
of God” was *‘the Church of the Living 
God ” (1 Tim. iii, 15), built of ‘living stones ” 
(1 Pet. li. 5). He who is ‘‘the Wisdom ot 
God” (x Cor. i. 24) had long before con- 
structed that house ideally (Prov. ix. 1); 
and His human nature was “ the Rock,” on 
which He, ‘‘ the Christ, the Son of the Living 
God,” actually built His Church (Matt. xvi. 
16—18). How vast the difference, then, 
between Moses and Christ ! 

builded] constructed and furnished :—the 
same word as in ix. 2 (‘‘made”), 6 (‘‘or- 
dained,” or, arranged), xi. 7 (“‘prepared”). 
Cp. Isai. xl. 28 ; Wisd. xiii. 4. 

more honour] Whatever glory the house 
may have, the ‘‘ honour” of it belongs to the 
builder. 

than the house] Moses was, after all, but 
one of God’s household; though he was so 
highly honoured in the kind of service that _ 
was entrusted to him. 


4. For every...| ‘‘I say, he that hath 
builded the house; for’’—where you have a 
house, material or spiritual, you must needs 
have a builder. 

by some man] Rather, by some one. 

all things} For that universal Temple 
which Christ has built, and to which by ous 
‘heavenly calling” (v. 1) we belong, em- 
braces all things (ii. 8; cp. Eph. i, 10). The 
builder of such a Temple must be God. He 
only, who was ‘‘constituted heir of all things” 
(i. 2), and who “‘upholdeth a// things by the 
word of His power,” could have designed and 
built that House. 


5. to be spoken after|—by the great Pro- 
phet of the Church. The ‘ house” built by 
Moses is called in Num. ix. 15 ‘‘the tent of 
testimony,” and in x, 11 ‘the tabernacie of 
testimony.” ‘This title represented the character 
of the work, which Moses did as ‘‘a servant” 
in God’s house and family. The while dis- . 
pensation was ministerial, bearing witness to 
the future Christ (Gal. iii. 24). Moses, when 


v. 6—9. | 


6 But Christ as a son over his own 
house ; whose house are we, if we 
hold fast the confidence and the 
rejoicing of the hope firm unto the 
end. 

7 Wherefore (as the Holy Ghost 


HEBREWS? FFT. 


43 


saith, To day if ye will hear his * Pal ss 
7 


voice, 

8 Harden not your hearts, as in 
the provocation, in the day of temp- 
tation in the wilderness : 

g When your fathers tempted me, 





he was preparing to die, foretold the coming of 
a Prophet to whom they were to “hearken in 
all things” (Deut. xviii. 1s —19, Acts iti. 22) ; 
and, after death, he was present “in glory” 
on the Holy Mount, when a voice came forth 
from the cloud of light, “saying, This is my 
beloved Son..,; hear ye Him,” 


6. Christ as} Rather, Christ (is faith- 
ful) as Son over His house :—the “ His” 
still referring to the ‘‘Son;” as ‘‘ whose” in the 
next clause evidently does. Christ could say; 
‘“ All things are delivered unto me of my 
Father” (Matt. xi. 27). That trust He ad- 
ministered faithfully; being ‘‘ Head over all 
things for the Church which is His body” 
(Eph. i. 22, 23). Inch. x. 21, where He is 
spoken of (not as ‘‘Son,” but) as ‘ High- 
priest,” we have ‘“‘ over the house of God;” be- 
cause as High-priest He represents the people 
in their relation to God (ch. ii. 17). (See 
Additional Note.) 

whose house are we,if| We are so; and 
so shall continue, if... Compare the “If” of 
v, 14, of Col. i, 23, and of the Psalm quoted 
in the next verse; “He is our God, and we 
are the people of His pasture and the sheep of 
His hands: To-day,—if ye will hear His voice.” 
In Zech, vi. 15, after the vision of the ‘‘ Priest 
upon His throne” (see on v. 3), it is added ; 
“and it shall be, if ye will hear His voice.” 

the confidence] Rather, “our confidence.” 
It is the same word as in x. 35 (but zo¢ as in 
v. 14 below). In x. 19 the word is rendered 
“boldness” (marg. “liberty”). It denotes 
‘freedom of speech;” here the freedom which 
befits children in addressing a father. The 
Syriac uses the same words (modified) as in 
2 Cor. ili, 18, ‘‘We all with open face be- 
holding the glory of the Lord;” thus furnish- 
ing an excellent comment on the passage. Cp. 
2 Cor, ili. 12, ‘‘Seeing we have this Aope, we 
use great boldness.” 

rejoicing of the hope| Rather, ‘ rejoicing 
of our hope;” the hope of the future inherit- 
ance in glory. Comp. Rom. v. 2, ‘ We rejoice 
in hope of the glory of God.” 

unto the end} Not satisfied with having 
been brought out of the house of bondage 
and admitted into covenant with God; but 
advancing with steady perseverance, through 
trial and conflict, till we enter the promised 
Test. 


7. Wherefore] The A. V. makes what fol- 
lows down to v. 11 to be parenthetic, This 


is in itself unlikely ; and v. 12 has every sign 
of being an independent sentence (the word 
for “Take heed” being the same as in xii. 25, 
“See”). It is better, therefore, to suppose an 
ellipsis (as in r Cor, 1. 31, cp. ii, 9; Rom. xy. 
3, 21); “‘ Wherefore (the case stands with us) 
as the Holy Ghost saith.”—In the Hebrew the 
clause ‘‘ To-day...voice” belongs to v. 7; and 
that this is the right connexion, is shown by 
the change of person in vv. 8—11: “ His 
voice,” but, “tempted me,” &c.; the verses 
8—x11 being, in fact, His voice. The last clause 
of v. 7, then, is an emphatic statement, at once, 
of the present privilege of those whom the 
Psalm addresses, and of the condition under 
which alone the privilege would be permanent 
(cp. on v. 6). It re-echoes the words spoken 
at Sinai, “‘ Now, therefore, if ye will hearken 
unto my voice” (Exod. xix. 5 ; cp. xxiii. 22). 

Obs. The words quoted from the xcvth 
Psalm follow naturally on the reference which 
was made in wv. 5 to Deut. xvili. 15; —r19. Christ 
is that prophet, of whom Moses spake: hear 
Him. His household ye are, if ye stedfastly 
adhere to His promises, 

To day| A slight pause is to be made be- 
tween this and what follows (cp. iv. 7). ‘‘To- 
day” you may claim your inheritance as God’s 
people ; ‘‘to-day” you may rest by the “ still 
waters” of God’s pasture. “To-day ;”—though 
it is so long since Moses said to the generation 
that was to enter Canaan, ‘‘ Hear, O Israel, 
thou art this day to go over Jordan...Under- 
stand, therefore, tis day, that the Lord thy God 
is He which goeth over before thee.” (Deut. 
1X: 1, ZisCp: XXIX. To, 12.) 


8. in the day| Rather, “as in the day.” 
The names “ Massah” (temptation) and “ Meri- 
bah” (provocation) both occur in Exod. xvii. 7. 
But the name ‘‘ Meribah” here probably (as 
in Deut. xxxiii. 8) refers to the incident men- 
tioned in Num. xx. 13. Since this occurred 
in the 39th year after the Exodus, the com- 
bination of the two names shows that Israel’s 
hardness of heart lasted throughout their so=- 
journ in the wilderness (cp. Deut. ix. 7). It 
was this ‘‘ hardening of the heart” against the 
past evidence of God’s love to them which led 
to their ‘‘ tempting God,” that is, asking for 
new and arbitrarily chosen proofs of His pre= 
sence (Exod. xvii. 7; cp. Num. xiv. rr). 


9. When] Rather, Where (as in Deut. 
vili. 15, LXX.), 
forty years} Inthe Psalm these words stana 


et: 
enter. 


HEBREWS. III. 


proved me, and saw my works forty 
years. 

10 Wherefore I was grieved with 
that generation, and said, They do 
alway err in their heart; and they 
have not known my ways. 

11 So I sware in my wrath, ‘They 
shall not enter into my rest.) 

12 Take heed, brethren, lest there 
he in any of you an evil heart of un- 


at the beginning of the next verse. So, in- 
deed, they are quoted below in vw. 17; which 
proves that the transposition was here made 
intentionally. In effect, this variation supplies 
a commentary on vv. 9 and ro of the 
Psalm :—‘‘as they put Me to the proof con- 
tinually throughout the forty years (cp. Amos 
y. 25); so throughout the forty years My 
displeasure with them abated not.” 

Obs. It has been often remarked that a 
probationary period of forty years occurred 
between the Crucifixion and the ‘“‘ days” fore- 
told in Luke xix. 43. At the probable date 
of this Epistle (A.D. 64), thirty-five of those 
years had already elapsed. Cp. x. 25. 


10. grieved| Rather, sore displeased. 
and they] Rather, “but they.” They wan- 
der, after their own imaginations, in search of 
happiness: but they have not known (or re- 
garded) my ways, which would have con- 
ducted them to true rest and peace. So in 
_ Isai. lix. 8 (Rom. iil. 17), ‘the way of peace 
have they not Amown.” Cp. Luke xix. 42, 
‘““Oh that thou hadst sown, at least in this 
thy day, the things of thy peace.” 


11. So] Rather, As (iv. 3). The old 
Psalters, Gallican and Roman, have ‘“sicut” 
4Estius), and similarly the Syriac. During 
these forty years, though they hardened their 
heart against My discipline (cp. Jer. v. 3, 4), 
yet they found My sentence against them come 
true. It was even ‘‘as I sware unto them” at 
the beginning. 

my rest} ‘The place where He caused the 
tokens of His gracious presence to abide (Ps. 
cxxxil. 14; Isai. xi. 10). There the people 
were to find their rest (Num. x. 33; cp. Deut. 
xii. 9). Not as though exclusion from Canaan 
involved deprivation of God’s higher rest to 
such as loved Him; as was made plain by the 
sentence on Moses (cp. Deut. iii. 23—27) ; 
any more than the entrance into Canaan con- 
ferred ipso facto the enjoyment of that rest. 


12. Take heed} Cp. Deut. xi. 16. 

in any of you) Cp. xii. 15 ; Deut. xxix. 18. 

an evil heart} The phrase is used in Jer. 
aii, 17, vil. 24, xi. 8, xvi. 12, xviii. 123 in 
speaking of apostatizing Judah. In all five 
passages it is preceded by the word, which 


[v. 1o0—15. 
belief, in departing fron the living 
God. 


13 But exhort one another daily, 
while it is called To day; lest any of 
you be hardened through the deceit- 
fulness of sin. 

14 For we are made partakers ot 
Christ, if we hold the beginning of 
our confidence stedfast unto the end; 

15 While it is said, To day if ye 





signifies “stubbornness” (see on Jer. iii. 17). 
Cp. Num. xiv. 27, 35. 

of unbelief | swayed by unbelief. So we 
read in Num. xiv. 11, ‘* How long will it be 
ere they believe me?” The word, however, 
contains in it the notion of ‘‘unfaithfulness” 
or disloyalty; which agrees with the next 
words, ‘‘in departing (or revolting, see Deut. 
Xxxil. 15; cp. Num. xiv. 9) from the living 
God (x. 31);” from Him who “lives for 
ever” (Deut. xxxii. 40), so that His promises 
and threatenings are alike certain. Comp. 
Num. xiv. 21, ‘As truly asI live” (LXX. “I 
live, and Living is My Name”). The Living 
God had now manifested Himself in His Son. 
To go back from faith in “the Son of the 
Living God” (John vi. 69), to trust in the 
effete symbols of the Law, was to revive in a 
subtler form the idolatry of former ages. 


13. exhort] Or, “encourage;” as Joshua 
and Caleb endeavoured to cheer the desponding 
Israelites (Num. xiv. 7—9). 

while it is called To day] Or, ‘so long as 
the name, To-day, is used;”—so long, there- 
fore, as our probation on earth lasts. Cp. 2 
Cor. vi. 2. 

hardened| As in wv. 8. 

the deceitfulness| ‘The wiliness with which it 
makes its serpent-like approaches (cp. 2 Thess. 
il. Io). 

of in] Especially, the sin of unbelief; 
clothing itself under the garb of a reasonable 
regard to probabilities as set against God's 
express command (Num. xiii. 28—33). 


14. are made] Rather, “have been 
made.” ‘Take heed to yourselves (v. 12) and 
encourage one another (v. 13); for we have 
been already constituted ‘‘partakers (see v. 1) 
of Christ” (lit. ‘‘the Christ”), and have a share 
in the privileges which belong to His body, 
the Church, if only (cp. 1 K. viii. 25, marg., 
2 Chro. vi. 16) we do not sever the relation 
between Him and ourselves. 

hold...stedfast...] Or, ‘hold fast the be- 
ginning of our confidence firm unto the end” 
(as in v. 6 above). The ‘beginning of” 
their ‘‘ confidence” was, that which they ex- 
hibited in the early days of the Church. The 
word here rendered ‘‘ confidence” (as it is in 


1. 16—10. | 


will hear his voice, harden not your 
' earts, as in the provocation. 

16 For some, when they had heard, 
did provoke: howbeit not all that 
came out of Egypt by Moses. 

17 But with whom was he grieved 
forty years? was it not with them 


2 Cor. ix. 4, Xi. 173 cp. Ps. xxxix, 7) is used 
of that which supplies a solid foundation, and 
hence, of the realizing power of faith (xi. 1, 
‘‘substance”), Here it is in contrast with the 
“unbelief” of v. 12. 


15. While it is said| Rather, In that it 
is said (as in viii. 13, cp. ii. 8). The ‘if 
only” of v. 14 is justified by a renewed appeal 
to the conditional clause of Ps. xcv. 7. Comp. 
on wv. 6, 


16—19. ‘The exposition of these verses has 
been obscured from its not being borne in 
mind that, although the Apostle is cautioning 
the Hebrews, yet the basis of his exhortation 
(as addressed to men under temptation, ii. 18, 
Iv. 15) is of an encouraging kind: ‘Consider 
your merciful and faithful High-priest. Hold 
fast your filial boldness and the rejoicing of 
your hope. For you are fellow-members of 
Christ; you have a promise of entering into 
rest; you have had glad tidings brought you. 
Only,” he urges, ‘‘remember that Israel’s 
example proves how unavailing your privileges 
will be, unless you odey the voice that speaks 
to you.” 

For some, of those Israelites, after they had 
heard, did provoke: but not all they who came 
out of Egypt by Moses ; for in Num. xiv. 29—33 
there is a strong and vivid contrast drawn be- 
tween those who *‘murmured against” God 
and the ‘‘little ones” whom God would bring 
into the land of promise. ‘‘ Not all:” for then 
God’s promise would have been made void: 
whereas (cp. iv. 6) “some must enter in.” 
But (v. 17) if ‘not all” provoked, who 
were they that did? with whom was He 
grieved forty years? was it not with them 
that sinned (Num. xiv. 19, 40) whose carcases 
fell in the wilderness (tb. 29, 32)? and to 
whom sware He..., but to them that were 
disobedient (see Num. xiv. 43, Josh. v. 6, 
LXX.)? That some fell, was sufficient for the 
admonition of the Hebrews; yet they needed 





PE BREW s.> Pr 


that had sinned, whose carcases fell 
in the wilderness ? 

18 And to whom sware he that 
they should not enter into his rest, 
but to them that believed not ? 

1g So we see that they could not 
enter in because of unbelief. 





not to be discouraged; for none fell except 
the faithless and disobedient. 

Thus vv, 16—19 are in unisen with wv, 
I2—14. 

(1) The cautionary, any one of you, in vv. 
12, 13 is abundantly justified by the indefi- 
nite ‘‘some” of v. 16; while the restrictive 
‘but not all” showed that none of ‘the 
little ones who believed in Christ” need be 
discouraged. And 

(2) The causes of danger mentioned in 
vv. 12, 13. “unbelief,” ‘‘rebellion,” and ‘‘sin,” 
are reproduced in vv. 17—I9. 

For a further examination of the passage, 
see Additional Note. 


17. carcases| Lit, “‘limbs;” as though 
referring to the bones that lay scattered about 
in the desert. 


18. delieved not] disobeyed; see above. 


19. So we see| Rather, “And we see;” 
or, ‘‘ We see also.” We “perceive” it from 
the sequel of the history. From what follows 
in the chapter which records the sentence of 
wandering, we see clearly that they ‘‘ were 
unable to enter in;” were incapacitated for doing 
so. ‘They made the attempt, but were driven. 
back “discomfited” (Num. xiv. 4o—45). This. 
self-willed invasion was no less the fruit of in- 
fidelity than their former withdrawal had been. 
In each case, instead of believing God, they- 
acted in defiance of Him (v. 41). We see, 
then, that their unbelief not only at first hin- 
dered them from attempting to enter, but also 
afterwards made them wzad/e to enter when 
they made the attempt. 

because of unbelief | This is the emphatic 
term on which the exhortation in ch. iv hangs. 
They were not excluded (observes Dr Owen) 
for their sin in making the golden calf at- 
Horeb, great as that was; bv‘ for a sin “that 
men are very unapt to charge themselves withal,” 
the sin of unbelief. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Cuap. ul. 6, 16. 


6. The reference of avrod in v. 6 has been 
a matter of doubt from very early times. 
Jerome, who left the Vulg., ‘“‘tanquam filius 
in domo sud,” gives it, in his Ep. ad Damasum, 
§ 5, ‘“‘ut filius in domo ejus.”—It has been 
objected that the Church is nowhere called 
‘¢ Christ’s house ;” but, since He is its builder 
(Matt. xvi. 18), it may certainly be spoken 


of as His. The sequence of the clauses im 
v. 6 seems to require us to refer oy to Xpic- 
Tos. 

16. Most modern commentators follow the 
Syriac version, and read rives yap interroga- 
tively, but this involves some very seri pus 
difficulties. 

1. The natural meaning of “ For, who did, 


45 


after hearing, provoke?” would be, that zone 
had done so (cp. Rom. ix. 19). 

2. Some, therefore, have proposed to make 
a new sentence begin with v. 15, and to render 
rives ydp as ‘who then?” Such a use of 
yap, however, in introducing an apodosis, ap- 
pears to be unexampled. ‘ 

3. The ddd’ ov has to be taken in a sense 
equally without parallel. The passages quoted 
in support of it are in reality quite different. 
To resemble them the sentence ought to be of 
this kind: “‘ For who did provoke? ‘Nay, did 
not all rather cheerfully obey?” 

4. The dé of v. 17, which has its usual 
force if the preceding verse be affirmative, is 
unexplained, 

But indeed there is no reason whatever for 
making the change. The supposed objection 
to saying ‘some provoked,” arises from the 
assumption that ‘‘a// qho came out of Egypt 
did provoke ;” which is not only untrue in 
fact, but would be adverse to the whole tenor 
of the context. The questions in vv. 17, 18 
are equivalent to saying, ‘It was only those 
who sinned,—only those who disobeyed,—that 
were excluded.” Compare 1 Cor. x. 1—18; 
“All our fathers were...baptized unto Moses 
(cp. Heb. iii. 16 4), and “‘a// drank of that 


CHARTER JIN. 

1 Zhe rest of Christians is attained by faith. 
12 The power of God’s word. 14 By our 
high priest Fesus the Son of God, subject to 
infirmities, but nol sin, 16 we must and may 
go boldly to the throne of grace. 


| ake us therefore fear, lest, a pro- 


mise being left us of entering 


HEBREWS. IV. [v. 1, 2 


spiritual Rock,which,..was Christ” (6 Xpioros, 
cp. Heb. iii. 14, rod Xpiorov); nfs with the 
greater part of them God was not well p' 

for they were overthrown in the wilderness. 
The use of ‘‘some” here, and of ‘*the greater 
part” there, is only in accordance with the 
design of the writer in each case. The danger 
of the Corinthians was from over-boldness ; 
that of the Hebrews from timidity “Some’ 

was sufficient for his purpose here; and his 
willingness to minimise the charge brought 

against Israel would help to conciliate his 

readers, as showing plainly that he had no 

wish to disparage the work achieved by Moses, ; 
We have parallel instances in ‘‘ What if some | 
did not believe?” (Rom. iii. 3), and ‘* Not all 
obeyed the Gospel” (id. x. 16) ;—those who be- | 
lieved and obeyed being, in fact, only a ‘‘rem- 
nant ” (ib. xi. 5). 

Obs.. The writer’s delicacy and economy of 
statement are evident throughout this section. 
How easy, for instance, would it have been 
for him to have noticed the fact that Moses 
and Aaron were not allowed to enter Canaan, 
and this ‘‘ because they believed not” God 
(Num. xx. 12); or again, that the commenda- 
tion given to Moses, the Apostle, involved a 
reproof of Aaron the High-priest (ib. xii. 8, 9). 


into his rest, any of you should seem 
to come short of it. 

2 For unto us was the gospel + Gr. sae 
preached, as well as unto them: but 772 v7 
'the word preached did not profit ! Or, be 
them, 'not being mixed with faith in Gere not 
them that heard 7t. wae. 





Cuap. IV. 1. This verse is in closest 
union with iii. r2—19; from which it is an 
inference. 

Let us...fear|] For there is a salutary fear, 
which springs from faith (Phil. ii. 12, 1 Pet. 
i. 17—19);—which is the safeguard of hope, 
and an incentive to diligence. 

a promise being...| Rather, while there 
(still) remaineth a promise. So long 
as the period of probation lasted, the promise 
continued in force. All who would might 
avail themselves of its offers. 

his rest} When the xcvth Psalm used 
these words (instead of saying ‘‘the land of 
promise”), it made provision for a higher appli- 
cation of Israel’s early history. ‘They, who 
were “‘partakers of the heavenly calling ” (iii. 
1), knew well what that rest was. They 
looked forward to the ‘‘ heavenly Jerusalem ” 
(xii. 22). 

should seem] He would not have any ot 
them (through loss of active love or neglect 
of Christian communion, vi. 12, x. 25) give 
reason for its being thought that they had 
‘¢ fallen short of” (cp. xii. 15) that promise. 

te come short] ‘‘to have fallen short.” 


2. For...] Rather, For indeed we have 
received glad tidings;—as they also 
did. A slight pause should be made after 
“tidings.” Let us fear lest any miss that 
Rest, even while the way to it is still open. 
For certainly we are in the position of men 
to whom a joyful message has been brought; 
as they also were; Sut (their example shows 
that a passive reception of God’s promises is 
not enough, for) the word which they heard 
proved to them unavailing. Compare Acts 
xiii. 32: ‘‘ We declare unto you (or, bring 
you glad tidings regarding) the promise made 
to our fathe-s; that God hath fulfilled the 
same to us their children, in that he raised 
up Jesus from the dead.” 

the word preached| Lit. ‘‘ word of mes- 
sage” (see Additional Note). 

not being mixed...| Or, “seeing that it was 
not mixed” (so the Syriac). The message 
entered their ears, but there was no inward 
faith to appropriate and assimilate it (see Note 
below). It was no better than food put into 
the mouth of a man whose vital powers were 
insufficient for turning it into life-blood. 

in them] Lit. “‘to them;” in their case, 


¥ 3-7.) HEBREWS. IV. 47 
5 And in this place again, If they 
shall enter into my rest. 
6 Seeing therefore it remaineth 
that some must enter therein, and 


they to whom 'it was first preached '0r, the 


3 For we which have believed do 
enter into rest, as he said, As I have 
sworn in my wrath, if they shall 
enter into my rest: although the 
works were finished from the foun- 


3 . fosper wai 
dation of the world. entered not in because of unbe- aan 3 
4 For he spake in a certain place lief: see 


of the seventh day on this wise, And 
God did rest the seventh day from all 
his works. 


3. For] This looks back to the whole 
of vv. 1,2. Let none of us come short of 
that promised rest (v. 1) ; for the gladdening 
invitation to enter it has been sent to us, and 
only needs that we receive it in faith (v. 2). 
For we, which have believed, do enter into 
(His) rest; not, ‘have entered;” yet ‘are 
entering ;” as it was said; ‘“‘ Hear, O Israel; 
thou art passing over this day ” (Deut. ix. 1). 
The ‘Captain of their Salvation” has already 
entered; and has opened a way by which they 
may follow. That is what they are intent 
upon. By faith they already enter into rest. 
For both the Old and the New Testament 
teach, that ‘‘salvation” begins in this present 
life. God spoke of Himself as being already 
Abraham’s “great reward” (Gen. xv. 1); 
and to all who walked in the ‘‘o/d paths” 
of Abraham’s faith and obedience there was 
given the promise ‘“‘ye shall find rest unto 
your souls” (Jer. vi. 16) ;—a promise which 
afterwards received so great an accession of 
glory frora being published afresh by the Son 
of God (Matt. xi. 28, 29). Indeed, Ps. xcv 
implied that this rest was attained (in some 
sense) by all who obeyed God's voice; since 
God was ‘‘ their God,” and they ‘“ the people 
of His pasture” (wv. 7) whom He led by the 
‘trest-giving waters” (Ps. xxiii. 2). 

as he said| The words quoted (‘‘as I 
sware, &c.,” see iii. 11) show, that the rest 
spoken of was one which had to be reached 
through obedient faith by the men of later 
times ; and it was denominated ‘‘ God’s rest,” 
although His own ‘ rest” had been complete 
from the time when the world was formed 
(Gen. ii, 1—3). But if man is to “enter 
into” God's rest, it must be by his being 
brought into conformity with the mind and 
will of Him, who made all things, at the first, 
“very good ;” and who will again ‘ rejoice 
in His works,” when sin shall no longer mar 
the face of the earth (Ps. civ. 30-—35). God's 
sabbatical rest made it certain that such a 
period should at length come; for He then 
blest all His earthly creation, man included. 
But God's blessing cannot be inefficacious. 
Therefore a time shall arrive when the curse 
which fell on our earth shal] be removed (Rev. 
xxii. 3). Indeed, they who are “ partakers 
of Christ” (iii. 14), being ‘‘redeemed from 


7 Again, he limiteth a certain day, 
saying in- David, To day, after so 
long a time; as it is said, To day it 





the curse” (Gal. iti. 13), do already possess 
‘Can earnest ” and pledge of that final rest in 
the gift of the Holy Spirit. 


4. spake im a certain place] Or, ‘‘hath 
spoken somewhere.” 

from all bis works| From the works 
which He had made; yet not from working 
(John v. 17),—especially, not from earrying 
on that work of “blessing”? and “ sanctifica- 
tion,” of which the Sabbath was a means, as 
well as a type. 


5. again| Almost (as in Matt. iv. 7), 
‘©on the other hand.” Comp. on i. 6. 


6. i remameth] Or (for clearness), “it 
still remaineth;” as a future thing, apart from 
that Rest which followed the work of Creation 
(cp. v. 9, X. 26). 

must} Rather, should. The rendering 
‘¢must” appears to give to “‘ remaineth” too 
much of the logical sense, “it results from 
these premises.” 

to whom it was first preached| Rather, 
who first received the glad tidings. 

unbelief | Rather, disobedience (cp. iii. 
18); the disposition which springs from un- 
belief, as obedience does from faith (xi. 8). 


7. Again, be] Rather, He again (put- 
ting a comma at the end of w. 6). 

limiteth| Rather, marketh out (opi¢e:) ; 
—moving forward the 4orizon of His invita- 
tion so as to include a later generation in it, 

in David| The Holy Spirit (iii. 7) spoke 
“in” or “by” David. Cp.i.1; 2 S. xxiii. 3, 
‘« The Spirit of the Lord spake by me” (LXX. 
‘‘in me”). Others take ‘‘in David” to be the 
same as, ‘‘in the Book of Psalms” (see Introd. 
to Ps. xcv). 

after so long a time|—when Israel had been 
400 years in occupation of Canaan. The 
promises made to David, after the ark had 
been brought up to Sion, were like the dawn- 
ing of a mew day in Israel’s history. A fresh 
appeal was made to their faith. Now, after 
so long a period of failure, they might enter 
into the full realization of their privileges, as 
‘the people of God’s pasture.” 

as it is said] Rather, ‘‘ as hath been before 
said ” (namely, in iii. 7, 15). 


HEBREWS. IV. 


48 
ye will hear his voice, harden not 
your hearts. 

WTha is, 8 For if ' Jesus had given them 
rest, then would he not afterward 
have spoken of another day. 

Or, #2 g There remaineth therefore a' rest 

ae tab to the people of God. 


8. For] David “after so long a time” 
addressed the men of his generation in lan- 
guage like that which Moses had used to 
those who were “‘ passing over Jordan” under 
Joshua (see on iii. 7). This is not surprising: 
For Israel's occupation of Canaan did not 
bestow on them “that Rest” of God which 
is in reserve for the faithful. 

Jesus} Rather, Joshua (cp. Acts vii. 45). 
It was true that under Joshua the Lord had 
given Israel “‘rest” from all their enemies 
round about (Josh. xi. 23, xxi. 44). But it 
was plain that this was not the chief aim set 
before Israel; or we should not find David, 
four centuries later, warning the people against 
forfeiting the ‘‘rest” which was offered to 
them. That must have been a further and 
higher rest. 


9. here remaineth| Or (v. 6), “There 
still remaineth ; °—is still to be looked for here- 
after, over and above that rest in the land of 
Canaan. This inference follows, since the 
Holy Ghost speaks in the Psalm (cp. iii. 7) 
to ws. ‘For the word of God is /ving,” 
and has present relation to us (wv. 12, 13). 

arest] Rather, a sabbath-rest; lit. “a 
keeping of sabbath ;” when the “people of 
God” (cp. Ps. xcv. 7, c. 3; ch. xi. 16, 25), 
the “Israel of God” (Gal. vi. 16), shall ob- 
tain rest from all that trouble them (2 Thess. 
i. 7), and when “all enemies shall be put 
under the feet of ” Jesus (i. 13), the “ Cap- 
tain” of the Lord’s Host (cp. ii. 8,9). Then, 
at last, the faithful shall ‘“‘ enter inio the joy 
of their Lord” (Matt. xxv. 21, 23). 

Obs.1. The word “ Sabbath-rest” may 
contain a reference to the first Sabbatical year, 
which was kept by Joshua after his six years 
of war (Josh. xiv. 10); when the “land had 
rest = war” (ib. 15). 

Obs. The group of Psaims, to which 
Ps. xcv (edo (xcii—civ), appears to have 
a Sabbatical character. The first of them is 
expressly headed ‘“‘ A Song for the Sabbath- 
Day ;” and a Jewish treatise (Eliyahu Rabba 
quoted here by Delitzsch) says of this title: 
“The Sabbath pointed to is that which ‘will 
give rest from the sin which now rules in the 
world, the world’s Seventh Day [a Sab- 
batical millennium]; which shall be followed 
by the after-Sabbath of the world to come, 
wherein is no more death, nor sin, nor punish- 
ment of sin ; but only a age of the wis- 
dom and knowledge of God. 


aes 
[v. 8—12. 


10 For he that is entered into his 
rest, he also hath ceased from his 
own works, as God did from his. 

11 Let us labour therefore to enter 
into that rest, lest any man fall after 


the same example of fl unbelief. ' 


12 For the word of God és quick, 


10. For] The rest i 
of God is rightly called a 
For be that (= ony cee Rom. vi. ais 
entered into His (God's) rest, bath rested 
(as in v. 4) from bis works, even as God 
did from His own. Such a one “rests 
his labours” (Rev. xiv. 3). ‘‘ Thenceforth 
there i is laid up for him the crown of righteous- 
ness” (2 Tim. iv. 8). The “good works” 
of God’s new creation (in working which the 
believer's will was in accord with the grace of 


God, Phil. ii. 12, 13) are then completed. 
even_as God did 


ii. “a 11), and to 
whom re are co (Rom. viii. 29), 
before He entered into His brief sabbath-day 
rest, said, “It is finished” (John xix. 30, cp. 
xvii. 4)- 

11. labour] Rather, give diligence 
(as in 2 Pet. 1. 10 

fali| Used absolutely, as in Rom. xi. 11, 
x Cor. x. 12. 

example] Or, “pattern;” typical form. 
Though the revelation given us be so much 
more glorious, yet our probation is analogous 
to theirs. 

unbelief] Rather, disobedience (v. 6). 


12. For] I say, the same typical form; 
For the word of God, which tries us, as it 
tried them (v. 2), has to do with the interior 
principles of action; searching into men’s 
hearts to see whether they are truly obeying 
God. 


the word of God] Not (as in Rev. xix. 13) 
the personal Word; to whom, indeed, the 
description, “ sharper than any two-edged 
ae is not appropriate (see Rev. i. 16, xix. 
15; cp. Wisd. xviii. 15); but, as in John xii. 
48, that word which is the perp ression 
of the mind and will of God (isa xl ¢ 
x Pet. i. 25, Tit. i. 2, 3; cp. note on v. 2); 
and in particular the ‘word of promise (v. 2). 
The promise of ‘‘good things to come” 
searched out the motives of men in old times; 
it does so still. 

guick] Rather, living. That word did 
not to one generation and then die out. 
The “ word” of the ‘‘ living God ” could not 
become a dead letter. As His creative word 





v. 13—15.] 


and powerful, and sharper than any 
twoedged sword, piercing even to 
the dividing asunder of soul and spi- 
rit, and of the joints and marrow, 
and is a discerner of the thoughts and 
intents of the heart. 

13 Neither is there any creature 
that is not manifest in his sight: but 
all things are naked and opened unto 


the spiritual world (cp. Ps. cxix. 89—91; 
Acts vii. 28 ; 1 Pet. i. 25). 

powerful] Rather, active; effective in 
operation (cp. 1 Thess. ii. 13). 

sharper] So sharp is it, that it dissects 
the whole inward nature; not only ‘“‘to the 
disparting of the soul and the spirit,” but 
so as to reach the most hidden parts of both,— 
yes (by a bold metaphor), their vertebra and 
spinal marrow (see Additional Note). The 
message of Revelation lays bare the various 
affections and habitudes of the spiritual and 
psychical natures. 

a discerner of | ‘‘ able to discriminate” their 
character with judicial accuracy. Cp. John 
Xil. 48. 

thoughts and intents...| Its busy, anxious, 
revolvings of thought (cp. Matt. ix. 4, xil. 
25), and its fixed and settled modes, or lines, 
of thought. 


13. The sentence, which in its first part 
had described the ‘‘ word” of God, now 
proceeds to speak of God Himself. 

naked| ‘The sophisms, with which men 
think to cloke their misdoings, are of no avail 
before Him (Gen. iii. 8—r1). 

opened] Or, ‘‘exposed;” lit. ‘‘with the 
neck bent back.” A naked man may bend 
down his head and cover his face with his 
hands. Not even this last resort of shame 
may avail at the Great Tribunal.—Many 
ancient writers suppose that the word con- 
tains a reference to animals, whose head was 
thrown back when they were to be slaughtered. 
But there seems to be no adequate philological 
ground for this. 

the eyes of him| Rather, His eyes; witha 
slight pause after it; giving still more of im- 
pressive solemnity to the concluding words. 

with whom we have to do| The words 
are taken by the Syriac, and by most ancient 
commentators to mean, ‘“‘unto whom we 
must give account.” But their range is both 
wider and deeper: ‘‘with whom our concern 
is;” which is well expressed by A.V. They, 
to whom the word of God has come, cannot 
avoid adopting a certain attitude towards it; 
accepting or refusing its conditions: and this 
determines their actual relation to God. The 
thought of our relation to God, which in ii. 


New Test.—Vot. IV. 


HEBREWS! ay: 


the eyes of him with whom we have 
to do. 

14 Seeing then that we have a 
great high priest, that is passed into 
the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, 
let us hold fast our profession. 

15 For we have not an high priest 
which cannot be touched with the 
feeling of our infirmities ; but was in 


17 had occurred in connexion with the highe 
priestly office of Jesus, prepares the way for a 
return to the consideration of that subject. 


14. Sceeing...| Rather, Having, there- 
fore (as in x. 19). In iii. 1 he had asked 
them to contemplate ‘‘the Apostle and Highe 
priest ” of their profession. The comparison 
which had been instituted between His Apoe 
stolic dignity and that of Moses had led the 
writer to trace out the terrible consequences 
which must follow from refusing to ‘hear 
His voice,” —that soul-and-spirit-searching 
voice. Now, therefore, he can proceed to 
speak of the provision which has been made 
for the comfort of all faithful souls in our 
Lord’s high-priestly functions. 

great high priest| As transcendently ex- 
alted in His high-priestly, as He is in His 
apostolic, office. Comp. xill. 20. 

is passed into| Rather, hath passed 
through (as in x Cor. xvi. 5). Jesus passed 
through the created heavens into ‘‘ heaven 
itself” (ix. 24); as the high-priest of Israel 
passed through the Holy Place into the Holy 
of Holies, in which God’s symbolic ‘‘resting- 
place” was (see on ili. 11). here, then, in 
heaven is God’s true ‘“‘ Rest;” into which 
we, by our “heavenly calling” (iii. 1), are 
invited to enter. There our compassionate 
High-priest is already seated, making the 
“throne of majesty” (i. 3) to be a ‘‘ throne 
of grace” (v. I5). 

Jesus| Typified by him (v. 8) who led 
Israel into Canaan; but incomparably mightier, 
for He is the Son of God. 

our profession) By which we vowed that 
our relation to God should be that of willing 
service (cp. on ili, 1). 


15. we have not...] as might have been 
feared, if we locked only at His greatness. 

be touched...| Or, “have compassion on” 
(as in x. 34). 

infirmities] Vv. 2, Vil. 28; the weaknesses 
incident to our frail humanity (comp. 2 Cor. 
xii. 5, 10). All these Jesus took upon Him 
(Matt. vili. 17; cp. 2 Cor. xiii. 4). 

but was] Rather, ‘‘but one that hath 
been.” 

like as we are] Lit. “in the way of resem» 
blance” (cp. ii, 14, 17). 

D 


50 


HEBREWS. IV. V. 


all points tempted like as we are, yet 
without sin. 
16 Let us therefore come boldly 


yet without sin] ‘This is a material part of 
the consolation which is here suggested. Jesus 
was tried by the Tempter to the utmost; 
but, though His human soul understood the 
full force of the motives which were pre- 
sented to it, to draw Him into sin, He re- 
mained entirely apart from sin (as in ix. 
28). There was no vulnerable point in Him 
(John xiv. 30). He was tempted; therefore 
He can have sympathy. He was sinless ; 
therefore He is fitted to be our Advocate, 


16. come (vii. 25)] or, as in x. 22, “draw 
near ;” approaching as accepted worship- 
ers. 


P 
boldly| Lat. “with freedom of speech” 


[v. 16, 3. 


unto the throne of grace, that we 
may obtain mercy, and find grace to 
help in time of need. 





(as in iii. 6); not fearing to confess our 
weaknesses, 

the throne of grace] Symbolized by the 
Mercy-seat, on which the God of Israel sate 
enthroned between the Cherubim (cp. on Isai. 
xvi. 5). Thence we may receive mercy 
for the forgiveness of our sins, and also 
may find grace, to ‘“‘establish our hearts” 
(xiii. 9) that we may ‘“‘serve God acceptably’ 
(ch. xii, 28), in spite of our infirmities (2 Cor. 
xii. 9). 

to help in time of need | A good rendering, 
though somewhat free. Lit. ‘‘ for seasonable 
help;’”’ with a reference to Ps. ix. 9, where 
the LXX. has, ‘‘a@ helper in seasonable times 
in trouble.” 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Cuap. Iv. 2, 12. 


2. The axoy here, following upon evnyye- 
Auopeévor, Must be taken in the sense of ‘‘ mes- 
sage,” or ‘‘report;” as in Isai. lit, 7, ‘‘ that 
publisheth the message (evayyeAuCouevov dxonv) 
of peace.” Cp. Isai. liii. 1; which in Rom. x. 
I5, 16 is coupled by St Paul with the passage 
just quoted. The phrase Adyos axons occurs 
also in 1 Thess. ii. 13; and the ‘‘ word of 
hearing” is there asserted to be “in truth 
the word of God (Adyov cov), which worketh 
effectually (€vepyetrac) in them that believe ;” 
a passage which illustrates v. 12, 6 Aoyos Tov 


- Gcod...evepyns- 


2. The word rendered “ mixed” is twice 
used by Greek poets in a manner which illus- 
trates its use here. 

levia b€ cvyxpabeioa duvcceBei Tpore. 

(Soph. ‘ Fr.’ 681.) 

Thy Tov Aoyou pev Svvauw ovK emidOovor, 

Occ S€ xpyot@ ovykexpapevny, exew. 

(Menander, ap. Stob. XLv. 8.) 
Both passages speak of something entering 


into combination with a man’s moral cha- 
racter, and being thereby modified in its 
action. ; 

Instead of the received reading, cvyxexpa- 
pévos (Supported by the Peshito and Itala), 
the great majority of MSS. (including A, 
B, C, D, but not ~) have cuyxexpapevous 
OF ouykexepacpevous (‘‘ because they were 
not mingled by faith with those who heard 
it”). This variation has the support of the 
Coptic, Ethiopic, and Armenian versions ; 
and of Irenzus, Theodorus, Chrys., and 
Theodoret. Yet it is rejected by Tischendorf, 
De Wette, Liinemann, Delitzsch, Moll, 
Riehm, and others, The usage of the verb 
(see above) and the whole tenor of the con- 
text conspire to show that the Received Text 
is correct. 

12. For the reference of the clause appav 
Te kai pved oy to the spinal vertebra, cp. Hom. 
‘11.’ xx, 483. For a metaphorical application 
of the word pvedés see Eurip. ‘ Hipp.’ 255 
(kai 4) pos axpov pvedov uxijs). 





CHAPTER V. 


1 The authority and honour of our Saviour’s 
priesthood. 11 Negligence in the knowledge 
thereof ts reproved. 





CuaAp. V. The subject introduced in iv. 
14—16,—our Lord’s qualification for acting 
as our High-priest,—is now more formally 
discussed. The idea embodied in the high- 
priest of Israel was that of one who was (1) 
empowered by God (z) to represent the people 
in their relation to Himself, and to make 
atonement for their sins ; but who (3) in spite 
af this elevation was fitted for dealing gently 
with them that went astray, because he him- 


OR every high priest taken from 
among men is ordained for men 


in things pertaining to God, that he 


self was ‘‘encompassed with infirmities * 
This whole idea, which is set forth in vv, 
I—4, was perfectly realized in Jesus. He 
was appointed by God (vv. 5, 6); He passed 
through the deepest experience of human 
suffering (vv. 7, 8); He was constituted the 
‘‘author of eternal salvation to all that obey 
Him” (v. 9). ‘The particular way in which 
this ‘‘ salvation” was effected (corresponding 
to the “‘ offering for sins” of v. 3) is explained 


(Or. can 
eee the ignorant, and on them that are 








7. a—7.] 


may offer both gifts and sacrifices 
for sins: 
2 Who 'can have compassion on 


out of the way; for that he himself 
also is compassed with infirmity. 

3 And by reason hereof he ought, 
as for the people, so also for himself, 
to offer for sins. 

4 And no man taketh this honou 


HEBREWS? WV. 


unto himself, but he that is called of 
God, as was Aaron. 

5 So also Christ glorified not him- 
self to be made an high priest; but 
he that said unto him, Thou art my 
Son, to day have I begotten thee. 

6 As he saith also in another place, 
Thou art a priest for ever after the 
order of Melchisedec. 

7 Who in the days of his flesh, 





in chh, viii—x; after ch. vii has first exhibited 
the superiority of Christ’s priesthood to that 
of Aaron. 


1. every high priest] under the Law; 
—Aaron and his descendants (viii. 3). 

taken| Rather, being taken. ‘This is 
the first pomt to which attention is called;—he 
is taken from among men. The command 
given to Moses was: ‘‘Take thou unto thee 
Aaron, thy brother...from among the children 
of Israel” (Exod. xxviil. 1). Cp. vii. 28. 

ordained for men| Or, ‘‘appointed on 
the behalf of men ;” to represent them in their 
relation to God (cp. ii. 17). This representa- 
tive character of the high-priest was signified 
by the twelve precious stones upon the breast- 
plate, and by the names engraven on the 
shoulder-pieces of the ephod (Exod. xxviii. 
12a): 

gifts| ‘The word is used of oblations in 
general; so that it includes burnt-offerings 
(Lev. i. 2, 3), meal-offerings (ib. ii. 1, 4), and 
peace-offerings (ib. iii. 1, 2): comp. ch. viii. 
3, ix. 9. Here, in contrast with ‘‘sacrifi- 
ces,” it may be taken to denote the meal- 
offerings and incense. 


2. have compassion on] ‘‘deal gently (or, 
forbearingly) with.” Standing before God, 
he admits the full demerit of his and the 
people’s sins;—in his dealings with man, he 
1s ready to make all reasonable allowance for 
those who are in ignorance or error. 
The sin-offering of the Law was for those 
who sinned ‘through ignorance,” from in- 
advertence or under a misapprehension (Lev. 
iv. 2, v. 17). The ‘“‘erring” are those who 
have ‘‘gone astray” from God’s ways (Ps. 
cxix. 176), yet not deliberately;—not as 
‘“‘heart- wanderers” (Ps. xcv. 10). 

Obs. ‘The first intercession offered by the 
great High-priest was for those who ‘‘knew 
not what they did” (Luke xxiii. 34; cp. Acts 
iii, 17; 1 Cor. ii. 8; 1 Tim. i. 13). 

compassed |—as with bonds (Acts xxviii. 20). 
Underneath the gorgeous robes of office there 
were still the galling chains of the flesh. 


8. At the end of wv. 2 there should be only 
a comma ;—/or that he also is compassed with 


infirmity, and because thereof is required, 
on the Day of Atonement (Lev. xvi. 6—14), 
first of all to make atonement for his own sins. 


4. honour] Or, “office.” The words, ‘to 
himself,” are emphatic;—amounting to, ‘‘by 
his own act;” as a thing to which he has a 
personal claim: (see Note below). 

but he that is...| or (according to a better 
reading), but (only) when he is called fy 
God. 


5. Christ] ‘the Christ” (as in iii. 14). 
He who, at His baptism, was ‘‘anointed with 
the Holy Ghost” (Acts x. 38) and declared 
to be the Son of God, did not ‘glorify Him- 
self,” nor ascend at once out of the waters of 
Jordan to heavenly glory. No: He awaited 
His Father’s will; which was, that He should 
be consecrated to His Royal Priesthood 
‘through sufferings” (il. 10). 

but he| Rather, but He (glorified Him), 
Cp. John viii. 54: ‘‘It is My Father that 
glorifieth me.” See also John xvii. 1, 5; 
Acts iii. 13. 


6. 4s] Rather, Even as:—bringing into 
parallelism (as Delitzsch observes) ‘those two 
unique utterances of the Psalter;’ ‘‘’Thou art 
My Son,” and, ‘‘Thou art a Priest for ever.” 

When Jesus rose ‘‘the first-begotten from 
the dead” (cp. on i. 5), He was fully consti- 
tuted the high-priestly administrator of ‘‘the 
everlasting covenant” (see on Xili. 20). 
When He ascended to God’s right hand, He 
clothed Himself ‘‘with honour and majesty ” 
(cp. on ii. 10), and entered upon His adminis- 
tration. 

order] Or, ‘‘style.” The word must not be 
thought of as referring to an “order” of 
priesthood. On the contrary, it was an im- 
portant element in the ‘‘style” of Melchizedek, 
that he had neither predecessor, assistant, nor 
successor; but stood absolutely alone. 


7. Who| ‘The construction of vv. 7, 8 
is in strictness, ‘‘Who, in the days of His 
flesh,...Son though He was, yet learned obedi- 
ence.” 

his flesh| We had taken part in flesh (ii. 
14) that He might be capable of suffering. 
Cp. 1 Pet. iv. 1. 


D2 


52 


HEBREWS. V. 


when he had offered up prayers and 
supplications with strong crying and 
tears unto him that was able to save 
him from death, and was heard 'in 
that he feared ; 


[v. 8g 


8 Though he were a Son, yet 
learned he obedience by the things 
which he suffered ; 

g And being made perfect, he 
became the author of eternal sal- 





when he had...) Rather, having with 
strong crying and tears offered up en- 
treaties and supplications (cp. Sirach xxxvi. 
17, li. g—12) unto Him that was able to save 
Him from death, and having been heard, Kc. 
By that gracious answer He was taught to 
practise obedience, even when it seemed to de- 
mand more than human nature could perform. 

offered up| The word has the sense of 
tacrificial offering in vv. 1, 3 (Cp. 1X. 9, 14, X. 
12, xi. 4). It probably has that sense here 
too; see Obs. 1, below. , 

crying] as of one in extremity, crying for 
help (Job xxxiv. 28, Ps. xviii, 8, Jonah il. 3, 
LXX). Such was the cry of Jesus, when ‘“‘ being 
in an agony, He prayed the more earnestly” 
(Luke xxii. 44). ‘‘Tears” are not actually 
mentioned in the Gospel narrative; but could 
scarcely have been absent in that night of agony ; 
—the antitype of Jacob’s night of ‘“wrest- 
ling,” when ‘‘he wept and made supplication” 
(Hos. xii. 4), and “prevailed.” 

able to save him from death| ‘This was ex- 
pressed in His prayer: ‘‘.dbba, Father, all 
things are possible unto Thee; take away this 
cup from Me: nevertheless, not what I will, 
but what Thou wilt.” The ‘‘cup” was that 
bitter potion which He ‘‘tasted for every 
man” (ii. 9); a death not merely of shame 
and torture, but one in which the horror of 
“he innumerable sins of men pressed upon 
Him as ‘‘a burden too heavy to bear;” while 
all the ‘‘power of darkness” assaulted His 
human soul, and the sense of God’s presence 
was withdrawn from His spirit. That appall- 
ing. ordeal was viewed by the Son of Man 
with natural apprehension. Nature cannot 
anticipate coming anguish without dread. A 
holy nature could not but shrink back from 
the prospect of suffering an obscuration of the 
light of God’s countenance. Under that feel- 
ing of holy, filial, fear, Jesus prayed to Him 
who was aéle (cp. Dan. iii. 17), if He saw 
fit, to ‘‘save Him from that hour” (John 
xil. 27; both the verb and the preposition are 
the same): but He did so with entire submis- 
sion to His Father’s will. And although (in 
the infinitude of Divine love) the Father ‘‘ with- 
held not His own Son” from death, yet, in 
answer to His prayer, He relieved Him from 
that apprehension. 

heard in that he feared| Rather, heard to 
the removing of his fear (see below); so 
that the fear departed, and He went forth, 
“knowing all things that should come upon 
Him” (John xviii. ro), and endured all, not 
only with entire obedience, but with unclouded 


hopefulness (xii. 2). The answer to His prayea 
was made, partly in that ‘‘an angel appeared 
from heaven, strengthening Him” (Luke xxii. 
43; cp. Isai. xli. 10, xlii, 6), but chiefly in 
that He was enabled to ‘set His face like a 
flint” throughout His actual sufferings. 

Obs. 1. The ‘‘fear” here spoken of illus- 
trates the statement that our High-priest was 
“tempted in all points” in a manner corre 
sponding to our temptations; so that He can 
‘sympathize with our infirmities” (iv. 15). 
He, indeed, remained ‘‘without sin,” so that 
He had no need to offer ‘‘for sins of His 
own” (wv. 3, vil. 27). But this “supplication,” 
which Jesus offered up, may be looked upon 
as analogous to that first act of the high- 
priest on the Day of Atonement. It was the 
act by which He was definitively qualified to 
stand forward as High-priest to ‘‘make atone- 
ment for the sins of the people.” That per- 
fect resignation of Himself to His Father’s 
will, amidst ‘‘strong crying and tears” (as 
though He were an agonizing victim), was 
rewarded by deliverance from the weakness 
which belonged to His innocent humanity. 
After that, He went forward to be the “‘pro- 
pitiation” for the sins of the world with un- 
wavering self-devction. ; 

Obs. 2. This experience especially fitted 
Him to comfort those, who (without servile 
fear of death, from which they are delivered, 
ii, 14, 15) might shrink from the hour of 
nature’s dissolution, or (still more) from the 
prospect of martyrdom. 


8. Though he were a Son] Rather, ‘‘Son 
though He was;”’—on two occasions declared 
by a voice from heaven to be God’s ‘‘ beloved 
Son, in whom” He was ‘‘well-pleased” (Matt. 
ili. 17, xvii. 5). Between Him and the Father 
was uninterrupted identity of will; but, in 
order that He might be qualified as man for 
the high-priesthood of humanity, He “learn- 
ed” to practise ‘‘obedience,” even ‘‘ obedience 
unto death” (Phil. ii. 8).—Something may be 
learnt as to what was involved in Christ’s obe- 
dience from a consideration of Matt. xxvi. 
53; ‘*Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray 
to My Father, and He shall presently give me 
more than twelve legions of angels?” 


9. being made perfect|—so that in Him, 
‘the First-born,” the Divine ideal of humanity 
was completely realized (cp. on il. to). Thus 
“perfected,” He was qualified to stand as 
Second Head of our race, the author of 
‘‘ eternal salvation” (Isai. xlv. 17),—the one 
meritorious and efficient cause of salvation 


r. 10—14.] EE BREWS. V. 53 


vation unto all them that obey 
him ; 

10 Called of God an high priest 
after the order of Melchisedec. 

11 Of whom we have many things 
to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing 
ye are dull of hearing. 

12 For when for t.e time ye ought 
to be teachers, ye hve need that one 
teach you again which de the first 


(Acts iv. 12),—‘‘to all them that obey Him,” 
submitting themselves to Him with entireness 
of faith, and following His commands, eve» 
as He obeyed the Father. Cp. John xii. 26. 


10. Called...| Rather, addressed by God 
as High-priest. This is closely connected 
in thought with the ‘‘eerza/ salvation,” that 
precedes. ‘‘Salvation”’ is thecorrelate of ‘‘right- 
eousness.” To secure our ‘‘eternal salva- 
tion,” we have a High-priest, who not only 
by His sacrifice for sin fulfilled the typical 
requirements of the Aaronic high-priesthood, 
but whe is also ‘‘a high-priest after the style 
of Melchizedek (the King of Righteousness)”, 
Cp. Isai. li. 6, 8; Dan. ix. 24. 


11. Of whom] Rather, Concerning whom; 
that is, concerning Christ, viewed as the eter-= 
nal High-priest (cp. vi. 1). Or, ‘‘Concerning 
which.” 

many things...| More nearly: ‘‘much to 
say, and that not easily expounded in words,” 
—in such words as were on a level with their 
state of intelligence. 

ye are| Rather, ye are become (asin wv. 
12); implying that they had not always been so. 

dull of | Or, ‘sluggish in” (cp. vi. 12). 
The words of Christ, which once had pos- 
sessed so deep an interest for them, now fell 
on listless and inattentive ears. He fe//s them 
this, that he may rouse them out of their torpor. 
Moses had done the like in Deut. xxix. 4. 


12. when for the time...| Rather, ‘‘where- 
as by this time (/it. on the score of time) 
ye ought to be even teachers, ye again have 
need (1 Thess. iv. 9) that one teach you what 
the first rudiments (in Gal. iv. 9, ‘‘ele- 
ments”) of the oracles of God are;”—what 
they amount to, what they involve (as in Acts 
XVil. 19, ‘‘qwhat this doctrine is”). They had 
fallen back, it would seem, upon a naked lite- 
ral view of the meaning of Scripture, and 
looked on Christianity as little more than a 
supplement to the Legal Dispensation; not 
as the fruit, on the appearance of which the 
blossom passes away. 

the oracles of God] His express utterances 
recorded in Holy Scripture (Rom. iii. 2; Acts 
vii. 38). Such divine words must needs have 
a pr found significancy. 


principles of the oracles of God ; and 

are become such as have need of milk, 

and not of strong meat. 
13 For every one that useth milk 

7s unskilful in the word of righte- ' Gr. Aaeh 

ousness : for he is a babe. Eps 
14 But strong meat belongeth to 

them that are ' of full age, even those! Cae 


I rn ech. 
who by reason ‘of use have their senses‘ Or, of aa 
exercised to discern both good and evil. Voss Sra 


strong meat] Rather, solid food. The 
same distinction is drawn in 1 Cor. iii. x, 2. 
The meaning of ts figure there is explained 
Oy a wuinparison of il. 6, ‘‘we speak wisdom 
among them that are perfect” (the word 
which here in wv. 14 is rendered, ‘‘of full 
age”): this wisdom being such that to the 
“natural” man it was foolishness, because he 
could not ‘‘discern” it (ib. 13, 14). 


13. For] This introduces (not a proof 
that the thing asserted in v. 12 was true, but) 
a development of what was implied in the 
figurative language just used. What had been 
a metaphor now becomes, in effect, an allegory. 
For every one that is fed on milk under- 
standeth not that which is spoken 
about righteousness; he is not capable ot 
perceiving the nature of right and wrong; 
for he is an infant; whose moral sense has 
not yet been called into exercise. 

The application (which is not given) is ob- 
vious, As an infant is swayed, not by con- 
science, but chiefly by the gestures, looks, and 
voices of those who are in charge of it, so 
those who are in an infantile state as regards 
religious attainments are chiefly moved by 
rites and ceremonies and positive enactments. 
On the other hand, as they whose moral 
nature is matured are guided by their own 
quick perception of ‘‘good and evil,” so per- 
sons of ripened Christian intelligence habitu- 
ally strive after that ‘‘righteousness of God” 
(Rom. x. 3, Phil. iii. 9) which the ‘ High- 
priest after the order of the King of Righteous- 
ness” has to bestow. 


14. But...] Rather, But solid food bee 
longeth to men of ripe age. ‘The last term 
(generally rendered ‘‘ perfect”) is one which 
readily lends itself to the allegory; being the 
word used in Phil. iii. 12, 16 of such as have 
attained to true ‘‘ righteousness.” 

of use| Rather, of habit:—the only place 
where the word is found in the New Testament. 
Its occurrence here is in keeping with the 
ethical character which we have assigned to 
the illustration. 

senses| Their faculties of perception; as 
we speak of a moral sense (cp. Phil. i. 9). 

exercised] 1, ‘‘fully trained” (xii. 11). 


1 Or, the 


word of 
the begin- 


ning of 
Christ. 


HEBREWS. VI. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Cuap. v. 4, 7, 13. 


4. Schéttgen quotes (from the Bammidbar 
Rabba): ‘‘Moses said to Korah,...I[f Aaron 


took. this office to himself Qnyy).” 


7. The literal rendering is that which is 
given in the J¢a/a:‘‘exauditus a metu,”—“ heard 
from fear.” The preposition is the same as 
in xi, 34, ‘They were strengthened from (or, 
to the removal of) weakness;” and in x. 22, 
‘‘having our hearts sprinkled from (to the 
removal of) an evil conscience.” We havea 
strikingly similar use of eicaxovw in Aquila’s 
version of Ps. xxii. 21, ‘‘ From the horns of 
the wild-oxen Thou heardest me.” Indeed, in 
Ps. liv. 16 the LXX. actually use this verb 
eicaxovw for yw yn (which Hebrew word oc- 
curs in Ps. xxii. 21 a), ‘‘I cried unto the Lord, 
and He saved (LXX. heard) me.” (Cp. 
Job xxxv. 12.) The noun evAaPBeia is used by 
Josephus (‘ Ant.’ x1. 6), where he speaks of 
Artaxerxes laying his sceptre on Esther’s neck, 
and so releasing her from her fear; that fear 
being a vivid apprehension of the danger which 
she incurred deliberately out of love for her 
kinsfolk, that she might save them by her 
intercession from the doom which had already 
gone forth against them. 

CHAPTER VI 
1 He exhorteth not to fall back from the faith, 

11 but to be stedfast, 12 diligent, and patient 

to wait upon God, 13 because God ts most 

sure in hts promise. 


HEREFORE leaving ' theprin- 
ciples of the doctrine of Christ, 


Cuap. VI. The word “ perfection” in 
v. 1 shews how closely this chapter coheres 
with the preceding. The warning is extremely 
solemn. To bea child is one thing; to sink 
back from the intelligence of manhood into 
childish imbecility is another. Israel under 
the Law was in a state of childhood (Gal. iv. 
1, 3): but Christians have put away ‘childish 
things.” For them to return to the ‘‘weak 
and beggarly elements” of Judaism (Gal. iv. 
9) were to ‘‘fall from grace” (ib. v. 4; cp. ch. 
xii. 15). 

Obs. The tendencies, which are here re- 
proved, took shape, at a later period, in the 
Ebionite sects;—the name (which signifies, 
‘‘beggarly ”) being given them in allusion to 
the meagreness of their theological teaching. 


1. seaving| Asa builder aves the foun- 
dation, when it is once well laid; not perpetu- 
ally disturbing and re-laying it, but advancing 
to the superstructure, for which the founda- 
tion was laid. 

the principles of...| Lit. ‘*the word of the 
beginning (ch. v. 12) of Christ;”—comprising 
the elementary truths which were preached 
dur'ng our Lord’s earthly ministry, before He 


[v. 1, 2 
The use of evAaBeia here by Josephus is 
the more remarkable, as a Jewish comment 


(Megillab, f. 15) represents Esther to have 
cried ‘‘ Save me from the lion’s mouth:” (cp. 
in the Septuagintal addition, Esther iv. 17, 
évarov Tov NéovTos). 

On this view, then, the expression has a 
full justification. On the other hand, there 
appears to be no instance given in which aro 
indicates the ground,—the procuring or meri- 
torious cause,—on account of which a person 
has something done to him by another (passages 
like Matt. xxviii. 4, Luke xxii. 45, not being 
in point). 


13. In considering the precise meaning of 
this verse, we should observe that there are 
such compounds as azretpoxados and agreipoxa- 
xos. This appears to suggest that the Acyov 
dixatocvvns, which follows dzetpos in v. 13, is 
to be referred to the same order of things as 
the xadod re kat kaxov Of v. 14; in other 
words, that it must be taken immediately in 
its ethical, not its theological, application. The 
drift of the allegory was made sufficiently 
plain by v. 12 and vi. 1. 


let us go on unto perfection; not 
laying again the foundation of re- 
pentance from dead works, and of 
faith toward God, 

2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, 
and of laying on of hands, and of re- 


had suffered, risen, ascended, and sent down 


the Holy Spirit. 

let us go on] Rather, let us press on. 
He speaks inclusively, of himself and his 
readers (as in li. I, 3, lV. I, II, 14). 

perfection] ‘‘ripenest” of spiritual character 
(in Col. iii. 14, ‘‘perfectness”). 

the foundation of | This ‘‘of” indicates the 
materials, of which the foundation was com- 
posed. ‘These are of a threefold character :— 
(1) Two inward acts, which were requisite 
for admission to Covenant relations; (2) In- 
struction concerning two ecclesiastical acts, 
by which the privileges of the Covenant state 
were conferred; (3) Instruction concerning 
two Divine acts, by which the promises and 
threatenings of the Covenant will be at last 
carried into effect. 

repentance...and...faith] At the very com- 
mencement of His preaching the words ot 
Jesus were, ‘Repent ye, and believe the Gos- 
pel” (Mark i. 13). 

dead works] works not quickened by the 
love of God; tainted with selfishness, which is 
spiritual death (comp. ix. 14; Eph. v. 14). 

toward God] Rather, “in God;” (same 
preposition as in Rom. iv. 5, Acts ix. 42). 


wv. 3—6.] 


surrection of the dead, and of eternal 
judgment. 

3 And this will we do, if God per- 
mit. 

4 For z is impossible for those 
who were once enlightened, and have 


2. Of the doctrire...] Rather, “of teach- 
ing concerning baptisms and the laying 
on of hands, and the...and the;” so that 
‘‘teaching” may refer to all that follows in 
the verse. 

baptisms] It would be needful to distin- 
guish the Legal ‘‘washings” (ix. Io; cp. 
Mark vii. 4) and the Jewish baptism of prose- 
lytes, as well as John’s baptism, from baptism 
into the Triune Name. Comp. Acts xix. 3—s ; 
where also mention is made of “‘laying on of 
hands” (v. 6; see also viii. 17). By baptism 
a man was incorporated into Christ’s Body, 
the Church. By ‘“‘laying on of hands” he 
was consecrated to his individual office as a 
member of the Body.—On the ancient ‘‘lay-= 
ing on of hands,” cp. Gen. xlviii. 14; Num. 
XXvii. 18. 

resurrection,,.judgment| Both of them ex- 
tending to all mankind (Acts xvii. 31, xxiv. 
15). The judgment is ‘‘eternal,” because its 
consequences are so (cp. ‘‘eternal redemp- 
tion,” ix. 12). 

All the points which are here enumerated 
had their place also in the Elder Dispensation. 
There was a danger lest the Hebrew Chris- 
tian should be satisfied with recurring to these 
fundamental points to the neglect of all higher, 
distinctively evangelical, teaching. 


8. his] The pressing on to pertection. 
He undertakes, for himself and them, to press 
forward, “‘if only (ili. 14) God permit” 
¢ Cor. xvi. 7), by prolonging to them their 

y of grace. 


4. The solemn “‘if only” of v. 3 is here 
commented on. ‘There may be cases, in which 
men have sinned so fearfully against the light, 
that God withdraws His grace from them. 

for those} Rather, as regards those. 
The actual construction of vv. 4—6 appears 
to be: ‘‘It is impossible to renew again unto 
repentance those who have been once....” But 
it is desirable on many grounds to follow the 
order of the Greek; especially as the condi- 
tional clause at the beginning of v. 6 and the 
explanatory clause at the end would otherwise 
be deprived of their force. 

qwere...| Rather, have been...bave tasted 
...have been made. 

once| ‘That is, ‘‘once for all;” already 
suggesting wy it is ‘‘impossible” to renew 
them. For men, who have received ‘‘the light 
a illumination) of the glorious gospel of 

jst” (2 Cor. iv. 4), and have ‘fallen 


TEBRBEWS.{ViI. 


tasted of the heavenly gift, and were 
made partakers of the Holy Ghost, 

5 And have tasted the good word 
of God, and the powers of the world 
to come, 


6 If they shall fall away, to re- 





away” from it, in hatred of the ight, there 
remains no other source of illumination (cp. x. 
26). 

este claal See x. 32 (‘‘illuminated ”), 
Eph. i. 18 (cp. iii. 9, v. 14). Compare Acts 
Xxvi. 18, 1 Pet. ii. 9. 

The four clauses which follow are to be 
taken as an expansion of the first; showing 
what was involved in the ‘“‘enlightening” there 
spoken of. 

the heavenly gift} Probably, that special 
gift of the Holy Spirit which was ‘*sent down 
from heaven” (x Pet. i. 12) upon the A- 
postles on the day of Pentecost. Cp. Acts ii, 

8. Of that special gift many thousands of the 
Jeqach Christians had ‘‘tasted.” They were, 
also, ‘‘partakers (cp. ili. 1, 14) of the Holy 
Spirit,” as the Sanctifier of the whole Body of 
the Church. 


5. tasted] Slightly different, in construc- 
tion and in meaning, from the ‘‘tasted of” 
inv. 4. They tasted of that special Apostolic 
gift: they tasted how good the ‘“‘word of 
God” (Rom. x. 17) was. For the expression 
‘good word,” see Josh. xxi. 45; Jer. xxix. 
To, Xxxili. 14. (Cp. 1 Pet. ii. 3.) 

world to come| Not the same words as in 
il. 5 :—lit. ‘‘the coming age” (Isai. ix. 6, LX X). 
In the supernatural endowments of the early 
Church, the influences of the invisible (and 
as yet future) world might be said to have 
penetrated into this present visible system. 


6. If they shall fall away] Rather, and 
(yet) have fallen away; as revolters or 
deserters (see Ezek. xiv. 13, LXX.). 

to renew them again| God had “sent 
forth His Spirit” with new creative power, 
and had ‘‘renewed the face of the earth” 
(Ps. civ. 30; cp. vv. 7, 8, below). If any 
‘did despite to that Spirit of grace” (x. 29), 
there was vo other means of spiritual renewal 
possible. God’s ministers can only work in: 
harmony with the arrangements of the Gospel 
Economy. Jesus is ‘‘exalted...to give repent=- 
ance and remission of sins” (Acts v. 31): if 
any turn away from Him, man is powerless to 
renew them. It is plain that this in no way 
justified the Montanists and Novatians in ree 
fusing to receive penitents back intothe Church. 
The fact of their repentance proved, that such 
were zot of those for whom renewal and re- 
pentance had become impossible. ‘They no 
longer ‘‘put Christ to open shame.” 

to themselves] so far as they are concerned, : 


56 


TQ, for. 


HEBREWS. {Vi 


new them again unto repentance; see- 
ing they crucify to themselves the 
Son of God afresh, and put 4im to 
an pen shame. 

7 For the earth which drinketh 
in the rain that cometh oft upon it, 
and bringeth forth herbs meet for 
them ' by whom it is dressed, receiv- 
eth blessing from God : 

8 But that which beareth thorns 
and briers zs rejected, and is nigh 


[v. 7—20, 


unto cursing; whose end zs to be 
burned. 

g But, beloved, we are persuaded 
better things of you, and things that 
accompany salvation, though we thus 
speak. 

10 For God is not unrighteous to 
forget your work and labour of love, 
which ye have shewed toward his 
name, in that ye have ministered to 
the saints, and do minister. 





ratifying by their own act and deed what the 
Jews had done when they crucified Him. 
Jesus had been condemned because He de- 
clared Himself to be the Son of God. If any 
fell back to the level of Judaism, what did 
they, in effect, but assert that Jesus had been 
justly condemned? 

to an open shame] as a blasphemer (Matt. 
XXvVi. 65). 


7. The whole of the preceding passage 
wears the appearance of a warning addressed 
to a community. ‘The privileges insisted upon 
in vv. 4, 5 are such as belonged to the Church 
generally, rather than specially to individuals. 
This impression is strongly confirmed by the 
allegory which now follows (for that it és an 
allegory, the use which is here made of the 
terms ‘‘blessing” and ‘‘cursing” shows; cp. 
Deut. xxx. 1, 19). 

For] It is impossible to renew such; For, 
consider what is the law of God’s spiritual 
husbandry (1 Cor. iii. 9), as it is set forth in 
the Old Testament (Isai. v. 1—6, 24; cp. 
Deut. xxix. 23). 

the earth| Rather, the land (cp. Deut. 
XXviil. 8, 12). 

drinketh in} Rather, hath drunk in 
(cp. Deut. xi. rr). 

the rain] Comp. Isai. v. 6, Ezek. xxxiv. 
26:—analogous to the “heavenly gift” of v. 4. 

herbs] Or, ‘‘herbage.” In Exod. ix. 22, 25, 
the word includes wheat, barley, and flax. 

by whom...| Rather, on whose account 
(i. 14), indeed, it is tilled. As of old so 
much loving toil was bestowed upon Israel, 
not for its own aggrandisement, but in order 
that all nations might be blessed through it ; 
so now the Hebrew Church at Jerusalem had 
received that ‘‘ gracious rain” (Ps. Ixviii. 9) 
of Pentecostal gifts with the like intent. If it 
brought forth abundant harvests, from which 
the bread of life might be communicated to a 
famishing world, it would be itself richly 
rewarded; such land ‘is a partaker (cp. 
ch. xii. 10, 2 Tim. ii. 6) of blessing from God” 
(Ps. xxiv. 5). This can scarcely be under- 
stood, unless we take the passage allegorically, 
As long as [sra2l had remained true to its 
national vocation, it had enjoyed its own share 


of Divine blessing (cp. Deut. xxviii, 8). So 
would it be with the Hebrew Church, if it 
diligently hearkened to the voice of the Lord its 
God (Deut. xxviii. 1, 2). 


8. that which beareth,,.] Rather, if it bear 
thorns and briers (Isai. v. 6; Prov. xxiv. 30, 
31), it is rejected; or, ‘‘ reprobate” (Jer. vi. 
30). 

whose end] If that end be not averted by 
timeiy reformation (comp. Jer. v. 31; Ezek. 
Vii. 3). 

to be burned| As a consequence of the 
judicial curse (Deut. xxix. 2o—23). 


9. better things] Lit. ‘the better things; ” 
the better of the two alternatives just described 
in v. 7; namely, fruitfulness rewarded by 
blessing. 

accompany| Or, ‘go along with.” Their 
lives were visibly such as harmonized with 
God’s invisible plan of salvation. The word 
is used in Ezek, x. 16 of the wheels, which, 
‘when the Cherubim went, went along with 
them.”—He had already stated (in the verse 
which immediately preceded this digression, 
ch. v. 9) what the necessary ‘accompani- 
ment” of salvation is on man’s part: ‘‘ He 
became the author of eternal salvation #o ail 
them that obey Him.” 


10. He was persuaded that they would 
receive the blessing of salvation; for God was 
not unrighteous, that He should forget, o1 
fail to reward, their loving deeds. 

your work,..| or, (according to the better 
reading) your work, and the love which ;— 
the words ‘‘labour of” having come into some 
MSS., doubtless, from 1 Thess. i. 3. Their 
work, being true and real work, though done 
amidst despondency, should be rewarded 
(Jer. xxxi. 16). The love which they had 
shewed, or manifested (comp. 2 Cor. viii. 
24), in relieving their distressed brethren, He 
would look on as directed towards His Name ; 
claiming what was done to His servants as 
done to Himself (Matt. xxv. 40; Prov. xix. 
17). 
Mee in relieving their temporal wants 
(2 Cor. viii. 4, ix. 1). i 

the saints] The ‘“tholy brethren” (iii, 4) 


v. 11—16.] 


11 And we desire that every one 
of you do shew the same diligence to 
the full assurance of hope unto the 
end: 

12 That ye be not slothful, but 
followers of them who through faith 
and patience inherit the promises. 

13 For when God made promise to 


in Judea (Acts x1. 29) or in Jerusalem itself 
(Rom. xv. 26). 


11. dnd] Rather, But. He had been 
speaking to them as a Church (see on v. 7): 
‘* But” he wishes that every one of them, indi- 
vidually, should manifest the same diligence 
in works of love, which he had commended in 
them asa community. That this is the true 
sense of the passage appears from 2 Cor. viii. 
16, ‘‘the same earnest care;” the word there 
rendered ‘‘earnest care” (cp. 2 Cor. vii. 12, 
*‘care’’) being the one for which ‘‘ diligence” 
stands in the text. 

to the full assurance] ‘This result (cp. the 
preposition in v. 14,ix. 13, r Cor. x. 4) would 
follow of itself. ‘Their benevolent activity, 
if it had no immediate reward, would tend to 
the exercise and strengthening of their hope; 
every deed of disinterested charity being, in 
fact, rewarded with a livelier anticipation of 
what God had in store for them. Thus the 
fruit-bearing soil would have a ‘blessing 
from God” (wv. 7). Cp. 2 Pet. i. 8—r1. 

the full assurance] ‘‘the full energy (or, 
development);” comp. x. 22, ‘‘the full as- 
surance of faith.” Of itself the word denotes 
simply the completeness with which the faculty 
produces its own proper fruit (see Additional 
Note). Cp. 1 Pet. i. 13, “‘hope perfectly.” 

unto the end | iil. 6, 14 (Rev. ii. 26). This 
refers, not to the ‘‘ diligence” only, or to the 
“hope” only, but to the whole of what 
precedes. Let their practical charity and their 
religious hope continue acting and re-acting 
upon each other even to the end. 


12. be not] Rather, become not. In 
ch. v. 11 he had charged them with being of 
“sluggish” ears. Now that he has roused 
their hearing, he warns them not, at any rate, 
to become “sluggish” in heart. The word 
is the same in both passages, and means 
*torpid,” or inert, or insensible; as hearts 
would be, which had lost their ‘‘ first love” 
and;.with it, their energy of hope., 

followers} Rather, ‘‘imitators” (as in 
1 Cor. iv. 16, xi. 1). 

patience} which enabled them to bear up 
under the burden of Jong-deferred hope. The 
verb is used in v. 15, ‘“‘having patiently en- 
dured.” In x. 36, xii. 1 the word which is 
rendered ‘‘ patience,” refers rather to the ex- 
durance of pain or suffering (2 Cor. i. 6). 


HE BREW S: 7 Vil. 


Abraham, because he could swear by 
no greater, he sware by himself, 

14 Saying, Surely blessing I will 
bless thee, and multiplying I will 
multiply thee. 

15 And so, after he had patiently 
endured, he obtained the promise. 

16 For men verily swear by the 


inherit the promises] The reference would 
seem to be, in part, to their own immediate 
predecessors in the faith (xiii. 7, whose faith 
imitate), but also (as the following verses imply) 
to the saints of former ages. In Acts xxvi. 6 
—8 St Paul speaks of ‘‘ the promise made to 
the fathers” (unto which promise the twelve 
tribes so earnestly desired to come) as 
being, the resurrection of the dead. And in 
Acts xili. 32, 33, he says, ‘* We declare unto 
you glad tidings, how that the promise which 
was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled 
the same, in that He hath raised up Jesus 
again.” Of that promised resurrection the 
faithful, as they rest in Paradise, are the 
assured heirs (cp. on Xi. 39, Xii. 23). 


18. This requirement of “ faith and pa- 
tience”’ in order to an attainment of the pro- 
mises is no new one. For—is it not set forth 
clearly in the history of Abraham? The 
greatest event in his life (which itself occurred 
after forty years of patient waiting) was the 
promise of a future blessing; a blessing to be 
won (as the figurative transaction on Moriah 
showed, cp. xi, 17—19g) through a resurrection 
from the dead. On that oath—which revealed 
to him ‘‘the day of Christ,” the fountain of 
blessing (John viti. 56)—Abraham stayed him- 
self in faith and patience; and so, entering into 
rest, he attained the promise (cp. xi. 8, ro, 16). 


14. multiply thee} In Gen. xxii. 17, it is, 
“T will multiply thy seed.” ‘The shortened 
form may involve a reference to Isai. li. 2, 
“T blessed him, and sultiplied him.” 


15. And so] In the strength of that 
promise confirmed by an oath, he went on to 
exhibit the full energy of hope unto the end. 
The terms of the oath were such as might 
well stimulate hope. It began, For because 
thou hast done this thing ; as much as to say, 
‘“T am not unrighteous to forget this work of 
thine and the love thou hast sheaed toward My 
name. ‘Thou hast not withheld thine only 
son from Me; be sure My love shall not fall 
short of thine. I too will not withhold My 
only Son (Rom. viii. 32), but will give Him 
up to death, to bring about the fulfilment of 
My solemn promise, that in thy seed all the 
families of the earth shall be blessed.” 

obtained| The word used in ch. x1. 34, 
Rom. xi. 7. Age after age Abraham in Parae 


HEBREWS VI. 


eater: and an oath for confirmation 
is to them an end of all strife. 

17 Wherein God, willing more 
abundantly to shew unto the heirs of 
promise the immutability of his coun- 


'Gr.snter- se], t confirmed zt by an oath: 


18 That by two immutable things, 
in which it was impossible for God 


dise found the promise advancing, in its 
various parts, towards completion; and, when 
Christ triumphed over death, he obtained in 
Him the gift of eternal life. 

Obs. This incident of Abraham’s history 
is connected with chh. iii and iv by the 
words, ‘‘because thou hast hearkened tu My 
voice” (Gen. xxii. 18). 


16. the greater| Rather, that which is 
greater. 

and an oath...| Rather, and an oath is 
unto them an assured end [lit., an end 
for sure adjustment] of all controversy. 


17. Wherein] Rather, In regard where- 
of; in consideration of the fact that an oath 
puts a stop to all controversy. 

the heirs of promise] Not Abraham and 
Isaac only, but their spiritual seed, who are 
‘theirs according to the promise” (Gal. iii. 29). 

immutability| In respect of which the 
Covenant with Abraham stands contrasted 
with the Sinaitic (cp. vii. 12, xil. 27). 

counsel] Or, ‘‘plan;” the great scheme of 
Redemption (comp. Acts xx, 27). 

confirmed it by an oath| Rather, inter- 
vened as mediator by an oath. The 
two parties to the Covenant of Blessing were 
God and man. How was this Covenant, then, 
to be guaranteed? Where was one to be 
found who could represent the interests of 
each party, and guarantee to each party the 
stability of the Covenant (cp. Note below)? 
Clearly no created being could do this. None 
but God Himself could so act. By His oath 
He undertook thus to mediate. When He 
said, ‘‘ By myself have I sworn,” He engaged 
His own holiness and truth to the fulfilment 
of His promises. In appealing to Himself by 
an oath, He, in fact, took on Him the office of 
Mediator; pledging Himself to do all that 
was necessary for giving the Covenant eternal 
validity (xiii. 20). If this could be done in 
no other way than by giving His only Son to 
lie on the Altar of Atonement, even this 
should be done. Accordingly ‘the oath 
sworn to Abraham” (Lukei. 73) was actually 
made good in the person of ‘ Jesus, the 
Mediator of the New Covenant” (xii. 24), 
who “laid hold on the seed of Abraham” 
i. x6. After He had sealed the Covenant 
with His blood, it was impossible that any- 


[v. 17—19. 


to lie, we might have a strong con- 
solation, who have fled for refuge 
to lay hold upon the hope set be- 
fore us: 

19 Which hope we have as an 
anchor of the soul, both sure and 
stedfast, and which entereth into that 
within the veil ; 


thing could vitiate it. When God raised 
Him from the dead, He in fact declared to 
Him: ‘In Thee are all the families of the 
earth delivered from the curse, because Thou 
hast hearkened to My voice.” 

Obs. 1. When Moses ventured to intercede 
on behalf of Israel at Sinai, he took his stand 
upon the oath made to Abraham (Exod. xxxii. 
13). The covenant which he himself had 
mediated had been broken. How, then, could 
he plead for a fulfilment of its conditional 
promises? He could only rest his intercession 
upon God’s own mediatorial oath. 

Obs. 2. The stress laid here on God's oath 
prepares the way for the discussion of Ps. cx. 
4 (which has been already referred to at v. 6 
in the next chapter. Indeed, what is the oa’ 
in Ps. cx but a renewal, in a more definite 
form, of the oath to Abraham? 


18. rwv...things] Two actual facts (cp. 
x, 1 4, xi. 1 5); the original promise (Gen. 
xii. 3; Cp. xviii. 18), and the confirmation of 
it by oata (xxii. 18). 

in which| Or, ‘in regard to which.” 

consolation] Or, ‘‘encouragement;” incite- 
ment to persevering diligence (in xii. 5, xiii. 
22, ‘‘exhortation”). 

Jjied for refuge] as to an asylum, Num, 
XXXv. 25, 26 (Grotius), or as storm-tossed 
mariners to a harbour of safe anchorage 
(Bengel, Wordsworth). 

to lay hold upon] ‘Therefore the ‘‘ hope” 
must be something that is not of our originat- 
ing. Yet being “laid hold of” it becomes 
ours; ours to ‘hold fast” (iii. 6), and to 
employ as an anchor. This relatjon between 
the objective and the subjective in Christian 
hope arises from its very nature, since it is 
the outward object which creates the subjec- 
tive energy (1 Pet. i. 3). Yet this hope is 
set before us (xii. 2), as a thing to be attained 
through faith and obedience. 


19. This hope is as an ‘anchor of the 
soul,” cast upward into that qithin the veil, 
the heavenly Holy of Holies (see Lev. xvi. 2, 
12, 15,—1in the rules for the Day of Atone- 
ment); where it finds firm holding in the 
‘immutable counsel,” which forms the basis 
of the ‘* Mercy-seat.” 

sure and stedfast| Strong in substance and 
tenacious in its hold. . 


¥. 20—4. | 


20 Whither the forerunner is for 
us entered, even Jesus, made an high 





20. Whither...| Rather, Whither, as fore- 
runner, Jesus is for us entered;—as our 
“ Leader” (ii. ro) ; and to act for us, or, on 
our behalf (as in v. 1, vii. 25); in such sort 
that His entrance ensures ours also (x. 19; 
John xiv. 2, 3). 

made| Rather, having become ;—having 
at length fulfilled that so long mysterious 
oracle of Psalm cx. 


HEBREWS: ViIsi VII. 


priest for ever after the order of Mel- 
chisedec. 


an high priest] The discourse has come 
back to the point from which it diverged in 
ch. v. Io; having in the mean time roused the 
most earnest attention of the reader. 

for ever] In the original these words stand 
emphatically at the end of the clause ;—‘‘ having 
become high-priest after the order of Mel- 
chizedek for ever ;”—so striking the key-note 
of ch, vii (see vv. 3, 16, 17, 21, 24, 25, 28). 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Cuap. vi. 11, 17. 


11. The verb (adnpodopéw) occurs in 
2 Tim. iv. 5, “make full proof of thy min- 
istry ;” so as to realize the full amount of fruit 
which thy ministry should produce (cp. Acts 
xii. 25, Col. iv. 17, where we have mAnpoov 
ayy 6.): and again in v. 17, ‘‘ that by me the 
preaching might be fully known;” or, be made 
known over the whole of its intended field of 
operations. 


CHAPTER VII. 


1 Christ Fesus ts a priest after the order of 
Melchisedec, 11 and so, far more excellent 
than the priests of Aaron’s order. 


‘LCSOR this Melchisedec, king of 
Salem, priest of the most high 
God, who met Abraham returning 
from the slaughter of the kings, and 

blessed him ; 
2 To whom also Abraham gave 


Cuap. VII. The writer now proceeds to 
unfold the typical significancy of Melchizedek’s 
history. 

(2) He was King and Priest in one; like the 
Messiah of Pss. ii, xlv, cx, and like the 
typical Jozedek of Zech. vi. 13. 

(2) When Abraham, shortly after God 
had put him in formal possession of Canaan 
(xili. 14—17), had routed the invaders of the 
land, Melchizedek went forth to meet him, 
and d/essed him;—as the Righteous King of Ps. 
Ixxii is declared to be a fountain of blessing 
(v. 17). q 
(3) Abraham ackowledged him as God’s 
Priest by giving him tithes from all the spoil. 

(4) His name and title are significant ; for 
he was both King of Righteousness, and then 

for the order is important, Isai. xxxiii. 17, 

om. v. r) ‘King of Peace” (cp. Ps. Ixxii. 3); 
righteousness and peace being the chief ends 
that were to be attained through a priesthood 
(cp Rom. iv. 25, v. 1). 

(5) Melchizedek stands in the Scripture 
Barrative with no mention of father, mother, 


17. When Josephus (‘ Ant.’ Iv. 6, 7) 
speaks of the young Israelites, who engaged 
to marry the Midianite damsels, as “‘ swearing 
and making God the mediator of what they 
undertook to do,” he means that they appealed 
to Him as the God of truth and righteous- 
ness to maintain the integrity of their covenant, 
making Himself its responsible guardian. 


a tenth part of all; first being by in- 
terpretation King of righteousness, 
and after that also King of Salem, 
which is, King of peace ; 

3 Without father, without mother, 


without descent, having neither be- /S*, 
ginning of days, nor end of life; but g7ze. 


made like unto the Son of God; 
abideth a priest continually. 
4 Now consider how great this 


or pedigree, of the beginning or end of his 
life ; and the suppression of these details adapts 
him for standing as a type of the Son of God. 


1. For this Melchisedec| ‘The predicate is 
at the end of v. 3, ‘‘abideth a priest con= 
tinually.” 

2. Salem...peace| Such is its meaning in 
the name Jerusalem, ‘‘ home (or, foundation) 
of peace.” If, as is generally agreed (cp. on 
Gen. xiv. 18), Salem and Jerusalem are the 
same city, then (as Mr Dale remarks) the 
mountain, on which Abraham received the 
oath of :Blessing from God, was in the district 
over which Melchizedek reigned. 


3. descent| Rather (as in marg.), pedi- 
gree. ‘The Levitical priesthood was strictly 
genealogical (see Ezra ii. 62, 63). 

made like| ‘The sacred narrative regarding. 
Melchizedek was so ordered, both in what it 
said and in what it left unsaid, that the his- 
torical picture is singularly fitted to represent: 
in typical outline the Son of God. 


66 We. 
know of no beginning or end in either case= 


59 


pedi» 


witte 


40, pedi- 
ree. 


HEBREWS. ‘VIL 


man was, unto whom even the pa- 
triarch Abraham gave the tenth cf 
the spoils. 

5 And verily they that are of the 
sons of Levi, who receive the office 
of the priesthood, have a command- 
ment to take tithes of the people ac- 
cording to the law, that is, of their 
brethren, though they come out of 
the loins of Abraham : 

6 But he whose !descent is not 
counted from them received tithes of 
Abraham, and blessed him that had 


the promises. 


in the one, because none are recorded; in the 
other, because they do not exist” (Chrys.). 
The death of Aaron, on the contrary, has 
attention called to it in a very pointed manner, 
Num, xx. 23—29. 
continually| Or, ‘‘in perpetuity ;” without 
any term to the continuance of his office. 


4. the patriarch] ‘‘the head of our race.” 
In the original this stands, with marked em- 
phasis, at the end: ‘‘ Abraham gave tithe of 
the best of the spoil—(even he), the pa- 
triarch.” This occurrence is commented on 
in the next six verses in the following order: 

(1) wv. 5—7. The Levitical priests re- 
ceived tithes, not from foreigners on the 
ground of an acknowledged superiority, but 
from their brethren on the ground of a com- 

. pulsory legal enactment. Abraham, on the 
other hand, paid tithes to Melchizedek, not on 
account of any legal claim, but voluntarily ; 
out of respect for one who was his superior, 
and who had freely bestowed a blessing upon 
him in God's name. 

(2) wv. 8. The Levitical tithes are paid to 
‘dying-men; Melchizedek is set before us only 
as “ living.” 

(3) vv. 9, to. In the person of Abraham 
tthe Levitical priesthood virtually paid tithe to 
Melchisedek. 

On these grounds it is inferred that the 
Melchizedekan style of priesthood (referred 
to in the Psalm) is one which is superior to 
the Aaronic. 


5. they that...] Lit. “those who being of 
the sons of Levi receive,..;” that is, who 
receive the priesthood on the ground of their 
descent from Levi. The priests had a tenth 
of the Levites’ tithe (Num, xviii. 26). Ullti- 
mately, therefore, it was from “ the people.” 

according to the law] By positive enact- 
ment not because of any personal superiority. 


6. whose descent...| Lit. ‘‘that is not 
fegistered in pedigree from them;” the form 
of expression being chosen to carry the mind 
on to the antitype. 


[v. 5—18 


7 And without all contradiction 
the less is blessed of the better. 

8 And here men that die receive 
tithes; but there he recetveth them, 
of whom it is witnessed that he 
liveth. 

g And as I may so say, Levi also, 
who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in 
Abraham. 

10 For he was yet in the loins of 
his father, when Melchisedec met him. 

11 If therefore perfection were by 
the Levitical priesthood, (for under it 
the people received the law,) what 


received | Lit. ‘hath received.” That is 
the position in which he stands before us in 
history. 

blessed...| This is a very distinctive part ot 
Melchizedek’s action: and what he did in 
words, the Antitype did in reality. “Through 
Jesus Christ the blessing of Abraham” has 
“come on the nations” (Gal. iii. 14). The atti- 
tude in which He was last seen by the Apostles 
signitied that His work in heaven would be to 
pour out blessings on the faithful (Luke xxiv, 
51): so eliciting ever-renewed benedictions 
from men towards God (Eph. i. 3; 1 Pet. i. 
3); even as Melchizedek, after saying ‘‘ Blessed 
be Abram,” added ‘‘ Blessed be God.” 


7. And without all contradiction] Rather, 
But without any controversy. 


8. ere] In the Levitical system. 

it is witnessed...| He is set before us in the 
Scriptural record simply as /iving ; no mention 
being made of his birth or death. Asin a. 3, 
the features of resemblance presented by the 
type depend on the silence of Scripture. 


9. as I may...] Rather, so to speak. 
Though not literally, yet virtually, he did so. 
The interview with Melchizedek took place 
at least fourteen years before the birth of 
Isaac, 


1l. [If therefore] Rather, “If however.” 
‘The argument in vv, s—ro had only reached 
so far as to prove, that a priesthood of the 
Melchizedekan order must be superior to the 
Levitical. The writer proceeds to draw from 
the fact, that Messiah is described in the Psalm 
as a Melchizedekan Priest, yet weightier conse= 
quences. 

(1) vv. 11—14. The prediction of another 
kind of priest implied that the Levitical priest- 
hood was set aside as imperfect, and conse- 
quently that the whole Legal constitution was 
so too. (2) vv. 1s5—19. This imperfection 
becomes more evident when we consider that 
their consecration rested on mere carnal ordie 
nances, not, as His did, on the power of am 


v. 12—16.} 


further need was there that another 
priest should rise after the order of 
Melchisedec, and not be called after 
the order of Aaron? 

12 For the priesthood being chang- 
ed, there is made of necessity a change 
also of the law. 

13 For he of whom these things 
are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, 
of which no man gave attendance at 
the altar. 


HEBREWS. V1.1. 


14 For it zs evident that our Lord 
sprang out of Juda; of which tribe 
Moses spake nothing concerning priest - 
hood. 

15 And it is yet far more evident: 
for that after the similitude of 
Melchisedec there ariseth another 
priest, 

16 Who is made, not after the 
law of a carnal commandment, but 
after the power of an endless life. 





endless life. (3) vv. 20—22. The superiority 
of Christ’s priesthood appears from the fact 
that He was constituted Priest (as the Abra- 
hamic covenant itself was constituted, vi. 
13—17) by a Divine oath. (4) vv. 23—25. 
In consequence of this He retains His priest- 
hood in unbroken continuity ; always able and 
ready to save. 

perfection] ‘The restoration of man from his 
present fallen condition to a state of fitness 
for communion with God (wv. 19, ix. 9, x. 1, 
2,14). Cp. on ii. 10. 

Sor under it... | The parenthesis emphasizes 
the term ‘‘ Levitical priesthood.” Jf, how- 
ever, there had been perfection by means 
of the Levitical priesthood (as might have been 
expected, for under it the people received its 
legal constitution). When Moses ascended 
Sinai he at once received instructions to pre- 
pare a tabernacle and to ordain the priesthood. 
Then, and not before, God promised to dwell 
among Israel as His people (Exod. xxix. 45). 

that another...| Rather, that a priest 
Should arise of a different kind, after 
the order of Melchizedek, and not be called after 
the order of Aaron. 


12. Surely he would have been designated 
‘after the order of Aaron:’—For, if the 
priesthood be changed, the consequence can 
be nothing less than a change of the Law; 
which was established on the supposition of 
that priesthood’s being in existence. To 
remove Aaron from standing before God was 
to remove Israel (whom he represented, see 
on ch, yv. 1) from the position which it held 
under the Law, as God’s people. 

The writer leaves the argument in its hypo- 
thetical form, but goes on to enforce the 
statement that the Person addressed in Ps. cx 
did not belong to the tribe of Levi. 


13. eof whom] It was admitted by the 
Jews that their Messiah (addressed in Ps. cx) 
was to be the Son of David (Matt. xxii. 42). 
Bat the reference here is to Him whom the 
Hebrew Christians confessed to be Messiah: 
for, instead of ‘‘pertaineth to,” we should 
translate, is a member of (lit. “hath taken 


part in;” cp. ii. 14). 


another tribe] Rather, a different tribe. 
gave] Rather, hath given. 


14. evident] Rather, manifest; as a 
matter of fact (cp. Rom. i. 3; Rev. v. 5). 
The Gospels of St Matthew and St Luke 
were, probably, both of them at this time in 
circulation. 

sprang| ‘The figure is taken from a plant 
(comp. Ezek. xxix. 21, ‘‘bud forth”). The 
derived noun is used in Jer. xxiii. 5; Zech. vi. 
12, 13 (‘‘the Branch”); the latter of which 
passages is closely related to Ps. cx. 

of which] Rather, in regard to which, 
Many authorities instead of ‘‘ priesthood” have 
‘priests,’ The crime which filled up Judah’s 
iniquity, and ushered in the sentence of judi- 
cial hardening upon it (Isai. vi. 1—11), was 
King Uzziah’s assumption of priestly functions. 


15. st is yet...) Or, ‘yet more abundant- 
ly is it evident;”—namely, the imperfection of 
the Levitical priesthood and its consequent 
abrogation. In wv. 11—14 the argument had 
rested upon the simple fact that Messiah was 
not to be of Aaron’s line. In what now fol- 
lows the inference is drawn from the eternal 
duration of His priesthood. 

for that] Lit. ‘‘if;”—if (as is the case): 
nearly as in Acts xxvi. 23. 

another] ‘‘a different.” 


16. a carnal commandment] The rites used 
at Aaron’s consecration were of an outward 
kind; bathing, offering the flesh of animals, 
touching his right ear, hand, and foot with 
blood, placing the fat and bread in his hands. 
Those ‘“‘carnal ordinances” (ix. ro) could have 
no intrinsic value. They were performed 
simply because they were enjoined (see Lev. 
Vili with its oft-repeated, ‘‘as the Lord com- 
manded”’). 

power| ‘The word is used twice in refer- 
ence to the Eternal Priest in Ps. cx. In virtue 
of it, (1) He triumphs over all enemies (v. 2), 
—even over the last enemy of all, Death; 
(2) He draws to Himself a holy and devoted 
people; pure, bright, and numerous as the 
morning dew (v. 3). 

endless! Rather, indissoluble. It is 
only natural that a time should come, when a 


unto God. 
20 And inasmuch as not without 


62 HEBREWS. VII. [v. 17—25. 
7 
17 For he testifieth, Thou art a 'without an oath; but this with an '0r, si — 
priest for ever after the order of Mel- oath by him that said unto him, * The émgo/an_ 
chisedec. Lord sware and will not repent, Thou rye 
18 For there is verily a disannul- arta priest for ever after the order of + 
ling of the commandment going be- Melchisedec :) 
fore for the weakness and unprofit- 22 By so much was Jesus made 
ableness thereof. a surety of a better testament. 
1g For the law made nothing per- 23 And they truly were many 
Or, but’ fect, ‘but the bringing in of a better priests, because they were not suf- 
rincing hope did; by the which we draw nigh fered to continue by reason of death : 


24 But this man, because he con- 


tinueth ever, hath 'an unchangeable '0r, which 
passeth 


an oath he was made priest: priesthood. 


not from 
one to un- 


21 (For those priests were made 


25 Wherefore he is able also to 





system of positive institutions should be dis- 
solved. Not so with regard to the living, 
life-giving, energy conferred on the Eternal 
Priest; which was manifested first of all in His 
resurrection from the tomb (cp. Rev. i. 18; 
John v. 26, xvii. 2). 


17. he testifieth| Or, according to another 
reading, ‘‘it is testified of him.” 


18,19. The rendering of these verses needs 
to be entirely recast. For there taketh 
place, onthe one hand, a disannulling 
ofthe previous commandment, because 
of its weakness and unprofitableness 
{for the Law made nothing perfect), 
and, on the other, the bringing in of 
a better hope; by the which....” The office 
of the Levitical priesthood was only to pioneer 
the way for the coming of the true Priest. 
It was ‘“‘weak;” leaving men ‘ without 
strength” to contend with sin and death 
(Rom. v. 6). It was ‘‘unprofitable;” rather 
burdening, than easing, the conscience. 

better] higher and nobler (cp. i. 4, viil. 6, 
1X. 23, Xi. 16). 

draw nigh] ‘The same word is used in 
Lev. x. 3; Ezek. xl. 46, xlii. 13, xliii. 19, of 
priestly approach to God. 


20. not without...priest] Or, simply; it 
was not without an oath. 


21. For those...) Rather, For they in- 
deed were made priests without an oath; 
but He.” 

him that said| Vv. 2—4 of the Psalm are 
taken as a continuation of the address ‘Sit 
Thou on my right hand” in v. 1. The oc- 
currence of ‘The LORD” in vv. 2 and 4 
is no disproof of the correctness of this; see 
Ps. cxxxil. 13. The clause ‘‘after the order 
of Melchizedek” is wanting in the best MSS. 


22. By so much] Since the priesthood of 
esus rested on a Divine oath, and was there- 
re immutable, the covenant which His 
pecely work was to conserve must be equally 
utable. The Sinaitic Covenant was con- 


ditional and temporary; this better Covenant 
absolute and eternal. It is here implied that 
Jesus was constituted ‘‘surety” by the oath 
which gave Him the everlasting priesthood. 
This suretiship, then, must consist in His 
guaranteeing the fulfilment of God’s promises 
to men. He had this high office, in which He 
stood as Surety for God, conferred upon Him 
because He had already given Himself to be 
Surety for man, and as such had made satis- 
faction to God’s righteous law for the sin of 
man (see Note at the end of the Chapter). 
The union of these two suretiships made Him 
a perfect Mediator: one who could provide 
that a Covenant of assured blessing for man- 
kind should not be inconsistent with the holi- 
ness of the ever-blessed God. 

testament] Rather, covenant. So A.V. 
in the similar passages viii. 6 and Gal. iii. r5— 
18. Such isinvariably the meaning of the word 
in the LXX. (cp. notes on ix. 15); and no 
other meaning suits the context here (see 
below). A testament no more requires a 
surety than it does a mediator (see on ix. 15). 
A covenant between God and man required 
both; one who could give security to both 
parties that the covenant should not miscarry. 
The death of Jesus satisfied the Divine re- 
quiremeut; His presence in heaven satisfies the 
human. 


23. were...were not] Rather, have been 
...are not. One generation of priests after 
another has been carried away by death; un- 
able to save themselves and compelled at last 
to abandon those who had leaned on them for 
counsel and sympathy. 


24. this man] Rather, He (as in v. 21). 

continueth ever| Cp. John xii. 34 ‘(the) 
Christ abideth for ever” (the same words). 

an unchangeuble priesthood | one ‘‘that pass- 
eth not” from Him to devolve upon another: 
or ‘‘that passeth not away” (so the Peshito; 
using the same expression here as in Dan. vii. 
14: see Note below), His was trudy an ‘‘ever- 
lasting priesthood ;” while the Aaronic »rieste 


other. 








Or, ewes save them 
worse. 


v. 26—28.]} 


‘to the uttermost that 
come unto God by him, seeing he 
ever liveth to make intercession for 
them. 

. 26 For such an high priest became 
us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, 
separate from sinners, and made higher 
than the heavens ; 

27 Who needeth not daily, as 


hood had only the semblance of a claim to that 
title (Exod. xl. 15). 


25. Wherefore he is able also] Rather, 
Whence also He is able;—in virtue of His 
permanent Priesthood. 

to the uttermost] ‘To the uttermost extent 
of their needs; not, ‘‘beginning a good work 
in them” and then failing them before it is 
completed. 

come unto| ‘The word used in iv. 16. 

by him] Rather, “through Him.” 

liveth| v. 16; Rev. i. 18; Rom. vi. 9, To. 

to make intercession] As in Rom. viii. 34. 

This is the great work of our High-priest in 
heaven (cp. Isai. liii. 12). His intercession 
surrounds the Throne of Majesty as with a 
cloud of fragrant incense. 


26. The Apostle has shewn the transcen- 
dent excellence of Christ’s priesthood, as 
foretold in Ps. cx. He now adds, that a 
High-priest of such a kind not only realizes 
the scriptural idea, but a/so is suited to our 
needs. (The correct reading is, ‘‘also be- 
came us.”) 

such an high priest} Throughout the 
chapter, up to this point, the word ‘priest ” 
(taken from Ps. cx) has been used. The 
change, which is made here, indicates that the 
writer is passing on to speak of the Levitical 
high-priesthood. Incomparably inferior to 
the priesthood ‘of Christ, it nevertheless fore- 
shadowed it. In itself devoid of efficacy, it finds 
its existence justified, in that, as a type, it bears 
unsuspected witness to a glorious reality, in 
which the Melchizedekan and Aaronic priest- 
hoods are combined. 

holy| ‘The word used in Acts un, 27. It 
denotes one who is inwardly devoted to God; 
who is godly, and, because godly, pure. 

harmless| Or, “benign ;” without any touch 
of evil feeling. 

_ undefiled| (Indeed (so the word denotes) 
mcapapie of defilement; like that heaven (see 
1 Pet. i, 4) to which He has ascended. 

Separate| Rather, separated;—once, con- 
tinually ‘‘enduring the contradiction of sin- 
ners” (xii. 3); now, infinitely removed from 
them: though ‘‘He rules in the midst of 
them” by His sceptre (Ps. cx. 2). 

bigher...| At the right hand of God Most 
High (Ps. cx 1; cp. on iv. 14). 


HEBREWS. VII. 


those high priests, to offer up sacri- 
fice, first for his own sins, and then 
for the people’s: for this he did once, 
when he offered up himself. 

28 For the law maketh men high 
priests which have infirmity ; but the 
word of the oath, which was since 
the law, maketh the Son, who is 
* consecrated for evermore. 


27, 28. It is evident from v. 28 (‘the 
word of the oath,” ‘‘consecrated for ever- 
more”) that the writer is still contrasting the 
work of Him who is spoken of in Ps. cx with 
that of the Aaronic high-priests. Here, in 
conclusion, he gives the deepest, the most fun- 
damental, of all the points of distinction be- 
tween them. 

Aaron, on the last day of his consecration 
(Lev. ix. 1—15), before he offered the sin- 
offering for the people, had first of all to offer 
for his own sins, And on each Day of Atone- 
ment it was necessary that he should do the 
same; which shewed that his consecration was 
only of an external kind, and that, too, un- 
equal to the strain of more than one brief 
visit into the symbolic Holy of Holies, But 
not so was it with our High-priest. He abides 
always in the heavenly Holy of Holies; ever 
(wv. 25) engaged in intercession for us. Every 
day of our mortal lives is for us a Day of 
Atonement, since He in Heaven ‘‘Is the pro- 
pitiation for our sins” (x John ii. 2), He 
has no need ‘‘day by day” to renew His con- 
secration, ‘‘as those high-priests” were obliged 
to do on each Day of Atonement. The 
‘word of the oath” sealed the eternal validity 
of that one act of consecration, in which the 
‘‘undefiled” High-priest offered up once for all 
His sinless Self. 

this he did once| This, the work last-men- 
tioned, He did once for all; and that with 
no preliminary offering for sins of His own, for 
—He offered up Himself; and only a sinless life 
can be accepted as an atonement for sin. The 
obscurity which attaches to the ¢Ais in A. V. 
is materially relieved, if we follow more strict- 
ly the Greek (cp. Note below): ‘“‘Who hath 
no necessity day by day, as those high- 
priests (nave), first to offer sacrifices 
for their own sins, and then for (the 
sins) of the people; for this” —the offering 
for the people’s sins—‘‘ He did once for all, when 
(having no sins of His own) he offered up Him- 


self.” 


28. men| To be emphasized; mere men, 
in contrast with the Son. There should be a 
comma after ‘‘high priests.” 

infirmity| Moral weakness which required 
that they should seek expiation for their own 
sins (ch. v. 2, 3)- 


63 


ISH ra 


HEBREWS. VIII. 


since the law] Rather, after the Law. 
A divine oath, coming later than the Law 
(which was only conditionai in its nature), had 
power to abrogate it. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES 


22. The word éyyvos occurs nowhere else 
in the New Testament or the LXX. In the 
Apocrypha it is found in two places, 2 Macc. 
x. 28 and Sirach xxix, 15. The latter sup- 
plies a singularly apposite illustration of the 
suretiship which Jesus undertook for man: 
‘Forget not the thanks due to a surety: for 
he gave his life for thee” (umép cov). 

22. The radical idea of a diaOqxn, as ex~ 
hibited in Gen. xxi. 22—32, xxvi. 28—31, is 
that of an averment on oath by two parties 
that they will maintain a friendly relation to 
each other. If the two parties to such an 
agreement are to be God and man, between 
whom sin and its penalty, death, stand as bar- 
riers, it is evident that some Mediator must 
interpose, who can re-adjust (or rectify, ix. 10) 
the relation of the parties. To do this, He 
must be able to make satisfaction to God’s 
justice on the une hand, and on the other to 
rescue man from death. How such a Cove- 
nant could be established, was the problem 
set before God’s servants in old time for the 
exercise of their faith and hope. 


CHAPTER VIII. 

1 By the eternal priesthood of Christ the Levi- 
tical priesthood of Aaron ts abolished. 7 And 
the temporal covenant with the fathers, by 
the eternal covenant of the gospel. 


aN of the things which we 


[v. 1, 2 


the Son| See on i, 2. 

consecrated] Or, ‘‘perfected;” see ii. ro, 
v. 9;—freed from all semblance of infirmity, 
and endowed with fulness of glorious power. 


on CHAP. VII. 22, 24, 27. 
24. The Syriac is in each case jas Dv. 


The same occurs also in Ps, cxlviii. 6, “‘He 
hath given a law, and it passeth not away.” 
In both Dan. vii. 14 and Ps. exlviii. 6 the 
LXX. has ov mapedevoerat. It seems most 
probable, therefore, that amapaBaros is to be 
looked on as a Hebraism (the intrausitive 
form of the adjective, as in evmepioraros). 
St Athanasius (‘c. Arian.’ If. 9) gives ddva= 
dexros as its equivalent. 


27. ‘The correctness of this rendering will 
be evident, if we consider that 

(1) The text has 6voias, “sacrifices.” For 
the High-priest on the Day of Atonement 
offered only ove sin-offering for himself; and 
therefore the plural shews that the clause, in 
which it occurs, depends on oi dpycepeis. 

(2) The term trav idtov auapriay must 
mean, their own sins. In order to be con- 
nected with ds, it should be, umép idiwv a., 
‘sins of his own.” The article implies that 
the sins were there; and, being there, created 
a necessity for expiation. 


We have such an high priest, who is 
set on the right hand of the throne of _ 
the Majesty in the heavens ; 

2 A minister 'of the sanctuary, 'Ox 
and of the true tabernacle, which the 2 
Lord pitched, and not man. 





have spoken this is the sum: 
Cuap. VIII. The repetition, in v. 3 below, 
of the statement that was made in ch. v. 1,shews 
that the topic which was there introduced is 
now to be discussed. Ch. vii had shewn the 
infinite superiority of Christ’s priesthood and 
the covenant which it conserved to the 
Aaronic priesthood and the covenant which 
rested upon it. But now the question occurs: 
‘““For what purpose, then, were that elder 
priesthood and covenant introduced? or in 
what relation do they stand to the Christian 
dispensation?” The answer is given in the 
three next chapters.—They supplied ‘figures 
for the time then present” (ix. 9); which 
trained the faithful to think aright of sin and 
its consequences, and by their very imperfec- 
tion compelled men to look forward to a 
future system of spiritual and heavenly re- 
alities. 
1. Now of the things.. } Rather, ‘Now 
to sum up briefly the things we are s .ying.” 
The following statement refers not only (v. 1) 


to what has been said in chh. v—vii, but also 
(v. 2) to what is coming in chh, viii—x. 

We have such...| Rather, Such a High- 
priest have we:”—such as the prophetic 
word portrayed. Such a one we Christians 
have (cp. iv. 14). 

is set] Rather, sat down (i. 3, Xx. 12). 

che Majesty] Rather, Majesty. The 
“Throne of Majesty” loses nothing of its 
essential glory, though His session makes it 
relatively to us ‘‘the throne of grace” (iv. 16). 


2. A minister] To whom is entrusted the 
care of God’s heavenly Sanctuary, and the 
work of presenting to God all that the re- 
deemed people of God bring to be offered (see 
on v. 3). Though He be seated at God’s 
right hand, it is not as one who has no active 
duties. 

the sanctuary] Soin xiii. rr. In ix, 8, x. 
19 it is rendered, the holiest. Compare also 
ix. 12, 24, 25 and Exod. xxix, 30. 

the true tabernacle] This seems to correspond 


thimgz, 














v. 3, 4-] 


3, For every high pziest is ordained 
to offer gifts and sacrifices: where- 
fore it is of necessity that this man 
have somewhat also to offer. 


to the ‘‘ Holy Place” (or, frst Tabernacle). 
Similarly in ix. 11, 12, Christ enters into ‘‘the 
Sanctuary” by passing ‘“‘through a greater 
and more perfect Tabernacle not made with 
hands.” In both places, it would appear (cp. 
ix. 24), the ‘‘Tabernacle” corresponds to the 
Heaven in which the ‘‘myriads of angels” (xii. 
22) worship, and the ‘‘Sanctuary” to the un- 
created heaven of the *‘unapproachable light” 
in which God dwells (1 Tim. vi. 16). 

pitched] ‘The word is used in reference to 
the material heavens (‘‘stretched out,” as a 
tent) in Isai. xlil. 5. 

8. For] This assigns a reason for the use 
of the term ‘“‘minister” inv.2. Heis ‘‘seated,” 
yet perpetually engaged in holy work. ‘This 
Melchizedekan Priest a/so realizes whatever 
was presignified by the Aaronic high-priest- 
hood: and every high-priest (ch. v. 1) is ‘‘ap- 
pointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices,” on 
the behalf of the people and as their representa- 
tive. But precisely this is indicated by the term 
“‘ministry” (cp. v. 6). In ch. v. 1, in speaking 
specially of 4uman high-priests, he had said, 
“to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins.” Now 
that he is about to speak of the office of the 
heavenly High-priest (who had already esta- 
blished the New Covenant, under which ‘‘is 
no more offering for sin,” x. 18), he omits the 
words ‘‘for sins.” In v. 4 all is summed up 
in the word “‘gifts;” for such are all the ‘‘sacri- 
fices,” which the people of the New Covenant 
present through their heavenly High-priest; 
‘«sifts” offered by a grateful people. (Cp. 
‘Thy people are free-will offerings,” Ps. cx. 3.) 

wherefore... | Rather, whence it is neces- 
sary that this one also should have 
somewhat to offer;” as, in fact, the word 
“minister” in v. 2 implied that He had. 

to offer| Which He is zow to offer, as 
“Minister” of the heavenly Sanctuary. Evi- 
dently this cannot refer to His ‘offering ot 
Himself,” which was made once for all on 
earth (vii. 27, ix. 26, 28, x. Io, 12, 14); and 
in virtue of which He entered in once for all 
mto the heavenly Sanctuary (ix. 12): the 
covenant promise of ‘‘remission of sins” 
having been once and for ever definitely esta- 
blished (x. 16—18, xiii. 20). It must refer to 
His offering the ‘‘gifts and sacrifices” of His 
people; their prayers (iv. 16), their ‘‘sacrifices 
of praise” (xiii. 15), their works of love (xiii. 
16; cp. Eph. v. 2); their oblation of them- 
Selves, their souls and bodies (Rom. vi. 13, 
xil.1). They ‘‘who come unto God through 
Him,” bringing such gifts, find Him at all 
times ready, as Minister of the Sanctuary, to 
‘¢present” their gifts, hallowed by His own 


New Test.—Vou. IV. 


BED ReB Win ava 11. 


4 For if he were on earth, he 
should not be a priest, seeing that 


i} i Z ift . ' Or, 
there are priests that offer gifts ac they ave 
priests. 


cording to the law: 





all-efticacious offering (compare on ch. v. 7) of 
“intercession” (vii. 25). See Additional Note. 


4. For if be] Rather, For if indeed 
He” (or, according to another reading, ‘‘If, 
then, He”). The three verses, 4—6, are to 
be taken together, a colon being placed at the 
end of v. 5; and the “‘but” of v. 6 forming 
the antithesis to the ‘‘if indeed” of vw. 4. It 
“necessarily follows,” that our High-priest in 
that ‘‘true Tabernacle” has somewhat to offer ; 
since otherwise that which was a leading 
feature of the Levitical system would have 
no corresponding heavenly reality. To enable 
the people to bring their offerings to God con- 
tinually with acceptance, was the reason why 
the Aaronic priesthood and the ceremonial of 
the Day of Atonement were instituted. Now, 
therefore, that Jesus, having ‘offered Him- 
self” on earth (as on the altar in the outer 
court of the Temple), has, by virtue of His 
blood, ‘‘ purged” the heavenly things and places 
(ix. 23) and sate down on the throne of 
Glory in the Holy of Holies, has He no minis- 
terial work to perfagm? Will any imagine 
that His people’s gifts are now to be offered 
through the high-priest of the earthly Taber- 
nacle? in which case the fact that ‘every 
(earthly) high-priest is appointed to offer 
gifts” instead of making the inference drawn 
in v. 3 a ‘‘necessary” one, would exclude its 
possibility. Not so. There is no such inter- 
Jerence between His ministry and theirs; ‘“‘ FoR” 
they lie in infinitely distant planes. If indeed 
Jesus were yet on earth, no true atonement 
having as yet opened a way into the heavenly 
Sanctuary, He would not even be a priest 
at all: since the divinely appointed Levitical 
system would in that case continue in full 
force; discharging its appointed duty of testi- 
fying to the existence of that real Tabernacle 
of God, in which our High-priest is actuaily 
ministering. But, in fact, His true priesthood 
having now commenced, the typical system is 
ready to disappear (wv. 13). 

Obs. Here, as everywhere, the forbearance 
of the writer is very observable. For, if it 
might be said, that Christ ‘‘would not even” 
have been ‘‘a priest” here in the earthly taber- 
nacle, with yet greater necessity did it follow, 
that in respect of ‘‘the true Tabernacle” of 
God, the sons of Aaron were noi even priests. 
Instead, however, of drawing this inference, he 
proceeds to shew what end their divinely ap- 
pointed ministry did actually subserve. 

there are priests| Rather, ‘‘there are already 
the priests;”—the appointed priests. Many 
MSS. omit ‘‘ priests,” making the clause run: 
“since there are already those who offer.” 


E 


HEBREWS. VIII. 


Who serve unto the example 
and shadow of heavenly things, as 
Moses was admonished of God when 
he was about to make the tabernacle: 
for, See, saith he, that thou make all 
things according to the pattern shewed 
to thee in the mount. 

6 But now hath he obtained a 
more excellent ministry, by how 
much also he is the mediator of a 


[v. 5—8. 


better ‘covenant, which was esta- 'Or,#eA 


blished upon better promises. 

For if that first covenant had 
been faultless, then should no place 
have been sought for the second, 

8 For finding fault with them, he 
saith, Behold, the days come, saith 
the Lord, when I will make a new 
covenant with the house of Israel and 
with the house of Judah: 





5. Who] Or, ‘‘Men that.” While wv. 4 
admitted the exclusive prerogative of the Levi- 
tical priests to minister in the earthly Taber- 
nacle, this verse shews what the nature of their 
ministry was. 

serve unto...| Rather, serve that which 
is a delineation (ix. 23). Compare xiii. 
to, “who serve the tabernacle.” ‘The taber- 
nacle was only a diminutive outline sketch, 
which afforded a few hints regarding ‘the 
heavenly things (or, places, ix. 23).” 

and shadow] Such an outline, dim and 
obscure, as is given by the shadow of an object. 

admonished of God| As in Acts vil. 44; 
where the same passage is referred to. 

pattern] Or, ‘‘model:” (cp. on Exod. xxv. 
g, Acts vii. 44). The word supplies no 
ground for any inference respecting the re/a- 
tive dimensions of this pattern and the taber- 
nacle which Moses was to erect; nor yet as 
to the nature of the ‘‘pattern,’—whether it 
were presented to the sight of Moses, or only 
to his mental eye. It is implied, however, 
that only a representation of heavenly things 
was furnished by it. 


6. But now|]—‘“now,” as the case actually 
stands: in contrast with the supposition of v. 
4.. Cp. the “But now” of ix. 26, xi. 16. 

by bow much also| This is an additional 
way of exhibiting the transcendent superiority 
of Christ’s ‘‘ministry.”” The measure of ex- 
cellence supplied in vv. 4, 5—the difference 
between an earthly. ‘‘shadow” and the heavenly 
reality—appealed more vividly to the reason 
and imagination. The one which is now to 
be given—thesuperiority of the Covenant which 
the heavenly High-priest administers over 
that which was maintained by the Aaronic 
priesthood—is more practically impressive. 

The Covenant, and the Priesthood by which 
it is established and sustained, are correlatives. 
In vii. 22 the superiority of the Christian 
Covenant was measured by that of the Priest- 
hood, as determined by Ps. cx. 4. Here the 
superiority of Christ’s Ministry is measured 
by that of the Covenant, as determined by Jer. 
XXxxi. 3I—34. 

the mediator] who stands between the par- 
ties to the Covenant as one who is alike in- 


terested in both, and whogives assuranceto both 
that the Covenant shall be fulfilled. Througk 
His one offering of Himself on earth, human 
nature was restored to the favour of God. 
Through His perpetual intercession in heaven, 
sanctifying grace is poured down upon all 
“who come unto God by Him.” 

established| Or, enacted:—-so that it was 
the /aw, by which God’s dealings with Hig 
people were defined; the constitution, under 
which His people were to live (cp. vii. rr). 

upon...] on the basis of them. The promises 
which were directly attached to the Sinaitic 
Covenant had reference to Israel’s occupation 
of the land of Canaan, and were conditional 
on their observance of the Law. Those of the 
New Covenant provided for man’s restoration 
to full communion with God, and (which is 
especially to be noted) guaranteed that power 
to observe the Law should be bestowed on the 
faithful. 


7. faultless} Or, without room for blame. 
In itself, indeed, it was so; ‘‘holy and just 
and good” (Rom. vii. 12), ‘‘tending unto life” 
@ ro). But in respect of sinful man, it was 

efective, and ‘‘found to tend unto death” (ié.). 
If, then, it was to be blamed, the ground of 


blame was not with it, but with them (see 


v. 8). 

es by that ‘‘everlasting love” of God, 
from which the New Covenant proceeded 
(Jer. xxxi. 3). 

the second| Rather, a second, 


8. For] This refers to the last clause of 
v. 7, of which the full force is; ‘*Then 
would not place be sought, as it now is, for a 
second.” 

with them] the people. ‘‘Not with s, but 
with them,” says St Chrysostom. The cen- 
sure is contained in the clause, ‘‘ tecause THEY 
continued not in My Covenant” (~. 9). 

make...with] Lit. ‘accomplish, ..towards.” 
The verb is not the one which is used here and 
in v. ro by the LXX. (though it is used by 
them in Jer. xxxiv. 8, 15). The variation, 
however, is intentional, since the Septuagintal 
word is retained in x. 16, 17. 

new covenant] Luke xxii. 20, 1 Cor. xh 
25. 





¥. 9—13.] 


g Not according to the covenant 
that I made with their fathers in the 
day when I took them by the hand 
to lead them out of the land of Egypt; 
because they continued not in my 
covenant, and I regarded them not, 
saith the Lord. 

10 For this is the covenant that I 
will make with the house of Israel 
after those days, saith the Lord; I 
- will ¢t put my laws into their mind, 

and write them ‘in their hearts : and 
‘I will be to them a God, and they 
shall be to me a people: 


9. with] So the Hebrew of Jer. xxxi. 
32. The Greek here (as in LXX.) is “for,” 
or “‘unto” (and so also in v. ro). 

they...and I} Both the pronouns are to be 
emphasized. 

continued not] A very gentle expression 
indeed, For 900 years they had been constantly 
guilty of shameful violations of the Cove- 
nant. 

regarded them not} Or, ‘“‘ withdrew my 
regard from them.” Instead of shewing the 
tender care for them which He had done, He 
treated them with cold, unconcerned, severity ; 
as an injured husband might see fit to deal 
with an unfaithful wife. They had broken 
their vows; but He still retained His rights 
over them, and (in His marvellous love) He 
would exercise those rights with sternness (see 
Additional Note). 


10. will make] Lit. “ will covenant.” 

after those "ane After the commencement 
of the ‘‘ days” spoken of in x. 8. 

I will put] Lit. “putting” (and so the 
Alexandrine LXX.). We may render, Put- 
ting my laws into their mind, on their 
heart also will I write them. Cp. 2 Cor. 
ll. 3. 
will be to them a God| ‘‘ Giving them” 
(as Dr Brown observes) “every thing which 
beings like men can receive from such a Being 
as Gop.” 


11. xeighbour] Or (correct reading), ‘‘fel- 
low-citizen.” Under the new Covenant all 
should be ‘“‘ taught of God” (Isai, liv. 13). 


8. Cp. Athanasius, ‘c. Arian.’ IL, 7: 
s¢ When was He made High-priest of our 
profession, but when, having offered Himself 
for us, He raised His body from the dead? 
And zow He Himself drings near those who 
approach by faith in Him, and offers (arpoopé- 
oe) them to the Father, ransoming all and 





HEBREWS. VIII. 


11 And they shall 10t teach every 
man his neighbour, and every man 
his brother, saying, Know the Lord: 
for all shall know me, from the least 
to the greatest. 

12 For I will be merciful to their 
unrighteousness, and their sins and 
their iniquities will I remember no 
more. 

13 In that he saith, A new 
covenant, he hath made the first 
old. Now that which decayeth 
and waxeth old zs ready to vanish 
away. 





12. For] The promises contained in vv. 
to, 11 form the substance of the Covenant. 
That which is here added supplies the ground 
on which such a Covenant could be esta- 
blished. Before they can ‘‘ know God,” they 
must first be graciously “known of Him” 
(cp. Exod. xxxill. 1217); so that all which 
separates between God and man may be re= 
moved. Comp. 1 John ii. 12, 13, 2 Cor. iv. 6. 

merciful| Or, “propitious;” ready to be- 
stow forgiveness. 

unrighteousness| Lit. ‘‘ unrighteousnesses ;” 
unrighteous acts. 

their sins and their iniquities| So again in 
x. 17. The words “and their iniquities” 
(which are not found in the LXX. or in the 
Hebrew) may embody a reference to Exod. 
XXXIV. 9. 

The fact that this remission of sin is spe- 
cified as characteristic of the New Covenant 
implied that no such provision had been made 
by the Old (cp. Acts xiii. 38, 39). 


18. made...old] Or, ‘‘declared...old.” 
Though weare not (as the next clause shews) 
to introduce here the technical sense of ‘‘antie 
quate,” yet that meaning is plainly pointed to. 

decayeth...| Rather, ‘*becometh old (cp. 
i. 11, Isai. li. 6) and decayeth with age.” 

ready to vanish away| Or, ‘nigh unto 
perishing.” The word which corresponds to 
‘‘ perishing”’ is, according to its Septuagintal 
use, a very strong one; being frequently used 
for ‘‘ruin,” ‘desolation,’ ‘destruction ” 
(see Note below). 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Cuap. vim. 3, 9, 13. 


making reconciliation (as in Heb. ii. 17) to 
God-ward on behalf of all.” 


9. The view, which is taken above, shews 
how we may reconcile the two renderings of 
bya which are given by the LXX. in Jer. 
XXXi. 32, ili, 14 (see the notes on those pase 

E2 


67 


Or, cere- 
monies. 


HEBREWS. IX. 


sages); namely, auedéw, ‘‘to disregard (or, 
slight),” and. xaraxupietw, “to act as lord 
over.” When the injured husband withdraws 
the manifestation of his kindness and uses his 
rightful power in the way of discipline, he 
becomes for the time simply ‘ lord.” See 
Hos. ii. 8—16; where the, Baali of v. 16 
corresponds in idea to the 21 of Jeremiah. 
Compare also Ezek. xvi. 42, 43, 59, 60—63. 


13. The expression éyyis apavirpod re- 
calls the xatdpas éeyyus Of vi. 8. It is observ- 
able that the two nouns occur together in 
2 K. xxii. 19, ‘“* when thou heardest what I 
spake against this place (Jerusalem) and 


CHAPTER IX. 


1 The description of the rites and bloody sacri- 
Jices of the law, 11 far inferior to the dignity 
and perfection of the blood and sacrifice of 
Christ. 


HEN verily the first covenant 
had also ‘ordinances of divine 
service, and a worldly sanctuary. 


[v. 1—4. 


against the inhabitants thereof, that they 
should become a desolation and a curse (eis 
acbavic pov kal eis kaTapav).” The word agav- 
topos is also used in Jer. xxv. 11, ‘*this whole 
land shall be a@ desolation;” and Dan. ix. 26 
(Theod.), ‘‘ desolations are determined.” 

When the prophecy in Jer. xxxi was de- 
livered, the seventy years’ captivity, spoken of 
in ch. xxv, had actually begun (see xxix. 10). 
Although, therefore, the Temple was still 
standing, it was ‘ nigh unto disappearing.” 

When the writer of this Epistle quoted Jer. 
xxxi, the second Temple was, in like manner, 
still standing, but drawing near to the crisis 
foretold in Dan. ix. 


2 For there was a tabernacle made; 
the first, wherein was the candlestick, 
and the table, and the shewbread ; 
which is called ' the sanctuary. 

3 And after the second veil, the 
tabernacle which is called the Holiest 
of all; 

4, Which had the golden censer, 





Cuap. 1X. In the preceding chapter the 
apostle had spoken of Christ as now seated 
in the heavenly Sanctuary, ministering on His 
people’s behalf under a new Covenant; which 
had for its basis the declaration, ‘‘ Their sins 
and their iniquities will I remember no more.” 
Evidently, if this were the case, the Jewish 
priesthood, sanctuary, sacrifices, and Days of 
Atonement (however precious in time past) 
were no longer of any worth. So serious a 
charge, alleged against a divinely appointed 
system, required to be more fully substan- 
tiated. ‘This is done in the following discus- 
sion, ix. I—x, 18; at the close of which there 
is a recurrence to the prophecy of Jeremiah. 
In this section it is shewn, not only that the 
Tabernacle arrangements, while typical of 
heavenly things, testified to their own im- 
perfection, but also that their inherent ‘“ un- 
profitableness” had been distinctly stated in 
the 4oth Psalm. 


1. Then verily...) Rather (correct read- 
ing), Howbeit, that first also:—the first 
Covenant; which had been spoken of imme- 
diately before, in viii. 13. Although it was 
soon to be swept away, yet it had been pro- 
vided by Divine wisdom to answer certain 
valuable ends, 

ordinances| To which every worshipper was 
bound to conform. 

a worldly sanctuary] Rather, its sanc- 
tuary pertaining to this world; be- 
longing wholly to this visible, temporary, 
order of things (cp. Tit. ii. r2 ‘‘ worldly”). 

The two points here introduced are treated 


of in the inverse order; the sanctuary in vv. 
2—5, the service in vv. 6—I0. 


2. tabernacle] The writer nowhere men- 
tions the Temple. He is speaking of the 
Levitical system, and will take it at its best;— 
as it was in the time of Moses (see on wv. 4). 
The existing Temple had neither the glory of 
the Shekinah, nor so much as an ark, in it. 

made] Or, as in iil. 4, “ built.” The taber- 
nacle is first mentioned as a whole; and then 
its two portions are referred to separately. 

the shewbread| Lit. ‘‘ the laying out (or, 
setting forth) of loaves;” in two rows, Lev. 
XXlv. 6. 

sanctuary} Or, ‘* Holy Place.” 


3. the\second veil] The first veil being 
that which hung at the entrance of the Holy 
Place (Exod. xxvi. 36). 


4. golden censer| Rather, golden altar of 
incense. So the Itala (‘‘altare”), and so 
Calvin, Estius, Owen, Liinemann, Bleek, and 
Delitzsch. The A. ¥. followed the Vul- 
gate (‘‘thuribulum”), as also did Aquinas, 
Luther, Bengel, &c.; influenced, no doubt, by 
the fact that the altar of incense stood in 
“the Holy Place.” This fact, indeed, was, 
as Josephus says (‘ J. W.’ v. 5), ‘notorious 
to all men;” nor does our text assert the 
contrary. It only makes the altar delong to 
the Most Holy Place; which is expressly 
affirmed in x K. vi. 22 (not correctly rendered 
in A. V.), “the altar teat belongeth to the 
oracle.” In Exod. xl. 5, also, this altar is 
made to stand in a direct relation to the ark 


1 Or body. 


v. 5—8.] 


and the ark of the covenant overlaid 
round about with gold, wherein was 
the golden pot that had manna, and 
Aaron’s rod that budded, and the 
tables of the covenant ; 

5 And over it the cherubims of 
glory shadowing the mercyseat; of 
which we cannot now speak particu- 
larly. 

6 Now when these things were 
thus ordained, the priests went al- 


- 


(‘before the Ark of Testimony’’); cp. Rev. 
vill. 3. On the Day of Atonement the altar 
of incense was connected with the mercy-seat 
in a very marked way, (1) by the fact that the 
<*blood of the sin-offering of atonement’’ 
was sprinkled on both of them (Lev. xvi. 
I5—19; cp. Exod. xxx. 10); (2) by the fact 
that ‘‘the censer” from off it (so the words 
imply) was taken from the Holiest (Lev. 
Xvi. 12). 


It seems incredible then that this altar 
should not be mentioned in vv. 2—4; while 
the difficulty attaching to its being spoken of 
as belonging to the Most Holy Place is scarcely 
appreciable. Though locally situate in the 
Holy Place, it did 7% zts nature and idea ap- 
pertain to the Most Holy; and on the Day of 
Atonement was (as we have seen) distinctly 
associated with the Ark of the Covenant. 
(See Additional Note. ) 


round about] ‘‘in every part;” inside as 
well as outside (Exod. xxv. II). 


golden pot} So the LXX. in Exod. xvi. 33. 
That this and Aaron’s rod were placed inside 
the ark, might be inferred from Exod. xvi. 34 
and Num, xvii. 10, in which it is commanded 
that they should be put ‘‘before the Testi- 
mony;”’ for this ‘‘ Testimony ”’ (the Law on the 
Two Tables) was ‘‘ put into the ark’’ (Exod. 
xxv. 16). The circumstance that there was 
nothing in the ark, when it was placed in Sol- 
omon’s Temple (1 K. viii. 9), except the Two 
Tables, is mentioned as if it were something 
remarkable.—Was it not also significant ? That 
outwardly gorgeous temple was without the 
two great memorial symbols of Divine energy 
which had existed in the lowly tabernacle. 


5. of glory| According to Jewish tradition 
there was a visible glory—the Shekinah—rest- 
ing upon the Cherubim. According to Jerome, 
God’s ‘“‘dwelling upon the cherubim” was 
simply a fact revealed to, and to be apprehend- 
ed by, faith. It would seem, however, from 
Lev. xvi. 2, that there was some visible appear- 
ance on the Day of Atonement. 


shadowing] Rather, overshadowing. 
Their uplifted wings and bowed heads indi- 
cated the mysterious sanctity of the ‘‘ Mercy- 
Seat;’’ which was the very heart of the Holy 


HEBREWS. 


IX. 


ways into the first tabernacle, accom- 
plishing the service ef God. 

7 But into the second went the 
high priest alone ‘once every year, 
not without blood, which he offered 
for himself, and for the errors of the 
people: 

8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, 
that the way into the holiest of all 
was not yet made manifest, while as 
the first tabernacle was yet standing: 


of Holies, the meeting-point of God and man 
(Exod. xxv. 22). The word rendered ‘‘ mercy- 
seat” is literally ‘‘ propitiatory ’? (cp. Rom. iii. 
25, where the same word is used). 

Obs. The tables of the Law, and the Mercy- 
seat surmounting them, correspond to the 
promises of the New Covenant mentioned in 
ch. viii. 10, 12. The first, ‘* Putting my laws 
into their mind, on their heart also will I 
write them” (on the ‘fleshy tablets of their 
heart,’’ 2 Cor. iii. 3), is surmounted by the 
second, ‘‘I will be merczfu/ to their unright- 
eousnesses. 


particularly| That is, severally, or, in detail. 


6. went...into] Literally it is, ‘‘ Now, 
these things having been thus arranged, the 
priests go 27,’ and similarly in v. 7, ‘‘offereth;” 
in v. 8, “hath not been made...is standing;’” 
in v. 9, ‘are offered.” These shew that the 
writer transfers himself mentally to the Taber- 
nacle period. Itis more convenient, however, 
to retain the past tense in English. 

the service of God] Rather, the services; 
the various acts of their ministry, such as 
lighting the lamps and burning the incense. 


7. alone] without attendants. Not evena 
priest was allowed to enter the Holy Place 
while the High-priest was making atonement 
(Lev. xvi. 17.) 

once| Upon one day only. On that day 
he made two entrances: frst, with the incense 
and the blood of the bullock for himself, and 
then, with the blood of the goat, for the 
ignorances (cp. v. 2) of the people. 

offered| Sprinkling it upon, and before, the 
mercy-seat (Lev. xvi. 14, 15). 


8. Zhe Holy Ghost] who spake by Moses. 
signifying| Clearly indicating (xii. 27). 
made manifest] The Old Testament saints 


had access by faith to the favour and grace of 
God, and the tabernacle services assisted them 
in drawing near to Him. But the veil, which 
was drawn over the mystery of Redemption, 
was not removed until the true High-priest 
had come and effected a real atonement. 

was yet standing] Lit. ‘“‘as yet had stand- 
ing;” or, retained its divinely appointed status. 
The services of the Aaronic priesthood were 


HEBREWS. IX. 


g Which was a figure for the 
time then present, in which were 
offered both gifts and sacrifices, that 
could not make him that did the 
service perfect, as pertaining to the 
conscience ; 


LV. Q— 41. 


10 Which stood only in meats and 
drinks, and divers washings, and car~ 


nal ‘ordinances, imposed on them un- 50, rim 


til the time of reformation. 
11 But Christ being come an high 
priest of good things to come, by a 





performed in ‘the first tabernacle,” the Holy 
Place. These depended for their validity on 
the observances of the Day of Atonement; 
but those observances intimated most clearly 
that the way into the Holiest was not yet 
‘¢made manifest.” So far was the Aaronic 
priesthood from affording to Israel direct 
access to the ‘“‘ throne of grace” in Heaven, 
that even the high-priest himself—the ‘‘ called 
of God” (ch. v. 4)—was not allowed to enter 
the symbolic ‘‘ Holy of Holies” except for two 
short intervals on one day in each year; when 
he entered (Jewish tradition says) with fear 
and trembling, bearing with him sacrificial 
blood, which had no power to appease the 
conscience. That ‘first tabernacle,” then, testi- 
fied that admission to God’s presence was not 
yet granted, At the same time, since God 
Himself had ordained this ceremonial system, 
it supplied ground for hoping that a complete 
reconciliation between God and man would 
in due time take place. 


9. Which] Or, “‘ Which indeed.” This 
assigns a reason why nothing better could be 
effected during ‘‘ the first tabernacle.” It was 
but an acted parable; useful as answering 
certain disciplinary and prophetic purposes, 

_ but incapable of cleansing the conscience. 

a figure] Rather, a parable (cp. xi. 19); 
a system of analogical teaching. 

the time then present| The ‘ then” is justi- 
fied by our having used the past tense of the 
verbs (see on v. 6). Lit. ‘‘ which indeed is a 
parable for the time present.” The meaning 
of this ‘ present time’ is ascertained by the con- 
trasted ‘ time of reformation’ in v.10; according 
to which it must denote the Levitical period 
(see Additional Note). 

in which] Or, ‘‘throughout which,” So 
the Received Text, the Itala, and the Peshito. 
Others (adopting a well-supported, but per- 
haps less probable, reading); ‘‘ in accordance 
with which (parable) ;” implying that cere- 
monial sacrifices were in keeping with a sym- 
bolic tabernacle. 

him that,..| Whether the ministering priest 
(cp. viii. 5), or the worshipper whose offering 
he presented (cp. v. 14). 

the conscience] Not even the rites of the 
Day of Atonement, much less the ordinary 
services, could heal the wounded conscience, 
or give an assurance of perfect reconciliation 
with God. They effected what was necessary 
for the maintenance of an Israelite’s corporate 

rivileges ; and, taken in combination with 


God’s other declarations concerning Himself, 
they supplied him with a good hope of forgive- 
ness, but no more. Cp. on x. 3. 

10. Which stood only...| Rather (correct 
reading), “connected only with meats.and 
drinks, and divers washings,—carnal ordinances 
imposed until, &c.:”—the term ‘‘ carnal ordi- 
nances” being in apposition with the “ gifts 
and sacrifices” of v. 9. ‘The ceremonial law 
kept men’s thoughts revolving upon material 
things, as (1) the sacrificial ‘meats and 
drinks,” of which the priests and people par- 
took ; and (2) the ‘‘ divers washings,” enjoined 
on the priests before they offered sacrifice 
(Exod. xxx, 19—21), or required in case of 
defilement contracted by persons or things 
(Lev. xi. 25, 32)- 

imposed| Lying on them like a heavy yoke 
(cp. Acts xv. To). 

reformation| Strictly, “ rectification ;” the 
setting things right which have gone wrong. 
Here the thing to be ‘rectified’ was the 
relation in which fallen man stands to Ged. 


11,12. being come] Having at last arrived, 
after He had been so long ex (comp. 
Isai. Ivi. 1, lxii. rr). The name ‘‘Christ™ 
points to His being the reality, of which the 
“anointed” priest (Lev. xvi. 32) was the 
typical prophecy (v. 14). 

of good things...] Or, ‘* of the good things 
that were to come” (comp. x. 1). From the 
beginning these ‘‘ good things” had been dee 
signed for man. Prophets had announced their 
approach (cp. Isai. lii. 7, ‘‘ bringeth glad tidings 
of good things,” LXX.). Christ came to pro- 
cure and dispense them. ‘They were the 
things which He administered as High-priest ;— 
forgiveness, sanctification, and eternal life. 

by a greater...| This and the first part of 
v. 12 are to be read together, as dependent 
on the clause “entered in...” “Christ..., 
through a greater and more perfect Taber- 
nacle, and (not by means of the blood of 
goats and calves, but) by means of His own 
blood, entered in...having obtained...” He 
““ entered in once into the Holy Place through 
a greater Tabernacle, having obtained eternal 
redemption dy means of His own blood.” ‘The 
‘« Tabernacle not made with hands” (cp. Acts 
vii. 48) appears to be best referred (with 
Liinemann and Delitzsch) to the heavens, 
through which ‘‘the Great High Priest passed ” 
(iv. 143 cp. Vili. 2, and v. 24 below). A 
large number of commentators, however, both 
ancient and modern, understand it af our 


¥ 12—15.] 


gieater and more perfect tabernacle, 
not made with hands, that is to say, 
not of this building ; 

12 Neither by the blood of goats 
and calves, but by his own blood he 
entered in once into the holy place, 
having obtained eternal redemption 
for us. 

13 For if the blood of bulls and of 
goats, and the ashes of an heifer 


HEBREWS, IX. 


sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to 
the purifying of the flesh : 

14 How much more shall the blood 
of Christ, who through the eternal 
Spirit offered himself without " spot 10m, 
to God, purge your conscience from 
dead works to serve the living 
God? 

15 And for this cause he is the 
mediator of the new testament, that 





Lord’s human nature, comparing x. 20 (so 
Chrys., Aug., Theodoret; Calvin, Estius, 
Owen, Bengel, and others). 

of this building| Rather, belonging to 
this creation;—to this creation, which is 
all of it ‘‘ made subject to vanity” (Rom. viii. 
Io—22). 

22. goats ana calves] sacrificed on the 
Dey of Atonement (v. 13; Lev. xvi. 14, 15). 

once] once for all (vv, 26, 28) 

obtained| by His obedience unto death (wv. 
15; Matt. xx. 28; Eph. i. 7). 

eternal redemption| A recovery of man’s 
forfeited inheritance (v. 15; cp. Eph. i. 14); 
and such a recovery of it as would secure it 
for ever. 

Obs. ‘The word for ‘‘redemption” (not 
quite the same as in v. 15) is the one used in 
Lev. xxv. 23—29, of the purchasing back land 
or house which had been parted with under 
the pressure of poverty. Man, who, as a 
child of God, had been heir of “‘a house 
eternal in the heavens” (2 Cor. v. 1), had 

arted with his privilege. ‘The title, forfeited 
ie sin, was won back by Christ’s offering of 
Himself;—a sacrifice of infinite worth (v. 14). 
Cp. Hos, xiii. 14; Rom. viii. 19, 23. 


13—28. ‘The remaindei of the chapter is 
.an expansion of the statement which has been 
made in vv. 11, 12 :—the fact that our re- 
demption was effected by the blood of Christ 
being illustrated in vv. 13—22; while vv. 
23—28 dwell on the eternal efficacy of His 
one sacrifice. 


13. ashes| Used in the “water of purifi- 
cation” (Num. xix. 17—19), which is called 
by the LXX. ‘‘ water of sprinkling” (in vv. 
9, 13, 20, 21). 

the unclean| Or, ‘‘them that have been 
defiled.” 

to the purifying| Lit. “‘ unto the purity.” 

of the fiesh| So that a man who had 
“touched - dead body” (Num. xix. 11—16) 
was no longer debarred from entering the 
congregation. The disqualification created by 
the Law might be removed by a legal rite; 
yet such rite had no intrinsic value. The 
Teal purpose of the enactment was to drive 
men to think of the need there was of being 
Cleansed from the defilement of sin (of which 


death was the fruit), and to awaken in them a 
hope of God’s willingness so to purify them. 


14. of Christ] Lit. ‘‘of the Christ;” of 
Him who was anointed to His priestly office 
by the Holy Spirit (Acts x. 38: cp. Luke 
v. 18). 

through the eternal Spirit] The anointing 
of that Spirit (whose energy is the “Fire of 
love’) was as a flame, amidst which He, in 
the freedom of filial obedience (ch. v. 8, 9), 
‘‘offered Himself up to God.” By that act 
of holy love He was evidenced to be perfect 
and without spot (cp. Num. xix. 2). For 
further remarks see Note below. 

your conscience| Many authorities have 
“our.” Tischendorf and ‘Tregelles retain 
‘¢ your.” 

dead works| Works tainted with the cor- 
ruption which entered man’s soul when he 
lost his love of ‘‘the living God.” The fact 
of such corruption is testified by the con- 
science, whose declarations none can set aside. 
‘‘No man can restore his own soul to life” 
(Ps. xxii. 29). Comp. ch. vi. 1.—There may 
be an allusion to the ceremonial pollution 
noticed on v. 13. 

to serve] Or, ‘‘to worship” (compare wv. 
9, X- 2, Xil. 28). The nature of this “ rational 
service” is explained in Rom. xii. 1. They 
only can offer it duly who have been ‘‘sancti- 
fied” (cp. Lev. x. 2) through Christ. 

the living God] For communion with whom 
the Old Testament saints thirsted so intensely 
(Ps. xlii. 2); longing for the time when the 
hidden mystery, which separated them from 
the mercy-seat, would be laid open, and 
full access be granted them to Him “with 
whom is the fountain of Life” (Ps. xxxvi. 9). 


15. for this cause] Rather, by reason 
of this ;—because of the purifying efficacy of 
His self-oblation. He was thus qualified to 
act as Mediator of “‘ the New Covenant” (viii. 
8); to secure its perpetual validity. For His 
sake God can now “be merciful” (viii. 12) 
to the sins of His people. Through Him the 
Holy Spirit is sent down to ‘‘ write” God’s 
laws ‘‘ on their hearts ” (viii. 10). 

new testament] Rather, new covenant, 
as in viii. 8, xii, 24. It is evident from x. 
15—17 that the passage, which has been quoted 


HEBREWS. IX. 


by means of death, for the redemp- 
tion of the transgressions that were 
under the first testament, they which 
are ~alled might receive the promise 
of eternal inheritance. 


from Jeremiah, dominates the whole discussion 
in chh. viii—x. The use of the term ‘‘ Me- 
diator” of itself shews that we have here to 
do with the Hebrew idea of a “ covenant,” 
not with the Roman idea of a ‘“ testament.” 
A mediator is the proper guardian of a cove- 
nant (see Gal. ili. r5—20), but has no place 
in regard to a testament. Neither again does 
the death of a testator possess any of the 
sacrificial character which is referred to in vv, 
I5—z2z (see further in Note below). 

that by means of...] Rather; that, a death 
having taken place for... The indefinite- 
Ness of the expression is suited to the mys- 
terious nature of the act which is referred to. 
Christ ‘‘ tasted death on behalf of every man” 
(ii. 9). He ‘died for all;” and so in His 
death ‘‘all (in effect) died” (2 Cor. v. 14, 15). 
By that ‘‘death” the accuser’s power was 
abolished (ii. 15). The penalty due from 
man for his ‘‘ transgressions” of God’s cove- 
nant (Hos. vi. 7) was now paid: and, as 
regarded Israel in particular, there was ‘‘a 
redemption of the transgressions that were 
under the first Covenant;” that is, a ran- 
som, which more than compensated for those 
transgressions, and so procured their remis- 
sion. Comp. Eph. i. 7, Col. i. 14; in both 
of which ‘‘redemption” is made co-ordinate 
with ‘‘the remission of sins” (as in v. 22 


' below); the ground of the redemption in both 


passages being ‘‘the blood of Christ” (comp. 
Matt. xx. 28). 

under the first|—for which that first Cove- 
nant supplied no real expiation. ‘Though 
‘passed over through the forbearance of God,” 
they were not expiated until the second Co- 
venant was established (Rom. ili. 25, 26). 

are called| Or, ‘‘have been called;”.—made 
“‘partakers of the heavenly calling” (iii. 1). 
Cp. 1 Thess. ii. 12. 

might receive...| Rather, ‘‘may receive 
the promise of the eternal inheritance.” To 
“‘receive the promise,” here means, to have it 
fulfilled to them. 

eternal inheritance] ‘The ‘‘ inheritance” (1 
K. viii. 36) assigned to [srael under the pro- 
visions of the first Covenant was held by them 
“but a little while” (Isai. lxiii. 17, 18). The 
inheritance promised in the New Covenant is 
= the Covenant itself, ch. xiii. 20) eternal. 

p. x Pet.i. 4. 


16. a testament} Rather, a covenant. 
The statement here made is to be taken (no 
less than that in v. 22) as relative to the sub- 
ject under discussion; in other words, as refer- 
ring to covenants between God and man. 


[v. 16, 17. 


16 For where a testament /s, there 


must also of necessity ' be the death Or, & 
one 


of the testator. 
17 For a testament is of force 
after men are dead: otherwise it is 





there must...] Rather, there must needs 
be alleged (or, supposed) the death of 
him that made the covenant. The term 
rendered ‘‘alleged” is wide enough to include 
the representative deaths by means of sacrifice, 
which accompanied the elder covenants, as 
well as that actual death which sealed the New 
Covenant (x Cor. xi. 25). See Additional 
Note. 

When God engages to bless sinful man, He 
recedes from the claims of eternal justice, 
which has laid the sinner under sentence of 
death. Every such covenant engagement, 
then, must from the first have rested on the 
foreseen death of a Mediator to come, who 
should be God as well as man. And, in fact, 
the earlier covenants were all accompanied 
by intimations of the necessity of such a death. 
So the covenant of ‘‘natural mercies” given 
to Noah was preceded by sacrifice (Gen. viii. 
20—22). Isaac, with whom God purposed 
to establish His great covenant of blessing 
(Gen. xviii. 19), was rescued from death by 
the intervention of a divinely provided victim 
(Gen. xxii. 8—18). The covenant, in virtue 
of which Israel held possession of Canaan, 
was ratified by sacrifice (wv. 19, 20, below). 
They, whom God shall gather to Himself at 
the last day as His saints, are they who have 
“‘made a covenant with” Him “by sacrifice” 
(Ps. l. 55 see on v. 17). 

In the death of Christ, as Mediator, both 
the parties to the Covenant had an interest. 
In that Jesus was, and represented, man, He 
endured death as the penalty of human sin. 
In that He was, and represented, God, He 
paid a ransom, which was sufficient to recover 
man from death and to open for him the gate 
of everlasting life. 


17. a testament...) Rather, a covenant 
is stedfast that is made over the dead. 
So in Ps. 1. 5 the» strict rendering is ‘that 
make covenant with Me over sacrifice” (LXX. 
‘‘over sacrifices”); the sacrifices being the 
presupposition, on which the ratification of the 
covenant proceeded. 

otherwise...| Rather, whereas it hath 
no force when he that made the cove- 
nant liveth. The “living God” could not, 
as such, enter into a covenant ‘‘of life and 
peace” with sinful man. He had laid man 
under sentence of death. No created »eing 
could roll away that sentence; for none could 
‘‘take away the sin of the world.” A covee 
nant that promised eternal life to man ap-« 
peared, therefore, impossible:—unless there 
could be One in whose person the Godhead and 


ee 


) 
| 





v. 18—23.] 


of no strength at all while the tes- 
tator liveth. 
18 Whereupon neither the first 


Or, gu7i- testament was ‘dedicated without blood. 


| fred. 


1g For when Moses had spoken 
every precept to all the people accord- 
ing to the law, he took the blood 
of calves and of goats, with water, 


Bes, #67 and 'scarlet wool, and hyssop, and 


sprinkled both the book, and all the 
people, 


manhood should meet together (cp. Note on 
ch. vii. 22); who, suffering death as Mediator, 
should, as man, endure the penalty of man’s 
sin; as God, ‘‘purchase to Himself a Church 
by His own blood” (Acts xx. 28). See Ad- 
ditional Note. 

That this is the true interpretation of v. 17 
(resting on the idea of a Covenant, not of a 
testament), will be made plain by the three 
next verses, which follow upon it in the way of 
illustration. 


18. Whereupon...| Rather, For which 
cause neither was the first (covenant). 

dedicated| Or, ‘‘inaugurated;” solemnly 
and formally instituted. In x. 20 the word is 
rendered, ‘‘consecrated.” 


19. according to...| Each separate com- 
mand was recited by Moses in conformity 
with the Law which had been communicated 
to him by God (Exod. xxiv. 3). Thereupon the 
people promised obedience. But this assent of 
theirs was not adequate ground for the Cove- 
nant to stand upon. ‘The basis on which its 
ratification rested was provided in the sacri- 
fices that were offered afterwards (wv. 6). 

of calves and of goats| corresponding 
severally to the ‘‘peace-offerings” and the 
“‘burnt-offerings” mentioned in Exod. xxiv. 5. 

with...hyssop| ‘These accessories are not 
mentioned in Exod. xxiv. But scarlet wool 
and hyssop are mentioned in Lev. xix. 6, 7as 
employed in the sprinkling of blood; and the 
water was useful for keeping the blood fluid. 

the book, and| Rather, the book itself and. 
We are told in Exod. xxiv. 6, 7, that after 
Moses had sprinkled ove half of the sacrificial 
blood on the altar, he took the book and read 
it; as if the book had been on the altar. Thus 
the altar with the book upon it represented 
God’s Justice; which could enter into cove- 
nant relations with sinful man only by means 
of an atonement. The blood sprinkled on 
the people represented them as sharers in the 
atoning death. 


20. the blood of the testament] Rather, 
tue blood of the covenant; as in x.29, Exod. 
xxiv. 8. See also ch. xiii. 20, Zech. ix. 11 
(cp. Matt. xxvi. 28, x Cor. xi. 25). 

which... enjoined| This refers to ‘the 


HEBREWS. IX. 


20 Saying, This is the blood of 
the testament which God hath en- 
joined unto you. 

21 Moreover he sprinkled with 
blood both the tabernacle, and all 
the vessels of the ministry. 

22 And almost all things are by 
the law purged with blood; and 
without shedding of blood is no re- 
mission. 

23 Jt was therefore necessary that 


covenant” (cp. Josh. vii. 11, Ps. cxi. 9). It 
brings into prominence the specific nature of 
the Sinaitic Covenant, as a Law whose pro- 
mises were conditional upon the people’s obe- 
dience (cp. Gal. iii. 17). 

God| In Exod. xxiv. 8, ‘‘the Lord ;” (cp. 
John vi. 45). ‘The change avoids any con- 
fusion that might have arisen from the 
evangelical sense of ‘ the Lord’” (Delitzsch). 

unto you] Or, ‘‘in regard to you.” 


21. The Tabernacle, as the abiding symbol 
of God’s being in covenant with the people, 
was also sprinkled with blood. This, though 
not actually stated, may be inferred from what 
is said in Exodus and Leviticus. For 

(1) A comparison of Exod. xl. g—15 and 
Lev. viii. 10, 12 shews that the consecration 
of the Tabernacle ran closely in parallelism 
with that of Aaron; and we know from Lev. 
Vili. 30 that Aaron was sprinkled with blood. 

And (2) on the Day of Atonement (when, 
in fact, a renewal of the original consecration 
took place, cp. on vii. 27, 28) the High-priest 
was directed to ‘‘make atonement” for the 
Tabernacle (Lev. xvi. 16); which was done 
by the sprinkling of blood. 

Josephus (‘ Ant.’ 111. 8) says expressly, that 
Moses sprinkled not only Aaron, but the Ta- 
bernacle also, with both oil and blood. 

he sprinkled...both the] Rather, 4e in like 
manner sprinkled...the. 


22. And almost} The adverb probably 
qualifies both the clauses. ‘‘One might almost 
say, that all purifications are, according to the 
Law, made with blood, and that apart from shed- 
ding of blood no remission (or, forgiveness) 
takes place.” For instances of ‘‘ purification” 
made by blood, see Ley. xii—xvi; for cases of 
‘*forgiveness,” Lev. iv, v. 

An exception to the rule occurs in Lev. v. 
II—13, where a needy person is allowed to 
present fine flour as a ‘‘trespass-offering.” But 
even here a portion was to be burnt on the 
Altar of Burnt-offering; which was always 
associated with blood. 

shedding of blood...remission] Luke xxii, 20 


23. necessary] Both because it was so 
prescribed by the Law. and because such a 
provision was in itself fitting (see on wv. 10, 


73 


74 


HEBREWS, Tx. 


the patterns of things in the heavens 
should be purified with these; but 
the heavenly things themselves with 
better sacrifices than these. 

24 For Christ is not entered into 
the holy places made with hands, 
which are the figures of the true; 
but into heaven itself, now to appear 
in the presence of God for us: 


17), not, certainly, because the rites them- 
selves had any cleansing virtue (x. 4, II). 
Their value arose simply from their being ap- 
pointed by God (Lev. xvii, 11); who was 
pleased to accept the blood of the slain animal 
as a vehicle of atonement for the offerer’s soul: 
this efficacy being assigned to it because it 
typified the blood of the One true Sacrifice 
for sin. 

patterns] Rather, delineations (the same 
word as in viii. 5, ‘‘example”’). 

with these] such things as the blood of 
goats and calves (wv. 19). 

heavenly things| Or, ‘‘heavenly places” (as 
in Eph. i. 20). The relations of Heaven 
and earth had been disturbed by man’s sin. 
He, who is pure light, without any admixture 
of darkness (x Johni. 5), had (unchanged in 
Himself) become in regard to sinful man “a 
consuming fire” (cp. ch, xii. 18, 29). The 
Holy Love of God could shine forth in its 
serene brightness only after that real atonement 
for sin, which was made by Christ. 

better sacrifices] The plural denoting what 
we should express by, a detter kind of sacrifice. 


24. is not entered] Rather, entered 
not (as in v. 12). 

Jigures| typical images; differing from the 
archetypes not less widely than a photograph 
of the sun differs from the sun. 

heaven itself| The heaven of the Divine 
glory (see on viii. 2). 

now] So that the present dispensation is one 
continuous Day of full and perfect Atone- 
ment; since God and man now meet together 
without any cloud between them. 

to appear] personally, as our Advocate (see 
Note below). The Aaronic high-priest entered 
the Holy of Holies only under a cloud of in- 
cense; as one who was unworthy of gazing 
even on the typical cherubic throne. 


25. Nor yet] Rather, And not (as in 
wv. 12;—vv. 24, 25 being precisely parallel to 
vv. 11,12). It was needful that the heavenly 
places should be purified with a nobler kind of 
sacrifice (v. 23): and so they have been; 
“for” (v. 24) Christ has entered into heaven 
itself, reconciling man with God; “and” 
(wv. 25) His atoning sacritice is not one that 
needs to be repeated. The annually recurring 
entrances into the typical sanctuary were to 


[v. 2a-—26, 


25 Nor yet that he should offer 
himself often, as the high priest en- 
tereth into the holy place e»ery year 
with blood of others ; 

26 For then must he Jften have 
suffered since the foundation of the 
world: but now once in the end 
of the world hath he appeared to put 
away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 





have no place in the antitype. They were, 
indeed, due only to the essential imperfection 
of the type (see on v. 8). The Aaronic high- 
priest, having obtained a glimpse of the possi- 
bility of atonement, retired from the Holy 
of Holies. But, when Jesus entered heaven, it 
was to stand before God uninterruptedly on 
our behalf, ‘‘and not that He should offer 
Himself often;” His one self-oblation on the 
cross (vv. 14, 28, X. Io, 12) possessing an 
efficacy which extends to the whole race of 
man to the end of time. 

with (Lev. xvi. 3) blood of others} Or, 
‘‘with blood not his own:”—so that he cannot 
rest any claim of personal desert upon it. 


26. For then...) If His one sacrifice be 
not available for all coming time, how is it 
that all God’s saints, ‘‘from the foundation of 
the world” (Luke xi. 50), have approached 
God acceptably (ch, xi. 4) in the use of sacri- 
fices? ‘These were of themselves valueless, 
and derived their worth simply from being 
anticipations of the One true Oblation. If His 
sacrifice had such power in past time as ‘‘fore- 
ordained” (cp. 1 Pet. i. 20), much more, now 
that it is actually accomplished, will it suffice 
for all future ages. 

but now |—as the case actually stands. 

in the end of the world] Lit. ‘at the con- 
summation of the ages;” that “fulness of 
time,” towards which all former ages had been 
converging; in which all things in heaven and 
earth were to be gathered up into unity in 
Christ (Eph. i. to, Col. i. 20). 

appeared| Rather, been manifested 
(comp. Rom. xvi. 26; Col. i. 26; 1 Tim. 
ili. 16; x Pet. i. 20; 1 John iii. 5); coming 
forth from the bosom of the Father to reveal 
the mysterious purpose which had been ‘kept 
unuttered during countless ages” (Rom. xvi. 
25; Eph. iii. 9). 

to put away sin] Lit. “for the disannulling 
(as in vii. 18) of sin.” His perfect obedi- 
ence not only abrogated “‘the Jaw of sin,” 
which had prevailed over the whole of Adam’s 
race; but had real value to procure the abo- 
lition of the condemnatory power of sin, in 
respect of all those who are identified with 
Him by loyal obedience. : 

sacrifice of himself So that He was priest 
and victim in one: priest, in His act of self- 





v. 27, 28.] 


27 And as it is appointed unto 
men once to die, but after this the 
judgment : 

28 So Christ was once offered to 


HE BREWS? TX. 


bear the sins of many; and unto 
them that look for him shall he ap- 
pear the second time without sin un- 
to salvation. 





consecration; victim, in His endurance of a 
penal death for sins not His own. 


27. as| Rather, ‘‘forasmuch as.” Men 
have but one probationary life assigned them 
to do thejr work in. At death each man’s 
work has finality stamped upon it; though its 
character will not be made manifest until the 
Day of Judgment. So too was it with Him 
who was ‘‘made in all things like unto His 
brethren” (ii, 17). Christ’s work of re- 
demption was definitely completed by His 
self-oblation ; though the nature of its results 
cannot yet be made manifest. But at His 
second appearing the unspeakable grandeur of 
that work will shine forth in the salvation of 
all His faithful servants. 

it is appointed| ‘The verb properly belongs 
to doth the terms which follow. Lit. ‘‘ there 
is in reserve (cp. 2 Tim. iv. 8, Col. i. 5) for 
men once to die, and after that judgment.” 


28. So] Rather (correct reading), So also. 
Christ] ‘*The Christ ;” Priest and King. 
His first coming into the world (x. 5) was to 
offer His one atoning sacrifice, as Priest. He 
is now carrying on His mediatorial work in 


heaven, ‘‘a Priest upon His throne.” When 
He re-appears, it will be to bestow His kingly 
gift of salvation. 

was...offered| In the passive. Over against 
the death that is in reserve for men lies the 
one offering; demanded by divine Justice, 
provided by divine Love. 

to bear the sins of many] A quotation from 
Isai. lili. 12. Upon the cross Christ ‘bare 
in His own body” the burden of the collec- 
tive ‘‘sin of the world” (cp. 1 Pet. ii. 24, 
John i. 29). Now He is engaged in dis- 
pensing the virtue of His atonement to indi- 
vidual souls;—whose characteristic is that 
they ‘‘look (or, wait) for Him” (Phil. iii, 
20). Cp. Isai. xxv. 9: ‘‘Lo, this is our God; 
we have waited for Him, and He will save us.” 

shall he appear| As in Isai. lxvi. 5. Every 
eye of man, indeed, shall see Him (Rev. i. 7); 
but ‘‘to them that wait for Him He shall 
appear unto salvation ;” the completer, as He 
was the author (ii. 10, v. 9), of their salva- 
tion. Cp. Col. iii. 4, 1 Pet. v. 4. 

aithout sin} Standing wholly apart from 
it: no longer, as at His first coming, ‘‘made 
sin for us” (2 Cor. v. 21). 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Cuap. 1x. 4, 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, 24. 


4. The word @vpiarnpiov is used as the 
designation of the Incense-altar by Philo (1. 
504), and Josephus (‘ Ant.’ 111. vi. 8; ‘J. W.’ 
V. v. 5); as also by Clem. Alex., and Origen. 
A different word (zupeiov, ‘“‘fire-pan”) is used 
by the LXX. for ‘‘censer” in Lev. xvi. 12. 
The adjective ypuaovv is applied to the Altar 
of Incense in Exod. xl. 5. 


9. As regards the preposition e?s, it may 
be either (1) for;—as in eis émavrov, ‘‘for a 
(whole) year” (Hom. ‘Il.’ xix. 32), or (2) 
unto;—a parable designed for those who lived 
before Christ came. 

The xara of the next clause (xa? ov) will 
mean ‘‘during” or ‘‘throughout.” 


14. Instead of aiwviov, many cursives have 
@yiov; and sothe Itala, Vulg., and Coptic ver- 
sions read. The variation is of no textual value, 
but is interesting as a testimony to the view 
which was taken of the meaning of the passage. 
In modern times many have understood by 
the ‘‘ Eternal Spirit,” either our Lord’s Divine 
mature, or His human spirit. The use of the 
preposition d:a seems scarcely consistent with 
either of these views; but harmonizes with 
the reference to the Holy Spirit. This refer- 
eace is further supported by the prominence 


given to the title Xpioros in this chapter; re- 
curring asit does in vv. 11, 14, 24, 28. The 
great High-priest needed no Japtism to 
cleanse Him from sin; but He was anointed 
at His baptism with the Holy Ghost, in pre- 
paration for His priestly work. In the power 
of that anointing He ‘‘offered Himself with- 
out spot to God.” 


15. In addition to what has been urged 
above, observe that 

(1) The word dca6jxn occurs frequently 
in the LXX., and always means Covenant. 

(2) In vv. 18—20 we have Exod. xxiv. 
8 quoted; where the word certainly denotes a 
covenant. 

(3) The éayyedia, here associated with 
the d:aOjxn, is used eight times in Gal. iil. 14— 
28 of God’s covenant-promises. Comp. also: 
ch. vi. 17, vili. 6; Eph. ii. 12; Acts ili. 25. 

(4) To speak of “transgressions under 
a testament” (v. 15) is to join together incon= 
gruous ideas: whereas Israel is often said to 
have ‘‘transgressed”” God’s ‘‘covenant” (Deut. 
xvii. 2; Josh. xxiii. 16; Judg. ii. 20; 2 K. 
XVili. 125 Jer. xxxiv. 18; Hos. vi. 7, vili. 1). 

(5) The return of the Mediator to life 
was necessary for the establishing of the Cove- 
nant (cp. 1 Pet. i. 3, 4): while the return 


73 


76 


HEBREWS: -X. 


of a testator to life would invalidate a testa- 
ment. 

(6) The idea of a covenant recurs in xii. 
24 (‘‘the Mediator of the New Covenant”) 
and in xiii. 20. 


16. The verb, dépa, is used by Demos- 
thenes (Liddell and Scott) of ‘‘alleging,” or, 
bringing forward, “‘ reasons.”” This, or nearly 
this, meaning is assigned to the word here by 
most modern commentators. 

The Syriac uses the same word here that 
it does in ch. xii. 27 (A. V. “signifieth”), 
John xii. 33, xxi. 19. 

The Vulg. has intercedat, ‘should take 
place ;”.—the same verb being used in v. 15 to 
represent yevouévou (‘‘ morte intercedente ”). 


17. The assertion here made about a 
**covenant” (like that made in ch. v. 1 about 
‘‘high-priests””) must be taken as limited by 
the matter in hand; that is, it refers to a 
divine Covenant. 

The general idea of a Covenant is, a solemn 
guarantee given by a person to maintain to- 
wards another the relation of peace and good- 
will (Gen. xxi. 23, xxvi. 28—31), friendship 
(1 Sam. xviii. 3, 4), brotherhood (Zech. xi. 
14, LXX.), or love (Mal. ii. 14). Plainly, 
then, death is no way necessary to the forma- 
tion of a covenant between man and man, 
If any wrong have been done by either party, 
it must be set right (Gen. xxi. 25, 1 Kings xx. 


34); but nothing more is needed. On the 


CHAPTER X. 


5 The weakness of the law sacrifices. 10 The 
sacrifice of Christ’s body once offered, 14 for 
ever hath taken away sins. 19 An exhorta- 
tion to hold fast the faith, with patience and 
thanksgiving. 





CuaAp. X. With the concluding word of 
ix. 28, ‘‘salvation,” the great argument of chh. 
vii—ix was virtually brought to a close. In 
vv. I—18 of the present chapter it is reca- 
pitulated and enforced. This section has three 
subdivisions, each of which rests upon a pase 
sage of the Old Testament: (1) vv. 1—10, of 
the perfect sacrifice of Christ, on Ps. xl. 6—8; 
(2) vv. 1I—13, of His perfect ministry, on 
Ps. cx. 1; (3) vv. 14—18, of the perfect Co- 
venant which He has established, on Jer. xxxi. 
33, 34. The ruling thought of the section is 
seen in vv. 4, Io (‘‘once”), v. 12 (‘fone sa- 
crifice”), v.14 (‘‘one offering”), v. 18 (‘‘no 
more offering for sin”). 


1. For} Only in Christ (ix. rr, 28) was 
‘this hope of present forgiveness and final sal- 
vation to be found: For the Law was utterly 
powerless to give these. It only furnished a 
shadowy outline (viil. 5) of the good things 
that were to come (ix. rr). 


[v. & 


other hand, death enters of necessity into the 
idea of a covenant between God man; 
since death is the penalty of sin, and sin 
adheres to all mankind. Sinful man can be 
brought into communion with the holy God 
only if provision be made for the forgiveness 
of his sin, and his restoration to holiness; 
both of which are provided for by the death 
of Christ (ii. rr, 17), the Mediator of the 
New Covenant. 

This distinction is brought out prominently 
by a comparison of Gen. xxi. 22—22 
XXxiil. g—13 ;— 

(1) In xxi. 2232 Abraham and Abime- 
lech made a covenant (éé6evto apdorepos 
ScaOnxnv); but there is no sacrifice. 

(2) In xxii. g—13 the Divine Covenant is 
made emi vexpois. Isaac, representing “the 
seed of Abraham,” is laid on the altar and is 
reckoned among the dead; ‘‘from whence 
also in a figure” (ch. xi. 19) he was raised. 
Shortly afterwards a victim provided by God 
is seen lying dead on the same altar. In the 
Antitype both the parties to the Covenant meef 
together. 


24. In vv.24, 26, 28 three different Greek 
verbs are all rendered in A. V. by “appear:”— 
in v. 24, eudavabqva, which is used in Act 
Xxiv. I, xxv. 2 almost as a legal term, ‘“‘to ap- 
pear personally;” in v. 26, we@avépwras (see 
the note on v. 26); in v. 28, épOnoerat, which 
means simply to be seen, or become visible. 





OR the law having a shadow of 

good things to come, and not 
the very image of the things, can 
never with those sacrifices which they 
offered year by year continually make 
the comers thereunto perfect. 





the very image of the things] In the 
we have the full, lifelike, presentation of the 
actual things (cp. xi. 14). In Chris 
atonement, sanctification, and salvation, are 
facts; ever present to the ey? of faith. 

bs. The delineation of Christ's work given 
in the Psalms and Prophets went far beyond 
the shadows of the Law; yet, after all, it re- 
mained but a dim outline of things were 
hoped for, and not as yet accomplished. 

with those...) Rather, with the same 
sacrifices, year after year, which. The 
reference is plainly to the ever-recurring Days 
of Atonement. Each of these involved a con- 
fession that its predecessor had failed to pro- 
vide the worshippers with freedom of access 
to God’s presence. The fact, that the same 
sacrifices had to be reiterated in never-ending 
succession, shewed that they dill not effect 
a true and final atonement. 

the comers thereunto] Or, “ those that draw 
near (with them) ;” comp. v. 22, Vii. 25. 





v. a—8.] 


2 For then would they not have 
ceased to be offered? because that 
the worshippers once purged should 
have had no more conscience of sins. 

3 But in those sacrifices there is 
a remembrance again made of sins 
every year. 

or it is not possible that the 
blood of bulls and of goats should 
take away sins. 


perfect] restored to complete peace and 
communion with God (cp. v. 2, ix. 9). 


2. once] ‘‘once for all.” This purification 
Is provided in the new Covenant; its outward 
pledge being the ‘‘one baptism for the remis- 
sion of sins.” Cp. v. 22, ix. 14; Rom. vi. 
4—I4. 

conscience of sims] consciousness of unfor- 
given sins; such as separated from God and 
called for fresh expiatory sacrifices. ‘The one 
sacrifice of Christ avails for the uninterrupted 
purification of all who ‘‘walk in the light” 
(1 John i, 7, ii. 1, 2). 

8. a remembrance again made| ‘The Greek 
has simply ‘‘a remembering :””—a recalling to 
mind of sins which, although ‘ passed over 
through the forbearance of God” (Rom. ii. 
25), continued adhering to the people; so that 
every returning Day of Atonement called for 
new typical sacrifices, ‘‘ because of the unclean- 
ness of the ‘children of Israel and because of 
all their transgressions in all their sins” (Lev. 
xvi. 16; cp. 1 Cor. xv. 17). 

The confession of the people’s sins was 
made, not over the head of the slain goat, but 
over that of the living one: which bore them 
away, symbolically, to oblivion (Lev. xvi. 21); 
—put out of sight and passed over, rather 
than atoned for. 


4. of bulls and of goats| Still pointing to 
the Day of Atonement (cp. ix. 12, 13). 

take away] The word used in Isai. vi. 7, 
Zech. iii. 4 (A. V. ‘‘caused.,..to pass”). 


5. Wherefore] Since the legal sacrifices 
were unable to make any real atonement, the 
prophetic Psalm represents the Saviour as 
putting those sacrifices aside, and substituting 
for them His own perfect obedience and self- 
oblation. 

when he|—the “Christ” of ix. 28. That 
the Psalm refers to Christ is evident, for 

(a) The speaker is one whose coming had 
been foretold “‘in the volume of the Book ” 

v. 7); but it was of Christ that ‘* Moses in 
the Law and the prophets did write” (John 
i. 45). 

& In Christ only can vv. 8 and 12 be 
reconciled: “‘ Thy Law is within my heart;” 


PE BREWS. 1. 


7 


5 Wherefore when he cometh into 
the world, he saith, Sacrifice and 
offering thou wouldest not, but a 
body "hast thou prepared me: nee 

6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices mae 
for sin thou hast had no pleasure. 

7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in 
the volume of the book it is written 


of me,) to do thy will, O God. 
8 Above when he said, Sacrifice 





‘‘mine iniquities have taken hold of me” 
(cp. Isai. lili. 11). 

(3) The reference to Christ gives harmony 
to vv. 12—17; in which one who is burdened 
with numberless ‘‘ iniquities” solicits no par- 
don, but appeals to God for help, with the 
certainty that God ‘“ thinketh upon” Him. 

(4) The confidence with which the speaker 
represents his own obedience as the object of 
Divine complacency, and as effecting the end 
which the legal sacrifices pointed to, but could 
not attain, is appropriate to none but Christ. 

into the world| Resigning His supra-mun- 
dane glory ; the glory which He had ‘before 
the world was” (John xvii. 5). Cp. John 
lil. 17, iX. 39, Xvi. 28. 

Sacrifice and offering| The former of these 
terms is applied more specially to the ‘‘ peace- 
offerings” (Ley. iii. 1, 6, 9, vil. 11—34), the 
latter to the meal-offering. ‘The burnt-offer- 
ings and sin-offerings are spoken of in wv. 6. 

wouldest not| They were not the end aimed 
at in the Divine arrangements. They came 
in only provisionally, as a means by which 
men might be trained to draw near to God in 
lowly, reverential, faith, and so be enabled to 
obey Him (cp. Jer. vii. 21—23). 

a body...| So the LXX.; paraphrasing, as 
it does elsewhere, in a difficult passage. The 
Hebrew (cp. note on Ps, xl. 6) is literally: 
‘“‘ ars hast Thou digged unto (or, for) Me;” 
ears into which Thy word may sink deep. 
The rendering of the Seventy seems to imply 
that they understood the passage of Messiah, 
whose obedience was to be exhibited “1 the 
midst of intense bodily sufferings (Ps. xxii. 
14, 15). 

7. Icome] Rather, 1am come; mm fulfil- 
ment of the many types and prophecies con- 
tained in ‘‘the volume” of the Law. Comp. 
John vi. 38. 

to do thy will] To work out all God’s 
will concerning Him: but espevially, to effect 
what God had willed respecting the mystery 
of man’s redemption ;—that the inviolability of 
the law of righteousness should be established 
for ever by that very act which secured the 
remission of human sin. 


8. Above when he said] Rather, “ Having 


HEBREWS. X. 


and offering aid burnt offerings and 
offering for sin thou wouldest not, 
neither hadst pleasure therein ; which 
are offered by the law; 

Then said he, Lo, I come to 
do thy will, O God. He taketh 
away the first, that he may establish 
the second. 

10 By the which will we are sanc- 
tified through the offering of the body 
of Jesus Christ once for all. 

11 And every priest standeth daily 
ministering and offering oftentimes 


[v. 915. 


the same sacrifices, which can never 
take away sins : 

12 But this man, after he had 
offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, 
sat down on the right hand of God; 

13 From henceforth expecting till 
his enemies be made his footstool. 

14 For by one offering he hath 
perfected for ever them that are sanc- 
tified. 

15 Whereof the Holy Ghost aiso 
is a witness to us: for after that he 
had said before, 





first said ;”—in the earlier words of the quotae 
tion. ‘The writer wishes to call attention to 
the emphatic Ten of the Psalm (‘‘Then said 
I”). After the insufficiency of the ceremonial 
system had been clearly exhibited, then the 
Elect Servant of the Lord came forward to 
offer the one true sacrifice. 

Sacrifice and offering| Or (correct reading), 
‘€ Sacrifices and offerings.” 

which] Rather, such as (and so in v, 11). 


9. The true reading here is without the 
words, ‘‘O God.” 

the first] ‘The legal, typical, offerings. 

the second| His own perfect obedience 
‘Ceven unto death” (Phil. i. 8). This, as the 
appropriate means of saving mankind, was 
what God willed ; what He had willed “ be- 
fore the foundation of the world” (x Pet. i. 
20). 


10. By the which will] Rather, In virtue 
of which will;—God’s will concerning the 
salvation of men (x Tim. ii. 4), wrought out 
by Christ. 

are sanctifed| Rather, have been sancti- 
fied, or consecrated to God (see note on ii. 
rr). Compare v. 29, ‘“‘the blood of the 
Covenant, wherewith (or, in virtue of which) 
he was sanctified” (cp. Eph. v. 26). 

once for all| ‘This may be connected eithe1 
with ‘‘offering” or with ‘sanctified. The 
former way of taking it seems to be most in 
harmony with wv. 12, 14, Vii. 27, ix. 12, 
26, 28. 


11. The argument now passes from the 
Day of Atonement to the daily sacrifices. 
The same charges apply to these: (1) They 
are constantly repeated; and (2) Each one 
of them is inefficacious, 

standeth| ‘The word used of the Levitical 
ministers in Deut. x. 8, xviii. 5, 73 as of 
servants generally, 1 K. x. 8, 2 K. v. 25. 

take away] The word is often used of 
stripping off that which surrounds, or adheres 
to, a thing. In x Chro. xxi. 8, as here, it is 
applied to the removal of guilt. 


12. But this man, after] Rather, “ But 
He, when.” 

for ever,| Invii. 3 and x. 1 the phrase is 
rendered, ‘‘ continually” (more exactly, “in 
perpetuity”). The punctuation given by the 
A.V. is that of Chrys., Theophyl., Luther, 
and Lachmann. The rhythm of the Greek, 
however, is very distinctly in favour of put- 
ting the comma after ‘‘sins” and joining ‘for 
ever” with what follows. So the Syriac: 
“But this man offered one sacrifice for sins, 
and sate down at the right hand of God for 
ever.” This supplies a more complete antithesis, 
also, to the ‘‘ standeth daily ” of v. 11. 


13. From henceforth expecting] or,“Thence- 
forward waiting ;” waiting with long-suffering 
patience from age to age (as in r Pet. iii. 20). 
In ix, 28, nearly the same word is used of His 
people’s waiting for His return. 


14. perfected for ever| Brought into a 
state of complete and uninterrupted com- 
munion with God. Cp. ». 1, Vil. 19. 

that are sero That yield themselves 
to the power of that consecration which He 
had bestowed on them (v. 10). Cp. ii. 11. 


15. Whereof...| Lit. ‘‘ And the Holy Ghost 
also beareth witness unto us;” confirming 
what has been said about the “ perfecting ” of 
those who abide under the consecrating power 
of Christ’s Covenant. 

said before| ‘The best versions and MSS. 
have simply ‘‘said.” Some MSS. and trans- 
lations supply, before v. 17, “Then He saith,” 
or, “He afterwards saith,” to complete the 
sentence which begins, ** After that He said.” 
Most moderns suppose that the writer borrows 
the words “saith the Lord” from the pro- 
phetic text, and weaves them into his own 
statement (cp. on v. 9). “After He hath 
said, This is...days; the Lord saith, Putting 
my laws upon their heart, upon their mind 
also will I, &c.” This has the advantage of 
giving prominence to the two elements of the 
prophecy, which correspond to the two parts 
of the assertion in v. 15; sanctification, and 


OO ———— 


# Jer. sx. 
* 


Vv. 16—2 2.] 


16 This zs the covenant that I will 
make with them after those days, 
saith the Lord, I will * put my laws 
into their hearts, and in their minds 
will I write them ; 

17 And their sins and iniquities 
will I remember no more. 

18 Now where remission of these 
is, there is no more offering for 
sin. 


freedom of access to God. ‘To such as have 
“the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus” 
swaying them, ‘there is no condemnation” 
(Rom. viii. 1, 2). 

18. remission] The word used in Lev. xxv. 
to (A. V. “‘liberty”). Here it corresponds 
to the “I will remember no move” of wv. 17. 
The record of sin should be effaced no less 
surely than the record of debt was on the 
coming in of the Jubile-year. 

Obs. This ‘remission of sins” was ex- 
pressly mentioned by our Lord as the fruit of 
the ‘‘ New Covenant,” which He established 
in His blood (Matt. xxvi. 28). 

no more| Or, ‘‘no longer:”—since there is 
no further need of it. 


19. The TuHrrpD great Argument, which 
began at ch. v. 1, being complete, an exhorta- 
tion now follows, similar to that which came 
in at the close of the Second Argument (iv. 
14—16). 

boldness} Asiniv. 16. There is no longer 
cause for shrinking from God’s presenee. 

to enter into| Lit. “concerning the entrance 
into.” They enjoy present freedom of access to 
the Mercy-seat (v. 22, iv. 16); and they look 
forward to the time when they shall actually 
enter the eternal Sanctuary (vi. 19, 20). 

by the blood| Rather, ‘‘in virtue of the 
blood” (cp. v. 10). This may be connected 
either with ‘‘having boldness,” or (more pro- 
hably) with “‘ entrance” (see ix. 25). 


20. By a new...] Rather, ‘‘ By the way 
which He consecrated (or, dedicated, see 
ix. 18) for us, a new and living (way).” 

The thought contained in the last words of 
wv. 19, ‘in virtue of the blood of Jesus,” is 
here expanded in an allegorical form. The 
Jewish high-priest was shut out from access 
to the Holy of Holies by the veil, which hung 


- in front of it. How then did he pass into it 


on the Day of Atonement? By what way? 
He entered in by the virtue of the sacrificial 
blood (ix. 7, 25). This alone enabled him to 
draw aside the veil, which separated between 
sinful man and the Holy God. The atoning 
blood formed (for a brief interval) a way of 
approach to God. But, whatever the typical 
value of this entrance into the Holy of Holies 
might be, it could not “give life” (Gal. iii. 


HEBREWS: OX. 


19 Having therefore, brethren, ‘bold- 19» 
ness to enter into the holiest by the 
blood of Jesus, 

20 By a new and living way, 


which he hath !consecrated for us, iOr, na 


through the veil, that is to say, his 
flesh ; 
21 And having an high priest over 


the house of God ; 
22 Let us draw near with a true 


21). The “living way” of reconciliation 
was ‘‘consecrated for us” by the blood of 
Jesus. So long as the Word tabernacled in 
flesh, sin was not atoned for. But, when that 
flesh was rent, so that the life-blood poured 
forth from it, the way into the Holiest was 
‘©made manifest” (ix. 8), and ‘‘ dedicated :” 
a “living” way, endued with ‘the power of 
an endless life” (vil. 16); allowing man to 
enter into communion with the Living God. 

@ new...way] ‘* New,” in the sense of 
“recent,” as being only of late established, 
after the lapse of so many ages. 

through the veil| So that the veil was done 
away for ever; as was signified by the his- 
torical ‘‘ rending” of the veil of the Temple, 
which took place at Christ’s death (Matt. 
XXVii, 51). Having once ‘reconciled us in the 
body of His flesh through death,” He did not 
resume the ‘‘likeness of sinful flesh.” The 
veil disappeared ; and in its room was seen the 
“living way,” the glorified humanity of Him 
who is ‘‘the way, the truth, and the life” 
(John xiv. 6); “in whom we have boldness 
and access with confidence by the faith of 
Him” (Eph. iii. 12). 


21. an high priest] Lit. ‘a great priest ;” 
which is the exact rendering of the Hebrew 
words Gin Num. xxxv. 25, 28, and elsewhere) 
for which “ high-priest ” stands in A.V. The 
expression, which occurs here only in the 
Epistle, is suited to the present passage; where 
Christians are viewed as priests, who have 
access into the Holiest and are members of 
God’s family. In the passage of Leviticus, 
where the dignity of the high-priest is espe- 
cially dwelt upon (Lev. xxi. 1o—12, see on 
ii. 10), the words translated ‘‘ He that is the 
high-priest among his brethren,” are strictly, 
‘‘ The priest that is greater than his brethren.” 
This corresponds to what is added here, over 
the house (or, household) of Ged (cp. on iii. 6). 
Christ is ‘the First-born among many bre- 
thren” (Rom. viii. 29), whom He has “‘made 
priests...unto God” (Rev. i. 6). This view 
throws additional light on v. 22, which points 
out what qualifications we need for ‘‘ drawing 
near,” as priests, to God. 


22. draw near| A liturgical term (2s 
in v. 1, iv. 16, vii. 25). 


iberty. 


HEBREWS. X. 


heart in full assurance of faith, hav- 
ing our hearts sprinkled from an evil 
conscience, and our bodies washed 
with pure water. 

23 Let us hold fast the profession 
of ou faith without wavering ; (for he 
is faithful that promised ;) 

24 And let us consider one an- 
other to provoke unto love and to 
good works : 

25 Not forsaking the assembling 


[v. 23—29, 


of ourselves together, as the manner 
of some is; but exhorting one another = 
and so much the more, as ye see the 
day approaching. 

26 For if we sin wilfully after that 
we have received the knowledge of 
the truth, there remaineth no more 
sacrifice for sins, . 

27 But a certain fearful looking 
for of judgment and fiery indignation, 
which shall devour the adversaries. 





with a true heart) The words used in Isai. 
Xxxvili. 3, LX X. (in A. V. ‘with a perfect 
heart”). 

in full assurance of faith| So that our 
faith may have its complete developement (see 
on vi. 11); embracing the fulness of Christ’s 
redemptive work. 

having...| The perfect passive participles, 
following an exhortation, must be taken as 
supplying additional reasons why the exhorta- 
tion should be obeyed (as in 1 Pet. i. 23, 
‘having been born again”); ‘‘ seeing that we 
have had our hearts sprinkled...our bodies 
washed,” Both these terms refer to the 
benefits of the baptismal Covenant: (1) The 
heart is ‘‘ sprinkled,” and so cleansed (see on 
Isai. lii. 15), ‘‘ from an evil conscience” (cp. 
v. 2, ix. 13, 14), through the atoning blood 
of Christ (called in xii. 24, “the blood of 
sprinkling ;” cp. x Pet. i. 2), which is applied 
to the believer by means of baptism (cp. 
_ Acts xxii. 16); (2) And the body also has its 
share of blessing; the symbolical washing 
with ‘pure water” (comp. Ezek. xxxvi. 25) 
being a pledge, that the body so washed shall, 
in the great day of ‘‘ the Regeneration” (Matt. 
xix. 28; cp. Tit. iii. 5), be raised to perfect 
“incorruption ” (cp. Rom. viii. rr). 

23. of our faith] A curious oversight. 
It should be, of our hope. Thus in wv. 22 
we have faith; in v, 23, hope; in v. 24, love. 

without wavering] Rather, that it (our 
confession) waver not. The word here 
rendered ‘‘hold fast” is not the one which 
was so rendered in iv, 14, and the meaning is 
different. ‘There the exhortation was, to old 
fast by our profession of faith (objectively) ; 
here it is, to maintain in unwavering firmness 
the profession of our hope (subjectively). 

faithful] and worthy of our trust (xi. 11; 
1 Thess. v. 24). 

24. consider one another] Looking with 
kindly interest on each other’s concerns, so 
that we may “provoke” one another to a 
holy rivalry in generous deeds. 

25. Such zeal of brotherly love would 
overcome that fear of persecution which made 
‘¢some” abstain from the public assemblies 
of the Church. 


the assembling,..together] to meet your com- 
mon Lord and Saviour. This may be taken 
as implied in the word: for the noun occurs 
elsewhere, in the New Testament, only in 
2 Thess. li. 1, where it refers to the gathering 
of the saints to meet Christ at His second 
coming ; and the verb is the one which is used 
in Ps. cii. 22, ‘‘ when the peoples are gathered 
together...to serve the Lord.” Every assem- 
bling of the Church is a preparation for that 
final gathering. Cp, also Matt. xxiii. 37, 
xxiv. 31, where the same word is used. 

The inference we have drawn from the term 
itself is confirmed by the fact that the Apostle 
here proceeds to speak of ‘‘the day ;” just as 
in 2 Thess. ii. 1, 2, he goes on to speak of 
“the day of Christ.” 

the day| Cp. 1 Cor. iii. 13. As in James 
v. 8, 9, so here, there may be an allusion to the 
approaching visitation on Jerusalem; but the 
thought of the Last Judgment had been linked 
on inseparably to that event by our Lord’s 
own prophecy (Matt. xxiv). 


26. The wilful sin here spoken of must 
be apostasy (iii. 12, vi. 6); into which those, 
who forsook the fellowship of the Church, 
were in danger of drifting. 

the knowledge] The word here used implies 
a degree of real insight; genuine ‘“‘ recognition” 
of the truth. 

no more] or (v. 18), ‘no longer.” This is 
the dark side of the truth, of which the con- 
solatory side was presented in v. 18. To 
those who abide under shelter of the one 
atoning Sacrifice, no other sacrifice is needful ; 
to those who have left that shelter, none other 
can be of any worth. The old ritual had 
been of value, so long as it nourished hope in a 
coming Saviour. To those who receded from 
faith in Christ, it was a delusion. 


27. What remains for them is, during life, 


a certain vague and undefined, but anxious 


and fearful, looking forward to judgment; 
and afterwards, inexorable justice. There 
ought to be a comma at “judgment;” the 
word for “ indignation” being in the nomina- 
tive. 

Jiery indignation] Rather, ‘‘a fiery jealousy ;” 
with allusion, probably, to Deut.iv.24 God's 


v 28—34.] 


28 He that despised Moses’ law 
aied without mercy under two or 
three witnesses : 

29 Of how much sorer punish- 
ment, suppose ye, shall he be thought 
worthy, who hath trodden under foot 
the Son of God, and hath counted 
the blood of the covenant, wherewith 
he was sanctified, an unholy thing, 
and hath done despite unto the Spirit 
of grace? 

30 For we know him that hath 


aah said, ? Vengeance belongeth unto me, 


12. 19. 


I will recompense, saith the Lord. 


justice is “jealous” of whatever tends to 
obscure the purity of His holiness (cp. Deut. 
XxiX. 20). 

devour the adversaries] A reference to Isai. 
XxXvi. 11 (cp. Ixiv. 1); where also God’s jea- 
lousy is represented as a fire. 


28. despised...died| Rather, “‘setteth at 
nought...dieth.” Such was the provision of 
the Law respecting apostasy (Deut. xvii. 
2—7). To go back from Christ to trust in 
an antiquated ritual was no way better than 
idolatry (cp. on iii. 12). 

29. the blood of the covenant] By which 
the New Covenant was established (cp. ix. 20). 

wherewith] Or, ‘‘in virtue of which” 
(vv. Io, 19). 

sanctified | So that he was allowed to ap- 
proach the All-holy One with acts of worship 
(wv. To, xili. 12). 

unholy| Lit. “common” (in Rom. xiv. 14, 
‘‘unclean”). Their apostasy was equivalent 
to asserting that Jesus was a mere man, and, 
consequently, a sharer in human sinfulness. 

done despite unto] or, ‘‘insulted,” ‘treated 
with scorn.” 

the Spirit of grace] Which (in accordance 
with the promise in Zech. xii. 10) had been 
‘poured out” on believers; teaching them to 
“look unto Him, whom” the sins of men 
‘thad pierced.” ‘To treat with scorn the Holy 
Spirit, who was the fountain of grace, and 
who was Himself so gracious, so full of tender 
sympathy! to insult Him!—what desperate 
malignity ! 

30. we know him] We know His cha- 
racter, that He is ‘‘a God of truth” (Deut. 
xxxii. 6); who “will not call back His words” 
(Isai. xxxi. 2). 

Vengeance...|_ Rather, Te me belongeth 
vengeance (Deut. xxxii. 35; Rom. xii. 19). 

God’s justice is inviolable. It must per- 
form its work of ‘‘recompensing.” How fear- 
ful the lot of those who have left the only refuge 
which can protect against the sword of Divine 
Justice! 

New Test.—Vot. IV. 


HEBREWS. X. 


And again, The Lord shall judge his 
people. 

31 Jt is a fearful thing to fall into 
the hands of the living God. 

32 But call to remembrance the 
tormer days, in which, after ye were 
illuminated, ye endured a great fight 
of afflictions ; 

33 Partly, whilst ye were made 
a gazingstock both by reproaches and 
afflictions ; and partly, whilst ye be- 
came companions of them that were 
so used. 

34 For ye had compassion of me 


the Lord...| See Deut. xxxii. 36. God 
“judges” His people, when He vindicates 
their rights and overthrows their ‘‘ adver- 
saries” (cp. ib. v. 43);—those ‘‘adversaries” 
among whom the apostate had cast in his lot 
(v. 27). 

31. rhe living God| See the note on wi. 
12, Even for the penitent “‘it is a fearful 
thing” to be placed under His rod (2 S. xxiv. 
14f.); what must it be, then, for the wilful 
transgressor (1 Pet. iv. 17, 18)? 

David had been spared, when, in obedi- 
ence to God’s injunction, he offered a burnt- 
offering on Mount Moriah. For those who 
now rejected the one true Sacrifice, the Tem- 
ple sacrifices on Moriah were utterly unavail- 
ing. 

32. the former days| When they set a 
noble example to all Churches, 1 Thess. ii. 14. 
illuminated] As in vi. 4 (‘‘enlightened”). 

endured| Sustained, and bore up resolutely 
under (cp. xii. 2, 3, 7, where the same word 
is used). The derived noun is used in v. 36, 
xii, 1; where it is too feebly rendered 
‘‘patience.” 

jight of afflictions} A ‘‘fight,” or combat, 
like that of the athlete. They had to qwrestle 
with ‘‘afflictions” (or, ‘‘sufferings;” as in ii. 
9, 10). The Church at Jerusalem had passed 
through other persecutions besides those men- 
tioned in Acts viii and xii (see on ch. xiii. 7). 


33. a gazing-stock| Or, ‘“‘a spectacle” (cp. 
1 Cor. iv. 9); as when athletes were expo 
to public view in the amphitheatre. ‘The 
‘“‘reproaches” were, probably, the slanderous 
accusations which were so commonly brought 
against Christians (cp. 1 Pet. iv. 14). 

became companions of | Rather, made 
yourselves partners with:—by your 
active sympathy with sufferers, drawing upon 
yourselves popular violence or legal penalties. 

34. For ye had| For ye both had. 

compassion of me in my bonds| Lit. “‘sym- , 
pathy with my bonds;” or (according to 

F 


HEBREWS. 


in my bonds, and took joyfully the 
spoiling of your goods, knowing in 
“_apecaalee that ye have in heaven a 
etter and an enduring substance. 

35 Cast not away therefore your 
confidence, which hath great recom- 
pence of reward. 

36 For ye have need of patience, 
that, after ye have done the will of 
God, ye might receive the promise. 


another reading, see Note below) “‘with them 
that were in bonds” (xiii. 3). If the Re- 
ceived Text be correct, the reference will 
naturally be to St Paul’s detention at Czsarea. 
‘The other reading would not exclude such a 
reference; since Aristarchus, who went up 
with Paul to Jerusalem (Acts xx. 4), was his 
‘fellow-prisoner” at Rome (Col. iv. 10), and 
therefore, in all probability, was so at Czsarea. 

took joyfully] Or, ‘‘accepted with joy.” Cp. 
Matt. v. 12; Col. i.1z; 1 Pet. iv. 12, 13. 

knowing in...| Rather, knowing that ye 
have for yourselves a better posses- 
sion [in heaven] and one that abideth. 
—See Additional Note.—The possession was 
theirs already by an indefeasible title; because 
they were brethren of Him who is “Heir of 
all things” (i. 2). 


35. Cast not away|—as soldiers might 
cast away their arms after a long fight. 

confidence] In wv. 1g rendered, ‘‘ boldness;” 
confidence in approaching “the throne of 
grace” (cp. iii. 6, iv. 16). 

36. For...] They were not to be dispirited 
by the length of their trial: for—perseverance 
in doing the will of God was a needful preli- 
minary to obtaining the reward which He had 
promised. 

patience| patient endurance, or, fortitude; 
as in 2 Thess. i. 4, Rev. xiii. ro. Cp. on 
U. 32. 
after ye have done| Rather, having done. 
In doing the will of God they would be con- 
formed to Christ (vv. 7—9, cp. xiii. 21), 
and could not fail to enjoy His blessing. 

receive] in actual fulfilment (xi. 13, 39). 

the promise] of entering into His rest (iv. 
1), in the ‘‘eternal inheritance” (ix. 15). 


837. a little while] The expression (in the 
original, a peculiar one) is found in Isai. xxvi. 
20, LXX. (in A. V., ‘‘a little moment”). 

he that...| or, ‘*he that cometh shall come, 
and shall not tarry.” So the LXX. (Hab. ii. 
3). The Hebrew is more naturally taken as 
referring to the vision: ‘‘though it tarry, 
wait for it; for it will surely come.” The 
word used by the LXX. for “wait” is the one 
that occurred above in v. 32, ‘‘endured.” 


X. 


37 For yet a little while, and he 
that shall come will come, and will 
not tarry. 

38 Now the just shall live by 
faith: but if any man draw back, my 
soul shall have no pleasure in him. 

39 But we are not*of them who 
draw back unto perdition; but of 
them that believe to the saving of 
the soul. 


Lv. 35—39. 





88. The writer, weaving the prophet’s 
words into his own address, inverts the order 
of the clauses (comp. on Hab. ii. 4). 

shall live] The verb has here the same 
kind of emphasis which it has in Ezek. xviii. 
22; ‘‘In his righteousness that he hath done 
he shall live;”—shall maintain that spiritual 
life, which issues in salvation. Thus the 
“saving of the soul” of v. 39 may be looked 
on as an explanation of the term, ‘‘ live,” which 
is used here.—See Additional Note. 

by faith] Lit. “from faith.” The issue of 
his faith shall be life (see below). The Hebrew 
word rendered ‘‘faith” in Hab. ii. 4 generally 
signifies stedfastness, or, fidelity; but the 
‘“‘qwait for it” of v. 3 shews that it here de- 
notes, stedfast affiance on God’s promise; which 
is the prevailing idea of ‘‘faith” throughout 
ch. xi. The most essential element in /oyalty 
to God is, to put faith in Him. ‘They only will 
be ‘‘stedfast in His covenant” who ‘believe 
in Him” (Ps. Ixxviii. 21, 37). 

if any man| Rather, ifhe. It is true that 
we should translate the LXX., “if one draw 
back;” but as the Apostle, in constructing his 
own sentence, deliberately transposed the verse- 
members, he certainly meant the warning to 
apply to the just man. Comp. Ezek. xviii. 24. 

draw back] from patient waiting on God. 
Such withdrawal might be owing in some 
cases to cowardice, in others to self-confidence, 
The Greek word more naturally suggests the 
thought of the former of these; the Hebrew 
that of the latter. The men, whose history 
was commented on in chh. iii and iv, were 
guilty of ‘‘drawing back” in both ways; first 
refusing to go up and occupy Canaan, and 
then endeavouring to do so in opposition to 
God’s will (Numb. xiv. 2, 40: see Note 
below). 

shall have no| Rather, hath ne. 


839. not of them who...] Lit. “not Se 
the side) of drawing back...but (on the si i) 
of faith...” It is this word “faith,” whi 
supplies the transition to ch. xi. 

saving] A rare word; lit. “winning,” or 
“‘acquiring:” here, winning back from perdie 
tion. The verb occurs in Ezek. xiii. 18 (“save 
the souls alive”). 





; 
: 
} 


v. 1] 


HEBREWS. 


XI. 


' 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Cuap, x. 34, 38. 


984. The received reading rots dexpois pov 
mj supported by &, K, L, P, and other mgs, 
as also by Clem. Alex. and Origen; while A, 
D, with other MSS., as well as the two Syriac 
Versions and the Vulg., support rots decpious. 
In the fifth century Euthalius appealed to 
this passage as confirming the belief that the 
Epistle was written by St Paul. 

It is in favour of the ordinary reading, that 
cvprabée in iv. 13 has for its object, not the 
persons who suffer, but that which is the 
cause of their suffering. 

34. The clause ¢y ovpavois is found in 
many good hISS., in the Peshito, and many 
Greek fathers; but is wanting in A, D, &, 
in the Vulgate, and in some fathers. The 
rhythm of the sentence and the analogy of xi. 
16 plead for its retention. 

or év éavrois, Lachmann reads éavrovs, 
Tischendorf éavrots. ‘The latter has the ma- 
jority of cursive MSS, in its favour, is philo- 
logically simple, and yields a good sense: ‘‘ Ye 
have done as your Lord advised, when He said 

Luke xii. 33, 34), Sell your possessions (ra 
trapyovra tyav) and give alms: make for 
yourselves bags that wax not old, a treasure in 
the heavens that faileth not.” 


38. This emphatic meaning of the word 
is illustrated by Gal. iii. rx, 12; in which 
Hab, ii. 4 is contrasted with Lev. xviii. 5, 


“The man that doeth them sha | /ive in them,” 
Referring to this sentence of the Law, our Lord 
por att. xix. 17): “If thou wilt enter 
into life, keep the commandments.” I[n the 
other place in which Hab. ii, 4 is cited, Rom, 
i, 16, 17, it is to illustrate the statement that 
the Gospel is “the power of God unto salva- 
tion to every one that believeth.” 

38, The Hebrew is, “in his faith” (cp. 
Ezek, xviii. 22): so that we may paraphrase 
the sentence thus; “The righteous man, 
abiding in his faith, shall have life.” The 
Septuagintal rendering, pou é« miarews (found 
in good MSS. here too), would be represented 
thus: “The righteous man shall, as the out- 
come of faith in Me (cp. Eph. iti. 12), have 
life.” The position of pov before é« mierews 
is similar to its position in pou vrd thy oreyr, 
(Matt. viii, 3); whereas the unlikelihood o 
the combination 6 8ixavos pov is extreme; ne 
such form as "P"T¥ being anywhere found 

38. The verb, which is rendered “liftea 
+ in Hab. ii, 4, occurs elsewhere only in 

umb, xiv. 44; ‘they presumed to go up.” 
In Deut. i. 43 the corresponding verb is 17" 7; 
which is used in Neh. ix, 16 (A. V. “ dealt 
proudly”) in reference to Israel’s refusing to 
take possession of the land. In each case their 
disobedience was a manifestation of self-will ; 
which, in each case, had its root in unbelief. 





CHAPTER XI. 

1 What faith is. 6 Without faith we cannot 

please God. 7 The worthy fruits thereof in 
the fathers of old time. 





Cuap. XI In the conclusion of chap. x 
Jaith had been set forth as the means by which 
we obtain Eternal Life. The characteristics 
of this faith are now given, and verified in a 
large number of examples. 


1. Now faith is] This is not to be taken 
as a ition of faith, The Hebrew Chris- 
tians well that faith was ‘‘belief in 
God’s word.” But, if they did not require to 
have the term “ faith” defined, they did stand 
in need of being reminded what was involved 
in the act of faith. God’s word had revealed 
to them certain facts relating to the invisible 
world, and had taught them to Aope for a far 
higher state of existence than the present. 
Well: where true faith existed, it would be 
found to give present substance to the things 
which were thus proposed to their hope, and to 
supply conviction of the reality of those unseen 
facts. They who were “on the side of faith” 
&: 39); then, must not cling tenaciously to 
ee oe ie for faith has to do 
the future and the unseen; making the 
Future present, the unseen evident. 


33 


OW faith is the ‘substance of 10 
5 5 ground, 
things hoped for, the evidence or, cona 


of things not seen. 


the substance] Rather, “a substantiating,” 
or “a giving present reality to” (see below). 
Faith, taking its stand firmly upon God’s 
word, apprehends the good things which He 
has promised, as if they actually existed. 

things hoped for| ‘This is meant — to 
describe the class of things spoken of. e are 
not to infer from it that hope precedes faith. 
Certainly, the promise itself must be first be- 
lieved, before the affection of hope can be 
called into exercise, 

the evidence] Rather, “an evidence.” As 
sight is the surest evidence to a man of what is 
seen (producing the clearest conviction), so is 
faith the evidence of those invisible truths which 
God has revealed. ‘There exists the same real 
relation between man’s spirit and the things of 
the spiritual world, which exists between his 
eyes and the things of outward nature. Faith 
“sees Him who is invisible” (v. 27). 

things] The Greek word for “things” in 
the second member of the verse (there is no 
corresponding word in the first member) de- 
notes ‘‘facts,” or, “real things ” (as in vi. 18, 
x 1; Lukei. xr). They are realities, though 

F2 


HEBREWS. XI. 


2 For by it the elders obtained a 
good report. 

3 Through faith we understand 
that the worlds were framed by the 
word of God, so that things which 


[v. 2—4. 


are seen were not made of things 
which do appear. * 
4 By faith Abel offered unto God 
a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, 
by which he obtained witness that 





they are ‘‘not seen;”—unseen and beyond the 
reach of sight. This latter term, ‘‘ not seen,” 
stands to the former, ‘‘hoped for,” as genus to 
species (Rom. viii. 24, 25 ; 2 Cor. v. 7). Under 
it are ranged such revealed truths as the 
creation of the worlds (v. 3); God’s being 
‘‘a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him” 
(v. 6); and His omnipotence (v. 19). 


2. dy it] ‘in virtue of it” (as in x. 19). 

the elders| All who are mentioned, or al- 
luded to, in this chapter (see v. 39). ‘These 
acted as if the things which God had pro- 
mised were not less substantially present to 
them than the things of this world; as if the 
invisible impressed their minds with a convic- 
tion no less deep than that which was pro- 
duced by the visible. 

obtained a good report (v. 39) |—in the wit- 
ness borne to them by Holy Scripture; the 
witness that they were righteous men (w. 4), 
that they pleased God (wv. 5), that ‘‘God was 
not ashamed to be called their God” (wv. 16). 


83. Through faith] ‘‘By faith” (as in the 
following verses); and so in vv. II, 28. 

The nature of faith is first of all illustrated 
by a reference to the opening chapter of 
Genesis. We can know nothing of the origiz 
of the universe, or of the causes of the great 
epochal changes which it has since undergone, 
except from Revelation. Clear, and even ne- 
cessary, as the idea of creation may appear to 
the believer, we find no trace of it among 
nations that were wholly destitute of the light 
of Holy Scripture. Physical science is by its 
own principles forbidden to entertain the in- 
quiry into the origination of things; although, 
as a matter of fact, its investigations con- 
tinually suggest the zeed of a supernatural 
beginning of the world of nature. 

understand| Or, ‘‘apprehend” (the word 
used in Rom. i. 20). Though the intellect 
cannot discover, or prove, the fact of creation, 
it feels the statement of Scripture regarding it 
to be in harmony with its own interior work- 
ings. It finds that the first verse of Genesis 
furnishes the only satisfactory standpoint from 
which to take a view of the constitution of 
the world, and of the relation between the 
world and man and God. 

the worlds] Lit. ‘‘the ages” (see on i. 2); 
the universe, and its parts, in their several 
stages of existence. The latest of such ‘‘ages,” 
as regards our own earth, commenced with 
the six days’ work recorded in Gen. i. 3—31. 

were framed| had their fixed and settled 


constitution given them (comp. Ps. Ixxiv. 16, 
Ixxxix. 37, LXX.). 

the word of God| Here, as in Ps. xxxiii. 6, 
His spoken word. The ten Divine utter- 
ances of Gen. i. 3—29 are, no doubt, specially 
referred to. 

so that] ‘‘in such wise that.” The positive 
statement, which preceded, has its importance 
more clearly exhibited by this addition, which 
shows what it excludes. 

things which are| ‘*the things which are.” 
Many authorities have, “that which is;” sug- 
gesting more distinctly the idea of the visible 
universe. ‘The common reading, which is 
supported by good MSS., and by the Peshito 
and Vulgate, is favoured by 2 Cor. iv. 18 
(where also we have the word which in v. 25 
below is rendered ‘‘for a season”). 

were not made] Or, ‘‘had not their being.” 
The visible world was not generated by, or 
formed out of, pre-existing phenomenal mat- 
ter; as most schemes of philosophical specu- 
lation (unable to get outside the empirical 
maxim, ex nibHo nil) had imagined. Cp. 
Additional Note. 

which do appear] Rather, that did appear 
(pavopever); that had phenomenal existence; 
standing out to view, before there was any 
human eye to look upon them. 


4. more excellent| of a higher kind (comp. 
on iii. 3). So different were the two sacrifices, 
that the one was accepted by God and the 
other rejected. How was this? It was be- 
cause Abel offered his sacrifice ““by faith;” a 
faith of which the effect was to make him 
‘‘righteous” in God’s sight. What, then, was 
the Divine word which Abel believed? what 
the hoped-for good to which his faith gave sub- 
stance? What could it be but the predicted 
overthrow of him through whom sin and death 
had come into the world, an overthrow which 
was to be accomplished by the suffering of one 
who should be born of woman (Gen. iii. 15)? 
Even, then, if some more natural explanation 
of Gen. iii. 21 could be given than that which 
sees in it an indication of animal sacrifices 
having been instituted in Paradise, we cin 
scarcely avoid the supposition, that Abel was 
taught of God to associate the death of the 
lamb which he offered with the hope of atone- 
ment for sin and consequent victory over 
death. 

by which] Rather, by means of which 
(v. 7). The obvious reference of this is to 
‘“‘sacrifice;” and it was actually through, or, 
by means of, his sacrifice that Abel obtained 





| 


v. 5—8.] 


he was righteous, God testifying of 
his gifts: and by it he being dead 


ae set ' yet speaketh. 


: 


5 By faith Enoch was translated 
that he should not see death; and 
was not found, because God had 
translated him: for before his trans- 
lation he had this testimony, that he 
pleased God. 

6 But without faith zt zs impos- 
sible to please him: for he that com- 


witness from God that he was a ‘‘righteous” 
man,—one who was in harmony with the 
mind and will of God. It seems better, there- 
fore (in spite of v. 39, quoted by Delitzsch), 
to take it thus, than to refer it to “faith.” 

righteous| Compare Matt. xxiii. 35, 
I John iii. 12. The context of the latter 
passage (“‘he that doeth righteousness,” ‘he 
that doeth sin”) appears to point back to Gen. 
iv. 7. 

of his gifts| or, unto his gifts (comp. Gen. 
iv. 4: ‘‘God had respect unto Abel and unto 
bis gifts”). Abel was himself first accepted, 
then his offering: the acceptance of the 
offering, however, being a token that he was 
personally accepted. 

by it] by means of it ;—his sacrifice. Abel’s 
sacrifice was, indeed, the occasion of his death; 
but this only constituted him the Proto-martyr. 
When dead, he yet spake; bearing witness to 
God’s faithfulness. His very blood had a 
voice (Gen. iv. 10; ch. xii. 24), which cried 
aloud to God, and was heard by Him. Thus, 
by means of that one sacrificial act, standing 
as it does at the head of the history of our 
race, Abel has spoken to all succeeding gene- 
rations, and still speaks: proclaiming, that to 
God’s saints death is innocuous; that already, 
before a single death had occurred among man- 
kind, the grace of God had provided an antidote 
against the venom of death; that ‘‘the souls 
of the righteous are in the hand of God” 
(Wisa. iii. 1); and that God cares for and 
“will speedily avenge His elect” (Luke xviii. 
7; 8). 


5. Abel lived on after death. Enoch did 
mot even see death (Ps. Ixxxix. 48; John 
Vili. 51). He was “‘translated,” or ‘‘trans- 
ferred,” from this world of shadows to the 
world of invisible realities, on which his faith 
had been fixed. ‘The Hebrew word for ‘‘took” 
in Gen. v. 24 is the one which is used of 
Elijah in 2 K. ii. 3, 5. 

was not found| So the LXX. When his 
friends or his foes sought for him, he ‘‘was 
not found.” 

feor\| This looks back to, By faith. The 
Narrative implies that Enoch’s translation. was 
a rewara of his faith; for, immediately before 


MEBREWS OXI. 


eth to God must believe that he is, 
and that he is a rewarder of them 
that diligently seek him. 

7 By faith Noah, being warned 
of God of things not seen as yet, 


'moved with fear, prepared an ark !0r, being 
wary 


to the saving of his house; by the 
which he condemned the world, and 
became heir of the righteousness 
which is by faith. 

8 By faith Abraham, when he was 


his removal is mentioned, we are told that he 
‘pleased God.”—As the argument is not com- 
plete till the end of wv. 6, there ought only to 
be a colon at the end of w. 5. 

pleased God|—acted in such a way as to 
please Him. ‘That this is the meaning, appears 
both from the Hebrew (‘‘ walked with God;” 
comp. Gen. xvil. 1; 2 K. xx. 3;—in 2 Cor. 
v. 7, 9 both forms of expression occur), and 
from the use of the word here in x. 6. 


6. to please| to act in such a way as to 
please. None could set themselves to walk 
with God, or strive to live acceptably to Him, 
unless they had faith; faith which enabled 
them to ‘‘see Him who is invisible,” and to 
believe that He is righteous and true to His 
promises. 

cometh to| Or, ‘‘draweth near to;” as a wor- 
shipper (cp. x. I, 22). 

is a rewarder| Or, ‘‘sheweth Himself (lit. 
becometh) a rewarder.” He may see fit to 
defer the promised reward; but He is certain 
to prove Himself a rewarder; Himself, in- 
deed, being ‘‘the exceeding great reward” of 
His people. 

diligently seek| Or, simply, * seek” (cp. 
Ps, ix. 10, xxvii. 8; Amos v. 4, 6). 

7. not seen as yet|—as yet, far beyond the 
reach of human vision. ‘The first Divine warn- 
ing seems to have been given 120 years before 
the Flood (Gen. vi. 13). The breaking up of 
‘the fountains of the great deep” and the 
opening of ‘“‘the windows of heaven” were 
not only things ‘‘not seen as yet,” but such as 
might appear to run counter to the existing 
order of the visible world. 

fear] Rather, godly fear (as in xii. 28), 
an apprehension of coming danger, which 
sprang from a sense of God’s holiness and 
man’s sinfulness. 

prepared| Or, ‘‘builded” (as in iii. 3, 4). 

by the which| Rather (asin v.4), by means 
of which;—as the outward embodiment ot 
his faith, The Ark was a proof that Noah 
felt the sentence which God had passed upon 
the world to be just. 

became heir...) Noah’s building the Ark 
led to his being delivered from death, and to 
his becoming the new covenant-head of the 


HEBREWS. XI. [v. 9-14. 


called to go out into a place which 
he should after receive for an inhe- 
ritance, obeyed; and he went out, 
not knowing whither he went. 

9 By faith he sojourned in the 
land of promise, as im a strange coun- 
try, dwelling in tabernacles with 
Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him 
of the same promise : 

10 For he looked for a city which 
hath foundations, whose builder and 
maker is God. 

11 Through faith also Sara herself 
received strength to conceive seed, 
and was delivered of a child when 
she was past age, because she 


judged him faithful who had pro- 
mised. 

12 Therefore sprang there even or 
one, and him as good as dead, so many 
as the stars of the sky in multitude, 
and as the sand which is by the sea 
shore innumerable. 

13 These all died tin faith, not Gr. 
having received the promises, but tf 
having seen them afar off, and were © 
persuaded of them, and embraced them, | 
and confessed that they were strangers : 
and pilgrims on the earth. | 

14 For they that say such things 
declare plainly that they seek a 
country. 








human race; so that he was “their” of the 
promises made to those who, serving God 
in faith, are graciously accepted by Him as 
righteous. 

by faith] Lit. ‘‘according tofaith” (see marg. 
of v. 13, and 1 Tim. i. 9); on the basis of 
faith: faith in God being ‘‘reckoned for right- 
eousness” (Gen. xv. 6); of which, indeed, it 
is the living germ. 


8. called] by God (Isai. xli. 9). The 
strict rendering is, ‘‘By faith Abraham, when 
he was called, obeyed to go out.” 

should after receive] Rather, ‘‘was after- 
wards to receive.” 

whither he went] Lit. “‘whither he cometh,” 
At each stage of his journey he walked simply 
by faith. He did not know that Canaan was 
the land which God had promised to him, 
until he had actually arrived there. 


9. a strange country| Or, ‘‘a land not his 
own.” He fully recognised the fact, that the 
land was not to come into his own possession. 
The only piece of ground in it which became 
his was the burial-place of Machpelah; for 
the purchase of which he insisted on paying 
the full price. In negotiating the sale, Abra- 
ham stated, in a very pointed manner, that he 
was ‘‘a stranger and sojourner” in the land 
(Gen. xxiii. 4). 

tabernacles| Rather, tents (Gen. xii. 8, 
Xviil. 1, xxiv. 6, 7). In these he “dwelt,” or, 
took up his abode; content to have no other 
earthly home. 

heirs with dim] Not merely sharers of 
such present blessing as God granted to him, 
but joint heirs of the promise made te him and 
to bis seed. 


10. a city] Rather, the city: the ‘ heavenly 
erusalem ” (xii. 22); one of whose ‘ gates” 
acob saw, in his vision, thronged by angels 
Gen. xxviii. 17). 

which hath foundations} Emphasizing the 


contrast between the heavenly city, which | 
‘‘abideth ” (see on xiii. 14), and the tents of - 
the patriarchs. Comp. Ps. Ixxxvii. 1. -* 
builder and maker| Rather, architect and } 
builder. Cp. vill. 2. 
Obs. The examples of faith given in vv. 
g—16 illustrate the argument of chh. iii and 
iv; which taught that Canaan was not the 
promised rest of God’s people, iN 
11. also Sara herself] Or, ‘‘ Sara herself 4 
also:”—Sarah, who a little before had been ' 
reproved for unbelief (Gen. xviii. 12). 
and was...age] Rather (according to a 
better supported reading), and that, when 
she was past age. Cp. Rom. iv. 21. ‘ 
12. Therefore...] Rather, Wherefore also ; 
there sprang from one; the “‘also” point- 5 
ing to the reward of his faith (cp. Phil. ii. 9). j 
one] Isai. li. 2; Ezek. xxxiii. 24. i 
as good as dead| \t is the same word as in : 
Rom. iv. 19, ‘‘ dead.” i 
the sand which,...| Rather, ‘the sand by f 
the sea-shore, which is innumerable.” 


13. These all} Abraham and his family. 

in faith] Lit. (as marg.), ‘according to 
faith” (v. 7); standing on the ground of 
faith. Up to death they continued looking 
for God’s salvation as a thing yet to come 
(Gen. xlix. 18). 

not having,..confessed| Rather (correct 
reading), not having received the promises 
[that is, the things promised], due having 
seen and saluted them from afar, and 
having confessed. They ‘‘saluted” the 
yet distant object of their faith, as travellers 
on coming within sight of Jerusalem are 
accustomed to give it a reverent greeting. 
Comp. John viii. 56. 

pilgrims] Rather, sojourners (comp. Gen. 
xxiii. 4; Ps. xxxix. 12). Cp. Gen. xlvii. 9. 

14. declare plainly} Or, ‘make it plain.” 

seek a country} Rather, “are seeking their 
country ;”—their true home (cp. xili. 14). 


EE ee 


'Or, Zo. 


v. 15—23.] 


15 And truly, if they had been 
mindful of that country from whence 
they came out, they might have had 
opportunity to have returned. 

16 But now they desire a better 
country, that is, an heavenly: where- 
fore God is not ashamed to be called 
their God: for he hath prepared for 
them a city. 

17 By faith Abraham, when he 
was tried, offered up Isaac: and he 
that had received the promises offered 
up his only begotten son, 

18 'Of whom it was said, That in 
Isaac shall thy seed be called: 


15. When the patriarchs called themselves 
‘strangers ” they did not refer to their having 
left Chaldea. If they had thought of that as 
still their country, they might easily have 
found ‘‘ opportunity to return;” and so 
would have ceased to be wanderers. The 
distance was no such very serious hindrance 
(cp. Gen. xxiv. 4—6). 


16. But now|—to come back from the 
supposition made in v. 15 to the actual facts. 

ashamed| Lit. ‘‘ashamed of them.” ‘They 
had shewn themselves to be fitting recipients 
of His grace; welcoming His overtures, and 
“walking worthily of the Lord” (Col. i. 10; 
1 Thess. ii. 12). 

their God| Gen. xvil. 7; Exod. iii. 6, 15. 
See Matt. xxii. 32. Comp. on viii. Io. 

for| Such language God ‘‘ was not ashamed” 
to use: For, unspeakably great as the privilege 
must be of having Him to be theirs—rheir 
God,—it is only what God has conferred upon 
them. In His wondrous counsel ‘‘ He hath 
prepared for them,” from the foundation of 
the world (Matt. xxv. 34; cp. 1 Cor. ii. 7, 9), 
‘ea city,” in which ‘‘ He Himself will be with 
them, their God ” (Rev. xxi. 3). 


17. Having shewn, in vv. 8—16, how 
the faith of the patriarchs was exhibited in 
their whole character, he now proceeds to speak 
of some particular acts of faith. 

offered up| So far as Abraham personally 
was concerned, the offering was complete. 

received| Rather, accepted; cheerfully 
submitting to the conditions under which the 
promises were made. 


18. Of whom] Rather, “‘Unto wnom” 
(as in ch. v. 5, Luke ii. 18, 20). 

That| Rather, For (as being part of the 
quotation, Gen. xxi, 12). The name ‘“‘seed 
of Abraham” was to belong to the line which 
descended through Isaac. In surrendering 
Isaac to death Abraham appeared to abandon 
the promise of blessing which had been made 
$a his seed (Gen. xvii. 19). 


ie oR AWS! SOM. 


1g Accounting that God was able 
to raise 4m up, even from the dead ; 
from whence also he received him in 
a figure. 

20 By faith Isaac blessed Jacob 
and Esau concerning things to come. 

21 By faith Jacob, when he was a 
dying, blessed both the sons of Joseph; 
and worshipped, /eaning upon the top 
of his staff. 

22 By faith Joseph, when he died, 


'made mention of the departing of ' Or, 


the children of Israel; and gave com- dered. 


mandment concerning his bones. 
23 By faith Moses, when he was 





19. able...dead| Rather, “able even to 
raise from the dead.” He had firm cone 
fidence in God’s veracity, and he thought it 
no way ‘‘incredible that God should raise the 
dead” (Acts xxvi. 8). 

from whence also| Rather, from whence he 
did also in a figure receive him back. 
After Isaac had been laid as a victim on the 
altar and, by means of the substituted ram, 
figuratively slain, he was restored to his father, 
like one that had been raised from the dead. 
The text does not say that this sacrifice and 
resurrection was prefigurative ; but that it 
was so, and that Abraham’s faith was by it 
instructed to look forward to ‘‘the day of 
Christ,” may be certainly inferred from John 
Vill, 51. 

20. Although Isaac gave his blessing to 
Jacob at first under a misapprehension, yet, 
when he found out his error, he distinctly 
ratified what he had done (Gen. xxvii. 33, 
XXVill. 3, 4); and, in blessing Esau, he recog- 
nised Jacob’s superiority. 

21. a dying] See Gen. xlviii. 21, ‘‘ Behold, 
I die.” Cp. xlvii. 29. 

both| Rather, each of; discriminatingly 
(Gen. xlviii. 17—19). The act of ‘ worship,” 
mentioned in Gen. xlvil. 29 —31, was prior to 
the benediction of Ephraim and Manasseh. 
When Jacob had received an assurance from 
Joseph that he should be buried in the land 
of promise, he ‘‘ bowed himself upon (or, 
towards) the bed’s head” (cp. 1 K. i. 47). 
So the Hebrew. The LXX. have ‘‘ worship 
ped upon the top of his staff” (see below). 
As the act of worship was that by which the 
energy of Jacob’s faith was shown, the Apostle 
did not care to deviate from the familiar 
Septuagintal rendering. To have done so 
might have diverted the reader’s attention to a 
quite subordinate matter. 


22. when he died] ‘‘as he was dying.” 


made mention of | Or (marg.), ‘‘ called to 
mind concerning.” Joseph had for eighty 


10x, 
cae 


HEBREWS. XI. 


born, was hid three months of his 
parents, because they saw he was a 
proper child; and they were not 
afra’d of the king’s commandment. 

24 By faith Moses, when he was 
come to years, refused to be called 
the son of Pharaoh’s daughter ; 

25 Choosing rather to suffer af- 
fliction with the people of God, than 
to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a 
season ; 

26 Esteeming the reproach ! of 





years been the ruler of Egypt, yet he did not 
forget the great promises which God had 
made to Israel. 


23. he was a proper child] Rather, bow 
comely the child was. It would seem from 
St Stephen’s ‘‘comely before God” (Acts 
vii. 20), that there was something of un- 
earthly beauty in the child, such as befitted 
one with whom God would hereafter ‘‘speak 
face to face.” ‘This kindled the faith of the 
parents, so that they had courage to set at 
nought the king’s murderous edict. Instead 
of a semicolon after ‘‘ child,” there should be 
only a comma. 


24. refused| He did so, virtually, when 
he took part with the oppressed Israelite 
(Exod. ii. 11—15). 


25. the people of God] Cp. Exod. iii. 7: 
‘¢T have seen the affliction of My people.” 

to enjoy the pleasures of sin| Rather, to 
enjoy the short-lived fruit of sin;— 
that is, the honour and wealth which would 
have been his, during this life, if he would 
have renounced his connexion with Israel; 
—the ‘“‘sin” specifically referred to being that 
of apostasy (cp. ill. 12, 13). The word ren- 
dered ‘‘short-lived” is the same that is used 
in 2 Cor. iv. 18 (‘‘ temporal”). 


26. the reproach of Christ] ‘The contempt 
with which men treated the very idea of a 
future Saviour of mankind, such as Israel 
professed to look for. To the wise counsellors 
of Pharaoh this expectation would appear 
grossly absurd. The reputed ‘‘ promise” was 
said to have been made to Abraham some four 
hundred years before, yet here was God’s elect 
nation in abject bondage! What language 
could describe the folly of one who would 
sacrifice his prospect of succeeding to the 
throne of Egypt for so miserable a delusion! 
The language of the text may refer to Ps. 
Ixxxix. 50—52; ‘‘Remember, Lord, the re- 

roach which Thy servants have ;... wherewith. 

line enemies have reproached, O Lord, where- 
with they save reproached the footsteps [so 
slow and lagging] of Thy Christ.” Compare 
also Rom. xv. 3 (Introd. 111. 2, § ii.). 


[v. 24—a9. 


Christ greater riches than the trea- 
sures in Egypt: for he had respect 
unto the recompence of the reward. 

27 By faith he forsook Egypt, 
not fearing the wrath of the king: 
for he endured, as seeing him who is 
invisible. 

28 Through faith he kept the pass- 
over, and the sprinkling of blood, lest 
he that destroyed the firstborn should 
touch them. 

29 By faith they passed through 


had respect unto] ‘Turning his eyes away 
from other objects and fixing them on that 
one hope. The ‘recompense of reward” 
looked for by Moses was none other than 
that which had been already mentioned, in 


X. 35, as the aim of Christians, 


27. forsook} Rather, left (comp. Matt. 
iv. 13). As the Passover is spoken of in v. 
28, many have referred the present verse to 
the flight of Moses into Midian; so introdu- 
cing an evident inconsistency with Exod. ii. 15. 
But, in fact, v. 28 is quite subordinate to v. 
27; as is shown by the change of tense (lit. 
‘he hath kept”’) ; and the reference is really 
to the Exodus, in speaking of which Josephus 
uses the same words (‘ Ant.’ Il. 15): ‘‘ They 
Jeft Egypt in the month of Xanthicus.” Thus 
everything becomes harmonious. Pharaoh’s 
anger burst forth as soon as he heard the 
proposal that Israel should leave Egypt (Exod. 
v. 4—19). It culminated in his last interview 
with Moses (x. 28, 29): ‘*See my face no 
more [to ask for permission to leave Egypt] ; 
for in the day thou seest my face thou shalt 
die ”» 


endured| Persevered in his resolve. This 
he did, as seeing by faith the ‘‘ mighty hand 
and stretched out arm” of Him who is in- 
visible (Exod. vi. 6; cp. xiv. 13). 

28. Through faith| Rather, “‘ By faith.” 
Pharaoh had refused to allow Israel to go 
into the desert to ‘‘hold a feast to the Lord” 
(Exod. x. 9). Moses, in obedience to God’s 
command and relying on His promise, held 
‘¢a feast unto the Lord” (ib. xii. 14) there in 
Egypt. 7 

kept] Or, “performed ;” since the verb 
belongs also to the “sprinkling of blood” (on 
the door-posts of the houses, ib. xii. 7). The 
noun rendered, ‘‘ sprinkling,” is from the verb 
which is used in Levit. i. 5, &c., of sprink- 
ling blood on the altar. Or that passover- 
evening every nous becam: a~ altar. 

lest #e...should| Rather, that the de- 
stroyer of the first-born might not 
touch them; but might spare all whose 
doors were sealed with paschal blood. The 
faith of Moses was signally displayed in this, 





: 
. 
{ 


a 


(Or, that 
were dis 


Vv. 30—36.] 


the Red sea as by dry Jand: which 
the Egyptians assaying to do were 
drowned. 

30 By faith the walls of Jericho 
fell down, after they were compassed 
about seven days. 

31 By faith the harlot Rahab pe- 
rished not with them ! that believed 
not, when she had received the spies 
with peace. 

32 And what shall I more say? for 
the time would fail me to tell of 
Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Sam- 
son, and of Jephthae ; of David also, 
and Samuel, and of the prophets : 

33 Who through faith subdued 


whatever may have been the degree of insight 
which he had into the deeper significancy of 
that Passover deliverance. In any case Moses 
understood that God had redeemed Israel 
(Exod. xv. 13). 


29. which......assaying to do| Lit. ‘of 
which [sea]...making trial;’—to discover if 
they too could not pass through it. 


30. When the people carried the ark 
around the city seven days in succession, they 
gave a clear proof of their reliance on God’s 
unseen Presence. 


31. For the nature of Rahab’s faith see 
Josh. ii. g—11: ‘‘ The Lord, your God, He 
is God in heaven above and in earth beneath.” 

that believed not] Rather (as marg.), that 
were disobedient (comp. ili. 18, Acts xix. 
9); although they knew that Israel was coming 
up under God’s directions (Josh. ii. g—11). 

with peace| Severing herself from Israel’s 
enemies, and adjuring the spies in God’s name 
to make a covenant of peace with her (Josh. 
li. 12—14). 


32—38. The instances of faith which are 
alluded to’in these verses fall into two groups: 
the first of an active (vv. 32—34), and the 
second of a passive (vv. 35—38), character, 


32. In order of time Gideon follows Barak; 
but he is placed first, as the victory which he 
gained was pre-eminently a triumph of faith 
(cp. Isai. ix. 4, x. 26). Of the kings, David 
only is mentioned ; the deliverances granted to 
Judah in later times (even the great one in 
Hezekiah’s reign) being said to be ‘for 
David’s sake” (1 K. xi. 32, 34; 2 K. xx. 6). 
During the regal period the nation’s spiritual 
life was chiefly upheld by the prophets, who 
’ are here represented by Samuel (cp. Acts 
iii. 24). 


88, David subdued kingdoms (2 S, viii. 


BEBREWS.UXE 


kingdoms, wrought righteousness, ob- 
tained promises, stopped the mouths 
of lions, 

34 Quenched the violence of fire, 
escaped the edge of the sword, out of 
weakness were made strong, waxed 
valiant in fight, turned to flight the 
armies of the aliens. 

35 Women received their dead 
raised to life again: and others were 


“tortured, not accepting deliverance ; Berl 


that they might obtain a better re- 
surrection : 

36 And others had trial of crue/ 
mockings and scourgings, yea, more- 
over of bonds and imprisonment : 





I—I4), executed righteousness (ib. 15), and 
obtained promises of the most wonderful kind 
(2 S. vil. 12—15) ;—or, obtained the fulfilment 
of promises; his patient faith being rewarded 
by the throne of Israel. The clause, ‘‘stopped 
the mouths of lions,” is best taken as referring 
to Daniel (Dan. vi. 22), since quenched the 
power of fire in the next verse evidently refers 
to Dan. ili.25. It should, therefore, have been 
placed at the beginning of v. 34. 


84. violence] Rather, power. The fire 
retained its natural properties, but its power 
was ‘‘ quenched,” so far as the three confes- 
sors were concerned. 

escaped| As Elijah (2 K, i. 9) and Elisha 
(ib. vi. 13). 

out of weakness| As Samson (Judg. xvi. 
28), Asa (2 Chro. xiv. 11). But the last 
four clauses of this verse may all be referred 
to the men of the Maccabean period (So 
Delitzsch). 

of the aliens| Of foreigners;—so in the case 
of Gideon (Judg. viii. 12). 


35. Women] 1 K. xvii. 22; 2 K. iv. 36. 

raised to life again] Lit. ‘‘ out of a resur= 
rection.” 

others] As Eleazar and the seven sons of 
the Maccabean mother (2 Macc. vi and vii). 

tortured) Or, ‘‘broken on the wheel” 
(2 Mace. vi. 19, 28, 30). 

deliverance] Lit. ‘the redemption ;” the 
offer of purchasing life by apostasy. 

a better resurrection|—better than that 
which had been wrought for the Israelite 
mothers by Elijah and Elisha. ‘*The King 
of the universe,” said one of them, “shall 
raise up us, who have died for His laws, to an 
eternal revival of life” (2 Macc. vii. 9). 


836. cruel mockings| 2 Macc. vil. 7, fo. 

Sscourgings | ib. vii. I. 

bonds| As Jeremiah (Jer, xx. 2, XXxli. 2, 
XXXvii. 4). 


37 They were stoned, they were 
sawn asunder, were tempted, were 
slain with the sword: they wandered 
about in sheepskins and goatskins ; 
being destitute, afflicted, torment- 

, 

38 (Of whom the world was not 
worthy :) they wandered in deserts, 


HEBREWS, XI. 


[v. 37—40. 


and im mountains, and im dens and 
caves of the earth. 

39 And these all, having obtained 
a good report through faith, received 
not the promise: 


40 God having ' provided some !0r Swe 


better thing for us, that they with- 
out us should not be made perfect. 





37. stoned| As Zechariah (2 Chro, xxiv. 
20—22). 

sawn asunder] See Introd, to Isaiah, 11. 
§ 1, note 4. 

were tempted| So the youngest of the seven 
martyrs in 2 Macc. vii. After his six brothers 
had remained firm under the worst bodily 
torture, Antiochus applied to him a yet sharper 
test of fidelity, promising with an oath to give 
him great wealth and to make him his personal 
friend, if only he would abandon “the laws 
of his fathers” (see Additional Note). 

with the sword | 1 K. xix. 10, 13, I9. 

wandered about] Rather, went about 
(a different word from that in w. 38). 

sheepskins} The word used of Elijah’s 
mantle in 2 K. i. 8. 

tormented] Rather, distressed; the word 
used in v, 25 (“suffer affliction”), xiii. 3 
(‘‘suffer adversity ”). 


38. the world] That proud, ungodly, 
world (v. 7), which thought them not worthy 
co live (Acts xxii. 22). 

in deserts, and in mountains] So Judas 
Maccabeus (2 Mace. v. 27). 

dens] ib. vi. I1, X. 6. 

caves of the earth] underground caverns. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES 


1. There are two uses of the word vmo- 
araots, a transitive and an intransitive, to be 
carefully discriminated. In i. 2, iii. 14, it is 
used absolutely, and so is intransitive. Here, 
being in construction with a genitive, it is 
transitive. So Theophylact gives it, oJci@ots 
TOV LNT@ OVT@V, UTOTTAGLS Tav pH VpPEo- 
rnkota@y. And similarly Chrysostom: who 
gives this illustration of the meaning of the 
word; ‘* The resurrection has not yet taken 
place, but faith substantiates (idioryjcw) it in 
our souls.” 


8. There is no ground for imagining a 
transposition of the px (as though it were éx 
2 Pawouevwv); although the Itala, Peshito, 
and Vulg. (with many commentators) so trans- 
late it,—misled, probably, by 2 Macc. vii. 28, 
e& ovx Cvray (cp. Wisd. xi. 8). The py 
negatives an implied assertion, that é« aivo- 
pevay ra Breroueva yeyove—“the world we 
see had its being from a prior phenomenal 
world.” {f it be asked whether this negation 


39. received not the promise] The recur- 
rence of these words takes our thoughts back 
to x. 36 and its exhortation to patient endur- 
ance; thus preparing the way for ch. xii. 


40. some better thing] The mysterious 
privileges of the Gospel dispensation; which 
excite the wonder of angels (x Pet. i. rz, 
12). Abraham and Moses and David were 
not ‘made perfect” (xii. 23) until Jesus 
had established the New Covenant, in virtue 
of which we are now already (in one sense) 
‘* perfected” (see on x. 14). His resurrection 
from the dead was the fulfilment of ‘the 
promise made unto the fathers” (Acts xiii. 
32, 33). By it we are “begotten again... 
unto an incorruptible inheritance” (1 Pet. i. 
3, 4); the Holy Spirit being given as “the 
earnest of the promised possession.” 

for us| Or, “ concerning us.” 

that they...| Or, ‘‘ that they should not be 
made perfect apart from us.” This thought, 
‘not apart from us,” forms the ground of the 
exhortation in xii. 1. Those ancient worthies, 
who have now at length been ‘‘made perfect ” 
(xii. 23), stand around us, adding solemnity to 
our lives. 


onyCHAPs Xi; 1157135) '21aa7e 


be consistent with Gen. i. 11, 20, 24, the 
answer is, that vegetables and animals did not 
receive their being from the earth or the 
waters, but were framed by the (creative) 
word af God operating upon the earth and the 
waters.—It is evident that the text gives no 
warrant for speaking of God as having created 
the world out of on-phenomenal substance. 

21. Aquila and Symmachus render the 
word, ‘*bed.” Indeed, only two verses later 
on, the LXX, translate the same Hebrew 
word (there is no pronominal affix in either 
case) ‘‘the bed.”—The Vulgate here retained 
the erroneous rendering of the Itala, ‘‘ adoravit 
fastigium virge ejus;” although in Gen. xlvii. 
31 it had paraphrased correctly; ‘‘ adoravit 
Deum, conversus ad lectuli caput.” 

37. The word émeipaoOncay, though ib- 
sent from the Peshito, is in the Vulg., and is 
too well supported to be called in question. 
Besides having good MS. authority, it is found 
three times in Origen. 








v. I—3.] 


CHAPTER XII. 


1 An exhortation to constant faith, patience, 
and godliness. 22 A commendation of tne 
new testament above the old. 


HEREFORE seeing we also 
are compassed about with so 
great a cloud of witnesses, let us 
lay aside every weight, and the sin 
which doth so easily beset us, and 


Cuap, XII. The exhortation begun in x, 
32—36 is now resumed (see on xi. 39). If 
they, who had so much less light granted them, 
persevered thus manfully, what patience and 
courage ought we to exhibit! 


1. The we also of A.V. is certainly mis- 
placed, and gives a false antithesis; though it is 
not easy to represent the nicely constructed ori- 
ginal. The strict connexion is: Wherefore 
let us also...run with patience;—evel as 
those did of whom we have been speaking. 
But into this framework there are inserted 
two subordinate clauses: one to enforce the 
‘© Wherefore,"—having so great a cloud 
of witnesses surrounding us; the other 
to suggest a needful preliminary to the ‘‘run- 
ning,”—-laying aside every encumbrance 
and the sin thatis so ready to beset us. 

a cloud of witnesses| ‘The heroes of faith, 
who lived under the elder Dispensation, stand 
in a near relation to us (cp. on xi, 40). They 
hover around us (cp. v. 23 below), witnesses 
to the solemn ‘‘ profession ” (iii. 1) which we 
have made; and, as such, undoubtedly watch- 
ing our conduct with deepest interest. That 
this is the reference of the term ‘‘ witnesses ” 
here, is made plain by a comparison of 1 Tim. 
vi. 12 ;—where the word rendered “ fight” (as 
also in r Tim. iv. 7) is the same which has 
here to be rendered ‘race; ”—‘ Fight the 
good fight of faith; lay hold on eternal life, 
whereunto thou wast called, and didst profess 
the good profession in the sight of many wit- 
nesses.” 

lay aside Asa runner might lay aside his 
outer garments, shoes, &c. (Eph. iv. 22). 

weight| Or, ‘ encumbrance, » But the word 
may have a y moral signification ; 
“ pride,” or ‘‘ conceit ” (Additional Note). 

doth so easily beset us] Or, ‘‘is so ready to 
beset us.” Probably the sin referred to is that 
of timidity or false shame (see below); the sin 
which induced some of the Hebrew Christians 
to shrink back from their profession (x. 25). 

patience| patient fortitude; as in x. 36. 

the race] An athletic term, which carries 
our thoughts back to x. 32. 

set before us] with certain rules laid down 
to which the candidates must conform, and 
certain rewards for those who win the race 
(cp. 2 Tim. ii. 5). 


HEBREWS. XII. 


let us run with patience the race that 
is set before us, 


2 Looking unto Jesus the ! author #05, de 


and finisher of our faith ; who for the *""” 
joy that was set before Ta endured 
the cross, despising the shame, and is 
set down at the right hand of the 
throne of God. 

3 For consider him that endured 
such contradiction of sinners against 


2. Looking] with eyes turned away from 
other objects and fixed on one only. 

Jesus] In the Greek, the name occurs after 
the description (cp. ii. 9) : “‘ Looking unto the 
author and finisher of faith, (even) Jesus.” 

the author (in ii. 10, “‘captain”) and 

Jinisher] Or, ‘‘the beginner and the perfecter :” 

who by His victory over the powers of dark- 
ness (a victory gained in the power of faith, 
ii. 1I—13) won the grace of regeneration for 
the army of Faith; and who, after sustaining 
them in their conflicts, until they ‘stand 
perfect and complete in all the will of God” 
(Col. iv. rr), shall Himself bestow on them 
the crown of victory. 

of our faith| Rather, of faith; as the 
principle of spiritual life. By His one self- 
oblation He supplied the ground on which 
faith rests. At His Second Coming He will 
consummate that which faith has striven after. 

who] Christ’s own history is a pledge of 
what the recompense of faith shall be. He 
endured the unknown sufferings of the cross 
in stedfast faith (cp. ch. v. 7—9); the issue 
of which was exaltation to God’s right hand. 

for the joy| in order that be might gain 
the joy (such is the force of the preposition 
in v. 16). Suffering was the price He must 
pay for it. ‘‘The Saviour’s joy,” says Theo- 
doret, ‘‘ was the salvation of mankind” (cp. 
Isai. lili. r2). 

set before him (as in v. 1)] assigned to 
Him, in the counsel of eternal love, For His 
reward. 

the cross| ‘Here, at last,” says Bengel, 
‘the speaks of what to many was so odious 
a name ;”—a ‘cause of stumbling” (1 Cor. 
1. 23)- 

the shame] For He could say in 
assured faith, ‘*I know that I shall not be 
ashamed ” (Isai. 1. 7). 


3. For] Fix your eyes on Him, I say; 
For, consider how ‘slight your trials are, when 
they are compared with His. 

consider | Lit. ‘‘ estimate the proportion of.” 
So bly glorious in Himself, and yet 
subjected to ek indignities ! What Dro- 
portion can there be between His trial and 
yours? But He endured all in patience. 

contradiction] From the beginning it had 
beer. foretold that He should be as ‘‘a sign to 


g2 


HEBREWS. XII. 


himself, lest ye be wearied and faint 
in your minds. 

4 Ye have not yet resisted unto 
blood, striving-against sin. 

5 And ye have forgotten the ex- 
hortation which speaketh unto you 
as unto children, My son, despise 
not thou the chastening of the Lord, 
nor faint when thou art rebuked of 
him: 

6 For whom the Lord loveth he 
chasteneth, and scourgeth every son 
whom he receiveth. 


7 If ye endure chastening, God 


[v. 4—10. 


dealeth with you as with sons; for 
what son is he whom the father chas- 
teneth not? 

8 But if ye be without chastise- 
ment, whereof all are partakers, then 
are ye bastards, and not sons. 

g Furthermore we have had fa- 
thers of our flesh which corrected us, 
and we gave them reverence: shall 
we not much rather be in subjec- 
tion unto the Father of spirits, and 
live? 

10 For they verily for a few days 
chastened us after their own plea- 





be spoken against” (Luke ii. 34). His mi- 
nistry was one long ‘‘day of Meribah” (in 
Num. xx. 13, the LXX. have “waters of 
contradiction”’). 

faint|—as those who lose heart and give 
up their endeavour (cp. v. 5; Gal. vi. 9). 
Literally, the clause stands; “that ye be not 
weary, fainting in your souls.” 


4. The figure is now changed, trom the 
tace-course to the wrestling-ground (as in 
r Cor. ix. 24—27). In the expression, unto 
élood, the figure almost passes into reality. 

not yet] He is addressing the second gene= 
ration of Jewish Christians. In earlier times 
many had stood firm in their opposition to a 
sinful world, when this could be done only by 
risking their lives (Acts vii—xii). 

’ The death of St James may have taken 
place two years previously (cp. on xiii. 7). 


5. forgotten] 
forgotten. 

exhortation} Or, “consolation” (under 
their trials; cp. 2 Cor. i. 5, 7). 

speaketh,..as unto| Rather, discourseth 
with you as with (Prov. iii. 11, 12). 

despise not] Do not think lightly of it, or 
cast it away in disdain; but reverence it, as 
having in it very precious fruit. Exdure it, 
that you may obtain that fruit. 

chastening| Or, ‘‘discipline,” training, 
education; a phase of meaning, which is to 
be borne in mind throughout this passage. 

Jfaint| Or, ‘be disheartened” (7. 3). 

6. and scourgeth| yea, and scourgeth. 
So the LXX. The Hebrew has, “ Even as 
a father (chasteneth) the son...” 

receiveth] to his favour. 


It isa strong term; quite 


7. Ifye endure] Comp. x. 32 and vv. 2, 3, 
above. If, having chastisement sent on you, 
Ou endure it (after Christ’s example), then 
ow for your comfort that God dealeth with 
you as with sons (for the reading, see Ad- 
ditional Note). This patient enduring is the 
contrast of the ‘‘ despising” in v. 5 


what son is he] Or, *‘what son is there;”— 
what genuine son? 


8. without chastisement| None were with- 
out it, except those who, when it was offered 
them, ‘‘ would none of it” (Prov. i. 23, 25), 
and so were left to ‘‘ eat the fruit of thei own 
way” (ib. 31). 

all are] Rather, all have been made. 
The induction supplied in ch, xi warranted 
the use of ‘‘ all.” 

bastards| Supposititious children, not really 
belonging to the family (Deut. xxxii. 5, Matt. 
xiii. 38, John viii. 3944). 


9. Furthermore] Up to this point tne 
argument has been drawn from the analogy of 
human education. But this falls far short of 
representing the value of our Heavenly Father’s 
discipline. 

have had fathers...] Lit. ‘‘ have had the 
fathers of our flesh as chastisers.” 

gave them reverence] ‘The word used in 
Num. xii. 14 (A. V. ‘be ashamed”), 2 Chro, 
vii. 14 (A. V. ‘‘ humble themselves”). 

be in subjection] Submitting our wills to 
His (as in James iv. 7). 

the Father of spirits] From whom our 
spirits have their immediate origin (cp. Eccl. 
xii. 7). He is ready to bestow the tenderest 
regard on every ‘contrite and humble spirit ” 
(Isai. lvii. 15, 16). 

and live| obtaining from Him the only 
true life (Prov. viii. 35) ; that which is granted 
to the ‘‘just man” who abides ‘‘in his faith” 
(ch. x. 38); the essence of which is partici- 
pation in God’s holiness (see v. Io). 


10. for a few days} occasionally during 
our childhood. The contrast to this did not 
require to be mentioned in the second clause 
of the verse. God's training lasts so long as 
there is room for growth-in holiness; conse- 
quently, until death. 

after their own pleasure] Rather, as 
seemed good to them; to the best of their 
iudgment: though sometimes they might be 





Ox, even. 


¥. 11—10.] 


sure; but he for our profit, that we 
might be partakers of his holiness. 

11 Now no chastening for the 
present seemeth to be joyous, but 
grievous: nevertheless afterward it 
yieldeth the peaceable fruit of right- 
eousness unto them which are ex- 
ercised thereby. 

12 Wherefore lift up the hands 
which hang down, and the feeble 
knees ; 

13 And make 'straight paths for 
your feet, lest that which is lame be 


BED REWS: (XI 


turned out of the way; but let it 
rather be healed. 

14 Follow peace with all men, and 
holiness, without which no man shall 
see the Lord: 

15 Looking diligently lest any 


man ' fail of the grace of God; lest ! Or, fall 


any root of bitterness springing up 
trouble you, and thereby many be de- 
filed ; 

16 Lest there de any fornicator, or 
profane person, as Esau, who for one 
morsel of meat sold his birthright. 





over-lenient, and sometimes unduly severe. 
God’s discipline, on the contrary, always 
tends with certainty to our highest welfare. 

partakers of his holiness| and so, in the end, 
of ‘everlasting life” (Rom. vi. 22). Cp. 
2 Pet. i. 4. 


11. x0 chastening| Or; ‘‘all chastisement 
seemeth for the time present to be not a mat- 
ter of joy, but of grief.” This statement is 
true universally. That which follows in the 
second part of the verse is also true (in a de- 
gree) of all ‘‘discipline” that is worthy of the 
Dame. 

peaceable| Rather, peaceful; in contrast 
with the disturbance caused by ‘‘grief.” In 
Isai. lvii. 19 ‘‘peace” is the healing balm, 
which the Father of spirits (v. 16) bestows on 
those whom He has “grieved” (so the LXX. 
in v. 17, ‘‘I grieved him”). 

of righteousness] A genitive of apposition; 
righteousness being itself the ‘‘ peaceful fruit” 
(comp. James ili. 18). 

are exercised] Rather, have been exer- 
cised, so as to be thoroughly trained and 
proficient (as in ch. v. 14). 


12. There is an evident allusion to Isai. 
xxxv. 3. Later on in that chapter the Pro- 
phet foresees a time of ‘‘joy,” in which ‘‘grief” 
shall have fled away (2. Io). 

lift up| Lit. ‘‘straighten anew:” (see Note 
below). 

feeble] In Luke v. 18 and 24, ‘‘palsied.” 
Their sluggishness of faith has ended in spie 
ritual paralysis; so that they make little pro- 
gress in “‘the race set before them” (wv. 1). 


13. make...feet] From Prov. iv. 26. 

lest... Or, ‘‘that the lame be not turned out 
of the way,” in dread of its roughnesses; ‘‘but 
may rather be healed” (cp. Isai. xxxv. 6). 
The Church must not only remove stumbling- 
blocks (Isai. lvii. 14) out of the way of the 
lame (the doubtful-minded, 1 K. xviii. 21), 
but must also labour for their recovery; 
bringing them to Him who said, “I will 
heal him” (whom J had chastened); Isai. lvii. 
17, 19. 


14. Follow] ‘‘Pursue” (Ps. xxxiv. 14), 

Aoliness| Rather, sanctification (as in 
1 Thess. iv. 3, 7). They are to seek ‘peace 
with all men,” so as not to provoke any need- 
less contest with evil; but in doing this, they 
are to guard against anything that would in- 
terfere with their consecration of heart and life. 
Cp. 1 Pet. iii, rz—15. 

see the Lord] Matt. v. 8; cp. Isai. xxxv. 8, 


15. The members of the Church are to 
have a brotherly care of each other (cp. iii. 12, 
13, iv. r, x. 24). The form of this verse is 
evidently moulded on that of Deut. xxix, 18. 

Jail of | Or, ‘fall back from;” not keeping 
pace with the leadings of God’s grace; but 
lingering behind and so missing the reward 
which He has provided. Cp. iv. 1. 

of bitterness| Producing bitter fruit. The 
“root” designates the man who draws others 
into apostasy; see Deut. xxix. 18, 19 (cp. I 
Macc. i. ro). The same text is referred to 
by St Peter in Acts viii. 23. 

many| Rather, the many; the body of 
the congregation. ‘The sin of idolatry is fre- 
quently spoken of in the Old Testament as 
causing ‘‘defilement” (Jer. ii. 7, 23, iii. 1, 23 
Ezek. xx. 30). Whatever else draws men 
away from the ‘‘grace of God,” whether infi- 
delity or worldliness, must have the effect of 
leaving the soul polluted. 


16. as Esau] This probably belongs to 
the second of the preceding terms, ‘‘ Any 
fornicator, or [more generally] profane per= 
son ;’”—of Which profaneness Esau stands as the 
type. He despised his birthright (Gen. xxv. 
34): that birthright which made him heir of 
the blessing pronounced on Abraham; per= 
haps, also, of the right of priestly ministration 
eee ili. 12, 13). For him ‘things hoped 
or” wereas unsubstantial shadows, ‘‘things not 
seen” as things non-existent. Being thus sen- 
sual and faithless, he had cast away all care 
for that “‘sanctification” (v. 14), of which he 
had received the outward pledge in the rite of 
circumcision. He had become ‘‘ profane.” 

Let all who belong to the ‘church of the 


94 


HEBREWS XII 


17 For ye know how that after- 
ward, when he would have inherited 
tie blessing, he was rejected : for he 
found no ' place of repentance, though 


. he sought it carefully with tears. 


18 For ye are not come unto the 
mount that might be touched, and 
that burned with fire, nor unto black- 
ness, and darkness, and tempest, 

1g And the sound of a trumpet, 


firstborn” (v. 23) beware of bartering away 
their heavenly birthright. 
one morsel of meat] Rather, ‘‘one meal.” 


17. how that...would have] Rather, that 
when he afterward would fain have. 

rejected] his claim to be the rightful heir 
of ‘the blessing” being disallowed. Isaac 
himself recognized the fact, when he said of 
Jacob, ‘‘yea, and he shall be blessed” (Gen. 
XXVil. 33). 

place of repentance] Or, ‘‘room for repent- 
ance ;”—for that ‘‘repentance,” which he 
“sought after with tears;” which was, a 
change of the Divine purpose that had been 
announced in Isaac’s benediction of Jacob. 
There was no room for sucha change. When 
Judah was “rejected” by God (Jer. vi. 30, 
vii. 29), the sentence ran, ‘‘I have spoken it, 
I have purposed it, and qi/l not repent.” So, 
too, when Saul was rejected, it was added, 
that God was ‘not a man that He should 
repent.” So was it, when Esau was rejected 


- from being heir of the blessing which he had 


once deliberately set at nought. God’s sen- 
tence was irreversible. Cp. Deut. i. 45. 

sought it carefully| Or, simply, ‘sought 
after it” (as in xl. 6). The pronoun ‘‘it” 
has been taken by many to refer to ‘the 
blessing” (so Theophylact, Calvin, Bengel, 
Bleek, and Delitzsch). The philological 
reasons against this, however, appear insu- 
perable (see Additional Note). 

It is strange that any should have inferred 
from this verse that a man might strive 
earnestly to repent, and yet find himself shut 
out from the possibility of doing so. Through- 
out the narrative Esau shows no sense of his 
having done wrong. His tears were not those 
of contrition. His aim was to bend Isaac to 
his will;—not to bow himself in penitence 
before God. As regards God :—His refusing 
to allow of any such ‘‘ repentance” as Esau 
desired, was, in truth, giving him “room” 
and opportunity for personal ‘‘ repentance;” 
see Wisd. xii. ro. 


18. For] MHaving reminded them of the 
exhortation which Moses addressed to Israel 
of old, he now assigns a reason why the He- 
brew Christians should be even more diligent 
than their athers not to ‘fall away from the 


[v. 17—21. 


and the voice or words; which voice 
they that heard intreated that the 
word should not be spoken to them 
any more: 

20 (For they could not endure 
that which was commanded, And if 
so much as a beast touch the moun- 
tain, it shall be stoned, or thrust 
through with a dart: 

21 And so terrible was the sight, 


grace of God” (v. 15); For, how incompa- 
rably greater were the manifestations of that 
grace which had been made to them! 
are not come] Rather, have not drawn 
near; as into God’s presence (cp. x. 22): 
and so inv, 22. That this thought predomi- 
nates throughout the passage, is plain from 
v. 28; ‘‘grace whereby we may serve God.” 
the mount| Deut. iv. rz. Sinai stood at 
the head of the whole Legal Dispensation. 
When the Ark of the Covenant,—constituted 
at Sinai the centre of Israel’s religious system,— 
was lodged on Sion, it was as though ‘‘Sinai 
was in the sanctuary” (Ps. Ixviii.17). Down 
to the close of the Levitical period, the earthly 
Jerusalem belonged to the order of things of 
which Sinai was the historical symbol (Gal. iv. 
25).—For the reading, see Additional Note. 
touched| Rather, felt by the hand; as 
an object is fe/t by men who grope in the dark 
(cp. Isai. lix. 10). When the people were 
led forth out of the camp by Moses to ‘‘the 
nether part of the mount” (Exod. xix. 17, 
Deut. iv. 11), they must have advanced through 
the thick darkness like an army of blind men; 
anxiously groping after the barriers at the foot 
of the mountain, beyond which they were for- 
bidden to go on pain of death. It was a para- 
ble, in which the character of the Legal Dis- 
pensation was sketched. What a contrast to 
the later Dispensation! No need was there to 
grope after that Mount Zion, on which ‘the 
glory of the Lord was risen” (Isai. Ix. 1). 
blackness] Or, *‘thick gloom.” 


19. The ‘‘sound of a trumpet” is men- 
tioned in Exod. xix. 16, xx. 18. The ‘‘voice 
of words” is from Deut. iv. 12; where it 
refers to the ‘“Ten Words.” 

intreated...| Lit. ‘‘deprecated (or asked to 
be excused from) having anything further 
spoken to them.” The word recurs in v. 25. 
Comp. Deut. v. 25—27. 


20. could not endure] ‘The thought that 
even unconscious animals were to be slain, as 
if guilty of sacrilege, was intolerably appalling. 

And if...) Rather, ‘If even a beast.” 

or...dart] ‘This clause should be omitted. 
It is wanting in almost all ancient authorities. 


21. And so...] Rather, And (so terrible 
was the sight!) Moses said. The passage 





ee ee ee ee ee ee ee ee Re oo 


3 oe 


ee ee Te 


v, 22—24.] 


that Moses said, I exceedingly fear 
and quake :) 

22 But ye are come unto mount 
Sion, and unto the city of the liv- 
ing God, the heavenly Jerusalem, 
and to an innumerable company of 
angels, 


specially referred to is Deut, ix. 1s—1g. At 
v. 15 we read that ‘‘the mountain burned 
with fire,” in token of God’s anger against the 
sinful people. ‘Then it is added in vv. 18, 19, 
that Moses offered supplication on their behalf, 
“being afraid of the anger and hot displeasure, 
wherewith the Lord was wroth.” See Ad- 
ditional Note. 


22—25. At Sinai, and under the Dispen- 
sation that was there founded, men had ‘‘drawn 
near” to God only to shrink back in alarm 
from Him (Exod. xx. 21), The contrast now 
follows: 

(2) Christians ‘‘have drawn near,” not to 
the terrible Desert mountain, but to ‘the 
city of the living God;” of which Zion, ‘the 
perfection of beauty” (Ps. ]. 2), was a type. 

(2) There they meet ‘‘myriads of angels,” 
not dispensing a ‘“‘fiery law” (Deut. xxxiii. 2), 
but holding joyous festival. 

(3) They have their names enrolled, not 
after any human pedigree (Num. i. 18), but 
as heirs of heaven. 

(4) _ Their causes are heard, not by fallible 
men (Exod. xviii. 13—26), but by Him who, 
being the God of all, cannot but be a righteous 
Judge. 

(5) Instead of looking forward to the un- 
defined ‘‘blessing” promised to Abraham at 
some future time, they know that the departed 
‘trighteous” are now “‘perfected,” and that 
the same ‘‘perfection”’ is already made over to 
themselves, 

(6) through a Covenant, not mediated by 
man (like that at Sinai, which was broken 
before it was formally established, so that the 
mediator himself stood aghast, v. 21), but by 
the Divine Saviour, 

(7) who ratified the Covenant, not with the 
blood of animals, which bore witness to man’s 
guilt, but with His own atoning, and truly 
consecrating, blood. On this sustained con- 
trast the admonition in v. 25 rests. 


22. are come] ‘‘have drawn near;” v. 18. 
mount Sion} On which Christ reigns (Ps. 
it. 6); from which He exercises rule (cx. 2); 
the abode of ‘‘everlasting joy” (Isai. xxxv. 10). 
the living God| See on ix. 14. 
the heavenly Jerusalem| ‘The true mother 
Church, to which all the churches on earth 
are affiliated (Gal. iv. 26). 
to an innumerable...(v. 23)...firstborn] 
rT, to tens of thousands of angels 


HEBREWS. XII 


23 To the general assembly and 
church of the firstborn, which are 


‘written in heaven, and to God the ee 


Judge of all, and to the spirits of just 
men made perfect, 
24 And to Jesus the mediator of 


the new ‘covenant, and to the blood On 


in festal assembly, and to the congre- 
gation of the first-born. ‘Tens of 
thousands of angels” had attended ‘‘the minis= 
tration of death” on Sinai (2 Cor. iii. 7), and 
had mournfully watched over Israel’s later 
history. Now they were able to hold joyous 
festival; celebrating the victory of Divine love, 
achieved by Him at whose birth they had 
sung, ‘‘Glory in the highest to God,” whose 
Ascension they had gazed on with admiring 
wonder (x1 Tim. iii. 16), whose redeeming 
work they study with deepest reverence (x Pet. 
1. 12). 

ie Sinai, too, there had been a ‘‘congrega- 
tion of first-born,” who were numbered by 
Moses (Numb. ili. 42ff). But the Hebrew 
Christians were joined to a nobler ‘‘congre- 
gation of first-born,” whose names were en- 
rolled (even while they were yet pilgrims,— 
‘coetus peregrinantium’) in ‘the book of 
life” (cp. Luke x. 20; Phil. iv. 3); all of 
them made ‘‘priests unto God” (Rey. i. 6), 
because all of them ‘‘conformed to the image’ 
of the One First-born (see on i. 6) 


23. to God the Judge of all] Or, to the Judge, 
who is God of all ;—‘‘God of the spirits of all 
flesh” (Num. xxvii. 16, cp. on v. 9);—the 
God and the Judge of angels also. Since 
He is the “‘God of all,” He cannot but judge 
all equitably. Similarly St Peter, after setting 
forth the high dignity of Christians, proceeds 
to speak of ‘‘the Father, who without respect 
of persons judgeth according to every man’s 
work,” 

As universal and impartial Judge, He has 
admitted to thecitizenship of the Holy City not 
those only who have been ‘‘born anew” into 
it on earth, but also ‘‘the spirits of just men;” 
who (like Abel) had ‘‘made a covenant with 
Him over sacrifice” (Ps. 1. 5), and were now 
“perfected” (xi. 40) through the one Media- 
torial offering. 


24. to Jesus the mediator...| ‘The order of 
the words in the Greek is again noticeable (cp. 
ii.g, etc.); ‘to the Mediator of the New Cove- 
nant, Jesus.” The word here rendered ‘‘new” 
is not the one generally employed, which marks 
the contrasted character of the two Covenants. 
It points rather to this Covenant’s having a 
new, fresh, vigorous, life; while the other was 
ready to die. 

blood of sprinkling| Which really effects 
—what the sprinkling of sacrificial blood by 





HEBREWS. XII. [v. 25—27. 


of sprinkling, that speaketh better 
things than that of Abel. 

25 See that ye refuse not him that 
speaketh. For if they escaped not 
who refused him that spake on earth, 
much more shail not we escape, if we 
turn away from him that speaketh 
from heaven : 

26 Whose voice then shook the 








Aaron (ix. 13, 14) or by Moses (ib. r9—21) 
typically represented—purification from guilt 
(comp. x. 22, 1 Pet. i. 2). 

better things...| Or (corr. reading), better 
than Abel; more nobly and excellently than 
Abel could (comp. vii. 19, 22, viii. 6, etc.). 
Righteous Abel did, indeed, speak to all later 
ages of God’s readiness to accept the faith and 
obedience of His servants; but his voice had 
no power to quiet the conscience of his guilty 
brother. Cain’s cry was: ‘‘My iniquity is 
too great to be forgiven” (Gen. iv. 13, marg.). 
But the blood of Jesus offered pardon even 
to those who had shed it (Acts iil. 19) 
Through it Abel himself, with all the ‘‘righte- 
ous men” who had been mentioned in ch. x1, 
had been ‘‘made perfect.” Unspeakable, then, 
must be the value of that blood, ‘‘the blood 
of the Covenant, wherewith” Christians have 
‘‘been sanctified” (x. 29). How important 
that none should despise its pleadings! If 
that great ‘‘cloud of witnesses,” with Abel at 
its head, bids us to be earnest in “striving 
against sin” (v. 4), how much more He, to 
whose coming they all looked forward, ‘‘the 
Author and Perfecter of faith” (wv. 2)! 


25. refuse not] Or, ‘decline not to hear” 
(the same word as in v. 19). 

him that speaketh| God, who now ‘‘speak- 
eth” to us ‘‘in His Son” (i. r); with the 
gentle, yet infinitely persuasive, accents of the 
“blood of sprinkling” (wv. 24), and by the 
“Spirit of grace” (x. 29). How deep the 
guilt of declining that invitation (Luke xiv. 
18f., where the same word is used)! 

escaped not| Comp. ii. 3. ‘There was no- 
thing which was necessarily, and of itself, 
wrong in Israel’s shrinking from the terrors of 
Sinai (Deut. v. 25; Exod. xx. 16). But, in 
fact, their unwillingness to hear God’s words 
sprang from distrust of their Divine Benefac- 
tor; who, with so much @6ndescension, had 
“brought them unto Himself” (xix. 4). 
They asked for the intervention of Moses as 
if that might relieve them from responsibility 
te the Law, or shield them from its penalties 
(Exod. xxxii. 33—35) ;—an impossibility. 

who refused| Rather, when they re- 
ased. That did not absolve them from the 
obligation laid upon them. 

if we turn away] Lit. “we that turn 


earth: but now he hath promised, 
saying, Yet once more I shake not 
the earth only, but also heaven. 

27 And this word, Yet once 
more, signifieth the removing of 
those things that ‘are shaken, as of }Os sg 
things that are made, that those 
things which cannot be shaken may 
remain. 


atari 


away.” The word is the same as in Josh, 
xxii. 16, 18, 29. 

from heaven] That heaven into which 
Jesus entered ‘“‘by His own blood” (ix. 12, 
24); froin whence the “‘beseeching” voice of : 
‘*God in Christ” (2 Cor. v. 20) is continually 
issuing. f 

26. shook the earth] Exod. xix. 18. The 3 
earth trembled, as with birth-throes (Ps. xcvii. - 
4), when God’s great plan for forming “a : 
kingdom of priests” to Himself (Exod. xix. 6} § 
began to work. 

now] Under the Gospel dispensation; to ; 
which the prophecy in Hagg. ii. 6—9 looked q 
forward. ‘ 

promised] It is not said, ‘‘threatened.” 

If the framework of heaven and earth is to be 7 
shaken, it is for the introduction of a far 
higher constitution of things. 5 

Yet once more I shake] Or, ‘Yet again, once f 
for all, I will shake.” Israel’s disobedience & 
had brought the Sinaitic Covenant to an end. 3 
But the high design, which Israel as a nation ’ 
had failed to accomplish, was not abandoned. 
God would ‘yet again once for all” set to 
His hand, and ‘shake the heaven and the 
earth and the throne of kingdoms” (Hagg. ii. 
21, 22); that ‘the desire of all nations” 
might come (ib. ii. 6, 7), even His chosen 
Servant (typified by Zerubbabel), whom He 
would make to be‘‘as a signet,”—the immove- 
able Seal of His own immoveable kingdom 
(ib. ii. 23). 

27. ‘This work of God (so the ‘‘once for 
all” signified) should be jizal. ‘The old order 
of that natural system, which is “subject to 
vanity,” should be ‘‘removed,” or, ‘‘changed” 
(comp. vi. 17, vii. 12), to make room for that | 
which, being ‘filled with the glory of the 
Lord” (Hagg. ii. 7; Isai. vi. 3), is everlasting. 

that are made| Rather, that have been 
made. So in Isai. lxvi. 1, 2, it is said of 
heaven and earth, ‘‘all these things sath my 
hand made;” and this as a reason why they 
cannot furnish a fitting Temple for God; 
whose abode must be spiritual (cp. lvii_ re). 
The things that are to “remain” must be such 
as partake of God’s own holiness. 

remain] The same word as in vii. 3, 24, X 
34, xiii. 14; John xii. 34; 1 Cor. iii. 14, xia ; 
13. ' 


oe 


v. 28, 29.] 
28 Wherefore we receiving a king- 


us have grace, whereby we may serve 


eR RE WS. XT, 


God acceptably with reverence and 


ates dom which cannot be moved, !let godly fear: 


said fart 


29 For our God isa consuming fire. 





28. we receiving a kingdom] Rather, 
seeing that we receive a kingdom (comp. 
Dan. vii. 18). 

cannot be moved| ‘Kather, cannot be 
shaken: Dan. ii. 44, vii. 14,27. The centre 
of the kingdom is that ‘‘Zion” (v. 22) which 
“cannot be shaken, but abideth for ever” (Ps. 
cxxv. 1); with which God’s ‘Covenant of 
Peace” stands firm, though “the mountains 
be removed” (Isai. liv. 10). Comp. also the 
note on v. 26 above. 

let us have] Or, “let us hold fast.” So the 
Peshito; using the same word here that it does 
in x Tim. iii. 9, Rev. iii. rz. (For another 
rendering, see below.) Through Him, who 
sits on the ‘‘throne of grace,” we are con- 
secrated with ‘‘the Spirit of grace” (x. 29), 
and receive at God’s hands that priestly royalty 
which Israel forfeited; how careful, then, 
should we be not to ‘‘fall back from the grace 
of God” (v. 15) as they did. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Cuap. 


1. So Bengel takes it here: quoting from 
Hesychius; dyxos] @vonpa, vmepnpavia. By 
giving it this sense (1) We bring the term 
into symmetry with ayapriav (cp. 1 Pet. ii. 
I; dmoGeyevor ov macav kakiay Kal mavTa 
dodov). (2) We obtain the very same anti- 
thesis to patient faith which lies in the Hebrew 
of Hab. ii. 4: ‘‘His soul is lifted up” (or, 
«swollen out”’). 

1. The verb repiictnpe is used of PoBos 
ja Thuc. 11. 54; and of aioxywn in Demosth. 
30. 24. The adj. evmepicraros is a strictly 
Gma& Xeyopevov; occurring elsewhere only in 
Christian writers who are referring t6 this 
passage. 


7. Instead of ei ma:deiav, the most ancient 
MSS. and versions give eis maidetay (‘‘endure 
ye (or, ye endure) unto chastisement”). In 
the face of this strong external evidence Bleek, 
Tholuck, and Liinemann, adhere to the Re- 
ceived Text; and with good reason: for the 
other reading, besides grievously marring the 
continuity of v. 7, leaves the ci d5¢ of v. 8 
without anything to refer to. It should be 
remarked that the verb vzrouévw has just been 
used transitively in vv. 2, 3, and in x. 323 
and that it here supplies the needful antithesis 
to the slighting of God’s discipline which had 
been spoken of in v. 7. 


12. The word advop6ow is used by the 
LXX. in Ps. xviii. 35 : “Thy hand upheld me, 
and Thy discipline (or, chastisement) /ifted me 
up again” (n Tradcia cov avapbacé pe)- 


New Test.—Vor. IV. 


serve God] Or, “do service to God;” pree 
senting to Him that “holy, acceptable, sacrie 
fice,” which is our “rational service” (Rom, 
xii. 1). 

reverence] Such asa due sense of the Jefe 
ness of God is fitted to inspire even in the 
highest of created beings (cp. Isai. vi. 2). For 
the reading, see Additional Note. 

godly fear| ‘The verb is used in Exod. iii, 
6; ‘*Moses feared to look upon God.” 


29. For] Rather, For indeed:—though 
He be so gracious; though He have condee 
scended to call Himself ‘our God” (xi. 16). 

a consuming fire] In Deut. iv. 24 there is 
added, ‘‘even a jealous God;” who is intolerant 
of everything that would injure the purity of 
His people (cp. Exod. xxiv. 10, 17; Lev. x. 
1—3). That Fire has been burning in the 
Church age after age; yet is the Church itself 
“not consumed” (Exod. iii. 2, Mal. iii. 6). 


XID ineyo Dee ky) bos 2i, 22) 23) 26. 


17. 1. The distance between airy and 
evdoyiay is far too great. 

2. Meravoias from its emphatic position 
remains on the ear. 

The antithetic verbs “found” and 
“‘sought ” all but compel the reference to be 
to peravoias. 

4- To put peravolas yap...ctpe into a 
parenthesis, leaves the clause kaimep...avrn» to 
come in tautologously, after a completed 
statement. 

5. The structure of the verse is clearly 
chiastic; the 6eAnoas clause corresponding to 
the éx¢nrjaas, and dmedoxipacbn to the pe- 
Tavolas yap... (cp. Jer. iv. 28, ov petavonow; 
Vi. 30, amedokipacev avrovs 6 Kupios). 


18. Some MSS, and versions omit dpes 
(leaving us to render ‘‘to a palpable and 
kindled fire”): which, however, is well sup= 
ported by manuscript and patristic authority. 
The correctness of the Received Text is cone 
firmed by Deut. iv. 11: kal mpoon\Oere,...Kad 
TO Opos éxaiero Tupl...cKdros, yopos, Ovehra 
(cp. ib, v. 22, 23, ix. 13). In Rev. xxi. r— 
8 we have the Aipvyn 7 Katouevn mpi as the 
antithesis of the Heavenly Jerusalem. 

The word Vaapanere (‘‘groped after”) 
has a sufficently obvious application to the 
mountain enveloped in darkness; but appears 
quite unsuited to a “burning fire.” 


21. In Deut. ix. 19 we have éxqoBos eles 
in the text, xpoBos eiys kal evrpopos; 
second adjective being an idiomatic ap 


97 


98 


as in the phrase pera hoSou kat rpouov (2 Cor. 
vii. 15; Eph. vi. 5; Phil. ii.12). Cp. 1 Macc. 
Xili. 2, €vrpopos Kat €upoBos. 


22,23. Most are now agreed in connect- 
ing ravnyvpe With what goes before it (not, 
as A.V., with v. 23). So the best MSS., the 
Peshito and Vulgate, Origen, Ambrose, and 
Augustine (‘‘decem millibus exultantium 
angelorum”), It remains doubtful whether 
we are to render ‘‘to myriads of angels, a 
festal throng,” or, ‘‘to myriads, a festal throng 
of angels.” As zravnyupis is not so well suited 
to govern the genitive, the former rendering is 
to be preferred. 


28. Many translate, ‘‘let us have thank- 

. fulness; but 
x. No instance is given to show that the 
words can have this meaning, when used (as 
here) absolutely, and with the verb standing 


first. 


HEBREWS: OnE 


[v. 1—5. 


2. The drift of the exhortation is to pro- 
mote the ‘reverence and godly fear,” which 
are spoken of at the end of the verse. Thank- 
fulness, however compatible with this, yet be- 
longs to a different /ine 2f thought. 

3. The ‘holding fast of grace” is the 
contrast of the “falling back from the 
of God,” which had been spoken: f mv. r5 
(cp. also x. 29, xiii. 9). 

28. The oldest MSS. read pera evAaSeias 
kat déous. ‘Tregelles and Alford refer to the 
Peshito as supporting this reading; but incor- 
rectly. The first of the two Syriac words is 
the one which is used for aidds in 1 Tim. ii. 
9, while the second (from the verb used for ev- 
Aa8néeis in xi. 7) represents edAafeia in ch. v. 
7,8. The Received Text has good MSS. on its 
side, in addition to the Peshito and (very dis- 
tinctly) St Chrysostom. Delitzsch notices 
that the combination aidds cai evAaBeia Occurs 
in Philo, 11. 597, 33. 





CHAPTER XIII. 


1 Divers admonitions, as to charity, 4 to 
honest life, 5 to avoid covetousness, 7 to re- 


gard God’s preachers, 9 to take heed of 


strange doctrines, 10 to confess Christ, 16 to 
give alms, 17 to obey governors, 18 to pray 
Sor the apostle. 20 The conclusion. 
ET brotherly love continue. 
2 Be not forgetful to enter- 
tain strangers: for thereby some have 
entertained angels unawares. 


3 Remember them that are in 
bonds, as bound with them; and 
them which suffer adversity, as being 
yourselves also in the body. 

4 Marriage zs honourable in all, 
and the bed undefiled: but whore- 
mongers and adulterers God will judge. 

5 Let your conversation be with- 
out covetousness; and be content with 
such things as ye have: for he hath 





Cuap. XIII. 1. brotherly love] The love 
of such as are brethren in Christ (ii. rr, iil. 1; 
cp. 1 Thess. iv. 9, 10). How active this love 
had been in the Hebrew community, we saw 
in vi. 10, x. 32. The exhortation is, ‘‘ Let it 
continue,’ unshaken;—a sign that you belong 
to the immoveable kingdom (xil. 27). In 
vv. 2, 3, two forms of this brotherly kindness 
are mentioned—kindness to ‘‘strangers ” and 
to ‘prisoners ;” both of which classes had 
been specially named by Christ as among His 
“brethren ” (Matt. xxv. 38— 0). 


2. The Emperor Julian (Ep. 49) held 
that the kindness which Christians showed to 
strangers was one of the principal causes of 
Christianity having spread as it had done. 


8. bound with them] So closely united to 
them in love that you cannot but share their 
bonds (x Cor. xii. 26; cp. x. 33 above). 

suffer adversity] Or, ‘‘are in distress” 
(see on xi. 37). 

in the body] and therefore exposed to the 
like sufferings. 

4 Marriage is honourable] Rather, Let 
marriage be held in honour (the con- 
struction as in v. 5; cp. Rom. xii. 9). 

tz all] Rather, ‘in all things” (as in wv. 


18; Tit. ii. 9, 10). No part of that which is 
God’s institution is to be treated with dis- 
respect. 

the bed| Rather, let the bed be. Many 
good authorities, however, introduce the second 
clause by ‘‘ for,” instead of ‘* but.” 

God] Human law may not be able to 
reach such, but there is One who will with- 
out fail judge them,—Gop. 


5. conversation] Or, ‘conduct ;” habits 
and manner of life. 

without covetousness| Lit. ‘‘un-money- 
loving;” implying the reverse of money-lov- 
ing,—open-handed and generous. (On the 
sequence of vv. 2, 5, cp. Introd. III. 2, § i.) 

he hath said| ‘‘ He Himself,” or, ‘ 1E;”— 
there was no need to say, who. The juota- 
tion is from Josh. i. 5 (see below), where the 
words are addressed to Joshua after the death 
of Moses. A similar assurance was made to 
Jacob when he left Isaac (Gen. xxviii. 15), 
and to Solomon when he was. about to lose 
his father (1 Chro. xxviii. 20). “The Hebrew 
Christians might apply the assurance to them- 
selves, though they were separated from the 
Mosaic economy (now all but defunct, viii. 
13), and cast out from their patrimony (x 
32—34)- 


8 Josh. x. 
r% 


sOr, ave 
the oui 


v. 6—10.] 


said, *I will never leave thee, nor for- 
sake thee. 

6 So that we may boldly say, 
The Lord is my helper, and I will 
not fear what man shall do unto 
me. 

7 Remember them which ! have 
‘the rule over you, who have spoken 
unto you the word of God: whose 
faith follow, considering the end of 
their conversation. 


HEBREWS: XIII. 


8 Jesus Christ the same yester ay, 
and to day, and for ever. 

g Be not carried about with divers - 
and strange doctrines. For 7t is a 
good thing that the heart be establish- 
ed with grace; not with meats, which 
have not profited them that have 
been occupied therein. 

10 We have an altar, whereof they 
have no right to eat which serve the 
tabernacle. 





6. may boldly say| Rather, say boldly. 
The quotation is from Ps. cxviii. 6. There 
ought to be a colon at “fear,” the second 
clause being interrogative: What shall man 
dounto me? 


7. which have...spoken| Rather, that had 
the rule over you, (lit., your leaders;—the same 
word as in v. 17) which spake. The refer- 
ence is plainly to some who had been removed 
from among them. One of these, probably, 
was James the Just, bishop of Jerusalem, 
who was put to death in A.D. 62 (Jos. ‘ Ant.’ 
XX. 9). 

follow] That is, imitate (vi. 12). 

considering| Or, ‘‘ observing carefully.” 

the end of their conversation] Or, ‘‘the 
issue of their life:’—how nobly they con- 
cluded their long course of consistent labour; 
faithful to the last. ‘There should be a full 
stop at the end of the verse; the order of the 
words in the original being, ‘‘ of whom, ob- 
serving carefully the issue of (their) life, imi- 
tate the faith.” 


8. the same] is the same. The Greek 
order is somewhat mere emphatic: ‘‘ Jesus 
Christ is yesterday and to-day the same, and 
for ever.” He is ‘‘the same to-day,” in your 
season of trial, that He was yesterday, when 
your fathers were tried; and He will be the 
same ‘for ever.” What, then, if the Legal 
constitution were perishing, and an unknown 
future lay before the Church? They might 
advance courageously on their way to the 
Land of Promise. The ‘‘Ark of the Covenant 
of the Lord” had gone before, and would 
stand firm, until the whole Church should 
have ‘“ passed over” (Josh. iii. 3, 17) in safety. 

Obs. Thus the last chapter resumes, and 
applies practically, the testimony to Christ, 
which had been given in the first; Thou art 
THE SAME (i. 12). 


9. carried about with,,.doctrines| Rather 
(corr. reading), carried away by...teach- 
ings:—away from that simplicity of faith, 
which marked your departed leaders (v. 7); 
and so, away from the one unchanging Source 
of spiritual life (v. 8). 

The circumstances of the Church at Jeru- 


salem were at this time very critical. The 
‘“‘many myriads” (Acts xxi. 20) of its mem- 
bers were all ‘‘ zealous for the law.” The 
fact that a whole generation had passed away 
since the Christian Church was founded, and 
yet the Temple-services still continued to be 
celebrated, might incline some to suppose that 
the Levitical ritual was meant to be perpetual. 
True, the sacrifices were not needed (as the 
preceding part of this Epistle had shown) fos 
the purpose of atonement. But might they 
not be the appointed channels of self-consecra- 
tion and thanksgiving? And were not the 
sacrificial feasts valuable means of brotherly 
communion? The ‘‘many teachers” who 
existed among the Hebrew Christians (James 
ili. 1) might easily be led to form divers, and 
ever-varying, theories on these points; em- 
bodying elements that were strange, and alien 
to the true principles of the Gospel. Such 
speculations would be especially dangerous in 
times of persecution; when anything would be 
welcome which seemed to offer a plausible 
ground of compromise. 

established | Made firm and strong (comp. 
Col. ii. 7). This stedfastness of heart could 
be produced only by abiding in the ‘“‘ grace” 
of Christ (Rom. v. 2); not by sacrificial meats, 
which were mere “carnal ordinances” (ix. 
Io). If any Christians trusted in them, they 
were ‘‘fallen from grace” (Gal. v. 4). 

which have not| Lit. ‘wherein they that 
walked found no profit.” Had men not tried 
long enough what could be got from the 
Law as an outward system? Had they not 
walked in it, regulating their whole life by it, 
and found it unprofitable (vii. 18)? The naked 
and heartless ritual observances of the later 
Jews were, like the idols their fathers had 
trusted in, things that could not profit (Jer. 
ii. 8, vii. 8; cp. Isai. lvii. 12). 


10. We have an aliar|—by means of 
which our souls are upheld in health and 
comfort (v. 9). The Altar is that, on which 
Jesus offered up Himself “to sanctify His 
people” (v. 12); by which both our thank- 
offerings to God and our deeds of kindness to 
our fellow-men are hallowed (wv. 15, 16). 
We do not stand in need of those Levitical 


G2 


99 


100 


11 For the bodies of those beasts, 
whose blood is brought into the sanc- 
tuary by the high priest for sin, are 
burned without the camp. 

12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he 
might sanctify the people with his 
own blood, suffered without the gate. 

13 Let us go forth therefore unto 





“meats ;” we “have meat to eat which they 
know not of.” We have an Altar, of (or, 
from) which they that serve (vill. 6) the taber- 
nacle have no right (or, power, as in 1 Cor. 
ix. 4) to eat. Only by faith (sursum corda) 
can any have ‘‘power” (comp. John i. 12) 
to partake of the one true Sin-offering which 
was offered upon that invisible Altar (see Ad- 
ditional Note). ‘They who faithlessly adhere 
to the antiquated type disable themselves from 
feeding on the reality, which is ‘‘meat in- 
deed ” and ‘ drink indeed” (John vi. 55). 

11. This disability was figuratively set forth 
by the Law. For not even the high-priest 
was permitted to eat of the sin-offerings of the 
Day of Atonement. The bodies of the bullock 
and the goat were to be carried ‘‘ without the 
camp,” and to be there burnt (Lev. xvi. 27). 
Those sacrifices represented simply the penalty 
of sin, death; and were to be ‘‘ burnt” (not 
with holy altar-fire, but) as polluted things 
(cp. Josh. vii. 15, LXX.). The Law itself, 
then, declared that they ‘‘ who served the 
‘Tabernacle” were not permitted to feed on the 
most solemn of its typical sin-offerings. Al- 
though these, by Divine ordainment, bore the 
people’s sins representatively, yet, being un- 
able truly to atone for sin, they were treated 
as under acurse. So long as the Jews held 
Jesus to be, like their own sin-offering, simply 
an ‘‘accursed thing,” they could not partake 
of that most precious Sacrifice. 


12. Wherefore} That He might fulfil 
what was presignified by that provision in the 
Law, Jesus was contented to be led outside 
the gate of Jerusalem (John xix. 17), as one 
laden with guilt (cp. Lev. xxiv, 23; Num. xv. 
35; Acts vil. 58). This He did that He 
might ‘sanctify the people” (which was the 
end aimed at by the Day of Atonement, Lev. 
xvi. 30); see on ii. 11, 17. 

‘“* Through the offering of” His sacred 
‘body we are once for all sanctified” (x. 10). 
When He ‘‘ bore the sins of many” (ix. 28), 
and ‘tasted death for every man” (ii. x 
He made a rea/ atonement for sins; and 
abolished the power of sin and death. The 
eirtue of that sacrifice is communicated to all 
who obey Him; so that it becomes to them 
the reality, which was typified by the ‘‘ peace- 

rings” of the Law;—a means of commu- 
nion with the Holy and Blessed God. In the 


HEBREWS. XIII. 


[v. 11—15. 


him without the camp, bearing his 
reproach. 


14 ’For here have we nc con- 


tinuing city, but we seek one to come. 

15 By him therefore let us offer 
the sacrifice of praise to God conti- 
nually, that is, the fruit of our lips 





fullest sense, then, ‘‘ave Save an altar;” ot 
which we may eat and live for ever. 


18. go forth unto him] go outside the un- 
believing and rebellious camp; to Him, in 
whom we have sacrifice and high-priest and 
altar all combined. When He went forth from 
Jerusalem, He made it necessary (as of old) 
for ‘‘ every one who sought the Lord” to go 
forth without the camp (Exod. xxxiii. 7). 

bis reproach] Cp. Ps. lxix. 7, 19. So Moses 
bore “the reproach of Christ” (xi. 26) 
when he forsook Egypt. The city ‘‘ where 
the Lord was crucified” was now ‘spirit- 
ually” Egypt (Rev. xi. 8). This apostolic 
“Let us go forth” was a token that the 
unfaithful city’s doom was fast approaching. 


14. Let us not hesitate to go forth; For 
we, like our fathers (xi. 13—16), are only 
travelling towards the city that abideth (the 
same word as in xii. 27, ‘‘ remain”). 

one to come| Rather, that which is to 
come;—the subject of sure promise, 


15. By him] Rather, Through Him, 
Through Him, as the one offering for sin, by 
which we are sanctified (vw. 12); through 
Him also, as the living Altar (altar and 
priest in one), whereby our gifts are made 
acceptable to God (cp. 1 Pet. ii. 5). 

sacrifice of praise] ‘The words are used ot 
the Levitical thank-offering in Lev. vii. 12—15, 
but appear already lifted up to a higher ap« 
plication in Ps, l. 14, cvii. 22, CXVi. 17. 

coniinually| ‘The ‘‘thank-offerings ” of the 
Law were only occasional. Those of Chris- 
tians are to be, ‘‘at all times and in all places;” 
of perpetual recurrence (see Num. xxviii. Io, 
15, 23, 24, 31, LXX.). The Rabbins say, 
‘Tn the world to come all the offerings cease; 
but the offering of praise never ceases” 
(Schottg. ‘H. H.’ 11. 612). 

Obs. The word is the one used in St Luke 
xxiv. 53. When the Apostles had seen Jesus 
taken up to heaven as He was bestowing on 
them His high-priestly benediction, ‘they re- 
turned and were continually in the temple. 
praising and blessing God.” 

fruit of our lips giving] Rather, fruit of 
lips that give. The expression “fruit of 
the lips” occurs in Isai. lvii. r9. Though tne 
LXX. omitted it there, they inserted it in 
Hos. xiv. 2, where the Hebrew has “ the 


‘ giving thanks to his name. pat 


: 
| 
: 
. 
| 


5.6) 5 Perr 8 reentieis 


> Sp zy 


~ana? 


ee ee 


PP eaf 


ciienaaath tbl 





v. To—20.] 


16 But to do good and to com- 
municate forget not: for with such 
sacrifices God is well pleased. 

17 Obey them that ! have the rule 
over you, and submit yourselves: for 
tkey watch for your souls, as they 
that must give account, that they 
may do it with joy, and not with 
grief: for that s unprofitable for you. 


calves of our lips” [lit. “our lips (as) 
calves]: see Note below. Words of praise, 
uttered by the lips, are as fruit, borne by 
affections whose roots are in the heart. In 
the ‘fruit of the lips,” therefore, man’s 
‘‘rational service” of God finds expression, 
and so the whole body becomes ‘‘a living 
sacrifice” (Rom. xii. 1). 

to his name| To Him as He has revealed 
Himself; in accordance with that ‘great 
Name” (Mal. i. rr) into which we are 
baptized. 

16. But] Thanksgiving to God is the first 
great sacrifice; But it is not the only one. 
Deeds of kindness to our fellow-men are also 
offerings of ‘‘ sweet odour, acceptable to God” 
(Phil. iv. 18). 

In the Communion Service doth the offer- 
ings mentioned in vv. 15, 16 are combined 
with the sacramental feeding on the body and 
blood of Christ. 

to communicate| ‘To impart of our earthly 
store to those who are in need (Rom. xii. 13). 


17. In v. 7 he had bidden them imitate 
the faith of their departed ‘“‘rulers.” Having 
warned them in vv. 8—16 against being 
drawn aside from the one Fountain of grace, 
he now speaks of their duties to their living 
** rulers.” 

submit yourselves] Rather, ‘defer (to 
them);” yielding to their authority, complying 
with their admonitions (cp. 1 Cor. xvi. 16). 
Such compliance was reasonable; For they 
on their part watch, with unsleeping care 
(Luke xxi. 36), for your souls (2 Cor. xil. 15). 

give account| Or, ‘give an account;” an 
account of the flock entrusted to their charge 
(Gen. xxxi. 39, 40; Ezek. xxxiv. 10; cp. 
Acts xx. 28). 

may do it) Rather, may do this. The 
majority of commentators understand ‘‘¢4is” to 
refer to, watch for your souls.—Yield a ready 
compliance to your pastors’ admonitions; for 
they on their part keep watch for your souls’ 
salvation with godly earnestness ;—that so they 
may do this their work (cp. 1 Tim. iv. 16) 
with joy (Acts xx. 24; Phil. i. 4; cp. il. 2), 
anu not with grief (as mourning over your 
unfruitfulness, 2 Cor. ii. 13, xii. 21); for that 
were indeed your loss. 

Others, however (as Paschasius, Anselm, 


FRE BREWS. (TEI. 


18 Pray for us: for we trust we 
have a good conscience, in all things 
willing to live honestly. 

19 But I beseech you the rather to 
do this, that I may be restored to you 
the sooner. 

20 Now the God of peace, that 
brought again from the dead our 
Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of 


and Lyra, in Estius; and so Owen) refer the 
‘“‘ this” to, give an account ;—that they may 
render in their account with joy (rejoicing over 
you as the *‘ crown” of their labours, 1 Thess, 
ll. Ig, 20), and not with grief (as having ‘lost 
the things” they had “ wrought,” 2 John 8). 
The last clause, ‘‘ that were unprofitable for 
you,” is then to be regarded as a euphemism 
for, ‘‘ Terrible indeed in that case would the 
loss be ¢o you.’ 

The most probable punctuation of the verse 
is, ‘‘Obey them that watch over you, and 
defer to them; for they on their part 
watch for your souls, as men that must give 
an account: that they may do this with 
joy, and not with grief; for &c.” 


18. for we trust] Or, ‘we are per- 
suaded.” He states this, because they would 
pray on his behalf with greater confidence, if 
they were assured of his integrity. 

@ good conscience] Acts xxili, 1, Xxiv. 16. 

in all things...| Rather, desirous in all 
things to act rightly (or, ‘‘ honourably ;” 
see on Rom. xii. 17). 


19. the rather] the more earnestly 
(as in ii. 1). 

restored to you] Re-instated (so the word 
implies) in his former relations to them (cp. 
Jer. xvi. 15; in A.V. ‘‘bring again”). St Paul 
had been torn away from the Church at Jeru- 
salem precisely at the moment when the plan, 
at which he had so long laboured, for testify- 
ing the love he bore to his brethren after the 
flesh, had to all appearance reached a pros- 
perous issue. 


20. Now] Rather, But. He longed to 
see them again: But, however that might be, 
he committed them to the God of peace (cp. 
Rom. xv. 33, just after he had spoken of his 
desire to visit Rome); the God, who, amidst 
the unceasing changes of tke world, “ blesses 
His people with peace” (Ps. xxix. rr). 

brought again] Rather (as in Rom. x. 7), 
brought up:—with a plain reference to Isai. 
Ixiii. 11; which stands in the LXX., ‘* Where 
is He that brought up from the sea the Shepherd 
of the sheep?” The ascent of Moses and 
Israel out of the depths of the Red Sea was 
typical of the restoration of Christ and (in 
due time) of His redeemed host out of Hades. 

that great shepherd| So named in contrast 


IOL 


10 
§ Or, tes- 
fament. 


1 Or, do- 
img. 


2 


the sheep, through the blood of the 
everlasting ' covenant, 

21 Make you perfect in every good 
work to do his will, ' working in you 
that which is wellpleasing in his sight, 
through Jesus Christ; to whom de 
glory for ever and ever. Amen. 

22 And I beseech you, brethren, 
suffer the word of exhortation: for 
I have written a letter unto you in 
few words. 


with Moses; as in 1v. 14 He was styled, ‘‘ the 
great High-priest,” in contrast with Aaron. 
In the Psalm which wasso much enlarged upon 
in chh. iii and iv, the ‘‘Shepherd of Israel” 
is God Himself (Ps. xcv. 7; cp. xxx. 1). 

In the Greek the order of the words is (cp. 
ii. 9, &c.), ‘that brought up from the dead 
that great Shepherd of the sheep through the 
blood of the everlasting Covenant, our Lord 
Jesus.” 

through the blood) Rather, “in virtue 
of the blood” (cp. ix. 25, Eph. ii. 13, Zech. 
ix. 11; which last passage appears to be referred 
to). The death of Christ, as the expression 


’ of His perfect obedience, was of infinite merit. 


His blood, poured out on the cross, sealed 
the everlasting covenant of peace between 
God and man; which being effected (and 
because it was effected) the Surety of the 
covenant was Himself raised triumphantly 
from the dead. Comp. John x. 17. 

blood of the...covenant| By which the cove- 
nant was ratified (Exod. xxiv. 8). 

Obs. 1. In Ezek. xxxvii. 24—-26 God 
promises to set up David His servant as 
prince and shepherd over His flock, and so to 
make His ‘covenant of peace with them ;—it 
shall be an everlasting covenant with them.” 

Obs.2. In Zech. ix. 10, 11, the mention of 
the deliverance to be effected by the ‘‘ blood 
of the covenant” follows on the promise, 
“He shall speak peace unto the nations,” 


21. Make you perfect] Supplying what- 
ever has been defective, repairing whatever 
has been decayed, in you It is not the word 
used in ii. 10, v. 9, &c., but the same as in 
Gal. vi. 1, 1 Thess. iii. ro. 

every good work] 2 Cor. ix. 8. 

to do his will] So conforming you to the 
character of Christ (x. 7, 9; cp. x. 36). 

working] Lit. “‘doing;” the same word 


TWEBREWS:“AITE 


[v. 21—25. 


23 Know ye that our brother Ti- 
mothy is set at liberty; with whom, 
if he come shortly, I will see 


ou. 
* 24 Salute all them that have the 
rule over you, and all the saints, 
They of Italy salute you. 

25 Grace be with you all. 
men. 


{J Written to the Hebrews from Italy by 
Timothy. 


A- 


being used in regard to God and man. Cp 
Phil. ii. 13, “that worketh in you both to wil 
and to work.” 

well pleasing] Compare Rom. xii. 2. 

through Jesus Christ] through whom alone 
the renewing power of the Holy Ghost is 
communicated to man. 

to whom] A similar doxology follows the 
words, through Jesus Christ, in 1 Pet. iv. 11. 
Comp. 2 Pet. iii. 18, Rev. i. 6. 


22. And I beseech you, brethren] So in 
the similar supplementary paragraphs in Rom. 
KV. 30, xvi. 173 x Cor. xvi xg. 

suffer] Rather, bear with (2 Cor. xi. 1). 

word of exhortation] ‘The expression used 
in Acts xiii. 15. We gather from it, that the 
writer looked on his Epistle as in the nature 
of a homiletic address. 

Sor I...] “ For indeed it is with few words 
that I have written unto you.” His words 
had been few in comparison of what was 
required for a full discussion of the subjects 
he had touched upon (comp. ch. v.11). Since 
he had avoided making undue demands on 
their attention, he hoped they would bear 
patiently with what he had addressed to them. 


23. our brother Timothy] See 2 Cor. i. 13 
Col. i. 1; Philem. 1; 1 Thess. iii. 2. Cp 
Phil. i. 1, ii. rg —24. 

_,_ set at liberty} So the word is used in Acts 
iii, 13, iv. 21, XXVi. 32. 


24. Salute] as St Paul had once done i 
person (Acts xxi. 18, 19). 

They of Italy] The Hebrew Christians who 
resided in Italy. So, when writing from 
Ephesus, he adds: ‘‘The Churches of Asia 
salute you” (1 Cor. xvi. 19). 


25. Grace be with you all] As in Tit 
iti. r5. Cp. Introd. 111. 2, § iv. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Cuap. x11. 5, 10, 15. 


5. In Deut. xxxi. 6, Moses assuring Joshua 
of God’s favour, says, ov pn ce avp, ovd’ ov 
pce éykaradeiry. In Josh. i. 5, where God 
Himse gives this same assurance to Joshua, 


the LXX. has a feebler rendering; instead of 
which the Apostle (retaining the first person) 
adopts the form of words which had been 
used in Deut. xxxi. 6. 








MEBREWS. XII. 


10. This is the only view regarding the 
nature of the ‘‘ Altar” here spoken of, which 
satisfies all the requirements of the context. 


(x) It cannot be taken of t4e Cress. ‘That 
was the instrument by which our Lord’s 
death was effected; but so far was it from 
being as ‘‘the Altar, which sanctifieth the 
gift.” that it stands as the outward symbol of 
the curse pronounced by the Law (Gal. iii. 
13) upon the malefactor. The cross was as 
little an altar, as the Roman soldiers were 
priests. 

(2) Nor yet can it be understood of the 
Lord’s Table. It is, of course, true to say that 
they who continued to serve the Tabernacle 
had no right to partake of the Lord’s Supper; 
and if v. to had stood alone, this might have 
been what it asserted. But the argument of 
vv. II, 12 compels us to carry our thoughts 
to the Altar on which Christ offered Himself 
once for all as the world’s Sin-offering. The 
Lord’s Table is not that Altar; though it be 
the hallowed means by which the faithful 
partake of that invisible, yet alone real, Altar. 

That antitypal Altar was wholly outside 
the range of the Levitical system because it 
belonged to an order of things infinitely elevated 
above it. On that Altar He, who went forth 
bearing the “reproach” of the iegal high- 
priest’s anathema, was offered up; realizing in 
fulness of perfection every thing that had 
been presignified by all the legal sacrifices. 
If, then, the Fire of that antitypal Altar was 
“the Eternal Spirit”—the ‘‘ Fire of Love” 
(see on ix. 14),—what could the Altar itself 
be but Christ’s own Divine-human person- 
ality? 

Ob;.1. Estius refers to Thomas Aquinas, 


as taking the Altar here to be, ‘‘the cross of 
Christ, or, Christ Himself ;” and as remark- 
ing, ‘‘ To eat from this Altar is to partake of 
(percipere) the fruit of Christ’s passion, and to. 
be incorporated with Him as Head.” Comp. 
Cyril. Alex. ‘De Ador.’ 1x.: Adrés ot», dpa, 
éori TO Ovortagrnpiov, adros S€ TO Gupiaya Kat 
GERM pet: ; ve ; 

és. 2. With this interpretation vv. 13, 
I5 are in harmony. ‘ Let us go forth io Him,” 
—to that Altar, which is invisible to the un- 
believing Jew, but from which Christians eat 
continually (especially in the sacrament of the 
Lord’s Supper). Through Him (altar, at once, 
and high-priest) let us offer up our thanks- 
givings (especially, our Eucharistic praises), 
and our deeds of kindness (especially, our 
offertory gifts). 

Compare Chrys. on ch. vi. 19, 20: ‘¢ As 
the difference between Aaron and Christ is 
great, so is that between the Jews and our 
selves. For see; we have our victim above, 
our priest above, our sacrifices above:—let us 
offer such sacrifices as can be present on ¢hat 
altar.” 


15. The substitution of the term xapzos 
was so much the easier, because (in addition 
to the resemblance between ‘5 and 075) the 
words kappa and ddokapr@pa, Kaprwots 
and odoxaprwors, had come to be used of the 
“ buent-offering,” and generally of ‘ offerings 
to the Lord made by fire;” under which head 
came the minchah of the ‘‘¢hank-offering” 
(see on Lev. vii. 11, 12). Such “offering 
made by fire” represented the self-sacrifice of 
a heart, in which the flame of Holy Love had 
been kindled;—the noblest fruit that the 
human spirit can yield. 


103 


Sy ae ag Gea \ oy = ee oe =". 
A 


TER AEN 
. 
; 
% 
f 
. 
4 
a 
: 
: 
Sob as 
7. 
Le 
| 
t ‘ 
_ ’ . 
‘ a 
' 
\ 
La ' 
nde 
4 
= 





JAMES 


INTRODUCTION. 


L 


HE writer tells us little, directly, of 
himself; though there are few 
writings which in the same space reveal 
more of the individual character of their 
author. He simply calls himself “James, 
servant of God and of the Lord Jesus 
Christ;” and addresses “the Twelve 
Tribes which are in the dispersion.” 

But he may be safely identified with 
that James of Jerusalem, who is pro- 
minent in Acts xii, xv., and xxi? In 
xii. 17, St. Peter sends the announce- 
ment of his release “to James and to 
the brethren.” In xv. 13, segg., after 
Peter, Barnabas and Paul have made 
their several statements in the meeting 
of the Apostles and elders, James for- 
mally sums up the discussion with “‘ Men 
and brethren, hearken unto me,” &c.: 
and the encyclic letter announcing the 
decision is, in substance, identical with 
his speech.2 And in xxi. 18, we read 
that “the day following [his arrival at 
Jerusalem], Paul went in with us unto 
James ; and all the elders were pre- 
sent.” In the next verse but one it is 
James, apparently, who speaks on be- 
half of ‘‘the myriads of Jews which be- 
lieve, and are all zealous of the Law;” 
and induces Paul to undertake certain 
Titual obligations which would satisfy 


1 It is scarcely probable that Mr. Bassett’s 
ingenious arguments (‘The Epa of St 
James ;’ F. T. Bassett, M.A., 1876) will win 
many to ascribe the Epistle to the son of 
Zebedee. 

2 It is remarkable that the classical epistolary 
form xalpew occurs in this Epistle, and in the 
encyclic letter ; but nowhere else in the N. T., 
except in the letter of the Gentile, Claudius 
Lysias, in Acts xxiii. 26. Cp., however, 2 


Foha 10, 527. 


them that he walked orderly and kept 
the Law. 

2. Such external testimony as we 
have, is in harmony with this view; and 
we may further identify him with James 
“the Just” or ‘ Righteous,” who is 
mentioned by Josephus (‘Antt.’ xx. 9, 1), 
and described more fully by Hegesippus 
in Eusebius (‘H. E.’ ii. 23, see Routh, 
‘Reliquize Sacre,’ vol. 1). The ac- 
count in Hegesippus is, indeed, highly 
coloured: but it may be accepted as 
containing a substance of truth, From 
this it may be inferred, that he was a 
man of ascetic habits, if not, strictly speak- 
ing, a Nazarite. The priestly features 
in the description may be taken as a 
conventional portraiture of his Christian 
character, his ecclesiastical position, and 
perhaps also his “ brotherhood” to the 
Great High Priest.! He was (we are told) 
continually in the Temple interceding 
for the sins of the people, so that his 
knees grew callous from kneeling on the 
pavement. He commanded the confi- 
dence and reverence of Jew and Chris- 
tian alike; and received from the 
Jews not only the title 6 dikaos, but 
also another, ‘Q@dias,? interpreted by 
Hegesippus zepioxi) tod aod, Bulwark 
of the people; as the Christians called 
him “one of the pillars.” And it is 
stated that his martyrdom (which 
took place in the interregnum between 
the procuratorship of Festus and that of 


1 We find those who were descended from 
the brethren of the Lord designated Seamécuvos 3 
see Africanus in Euseb. ‘H. E.’ i. 7 (Routh, 
* Reliq. Sacre,’ ii. 236, 7). 

* Le. py Spy, as Suicer s. v., Lange im 
Herzog’s Encyklopadie, s v. Fakobus.— Ql 
Buxodyres ordAa: elvat, Galat ii. 9. 


106 


Albinus, about a.p. 62 or 63), was sup- 
sed by many to have been avenged 
the woes which shortly afterwards 
began to fall upon Jerusalem.! 

3. The internal evidence of the Epistle 
points in the same direction. The man 
who reveals himself to us in it, is a 
Christian, and yet a Jew; and, as such, 
not severed from those Jews who, 
though they had not yet embraced 
Christianity, might hereafter become 
Christians ; one who saw in Christianity 
the completion and perfection of the 
older covenant; who probably looked 
on all Gentile Christians as received 
into Israel; yet would not lay on them 
a yoke of Judaism, but conceded to them 
a liberty that he would not use (pro- 
bably did not desire) himself. Thus he 
was qualified to act as a mediator, ina 
conciliatory spirit, in the questions which 
arose ; occupying a position which was 
indeed provisional,” while that visitation 
of Jerusalem was impending, by which 
God Himself was about to make the old 
vanish away : and looking on all things 
with the practical object of promoting 
the quiet discharge of duty; without 
taste for speculation, with a positive 
abhorrence of controversy, shunning 
“‘questions,” impatient of “talk” as a 
substitute for work and a hindrance to 
it? The portrait is not without its 
likeness to the human side of His 
character, who spent His nights in 
prayer to God, wrestling, even against 
hope, for those who refused to be 
saved; the Man of sorrow, of suffer- 
ing, of love; severe only to sin, most 
of all to hypocrisy and oppression of 
the brethren ; of whom it was said, “ He 
shall not strive nor cry; neither shall 
any man hear His voice in the streets; 
a bruised reed shall He not break, and 
smoking flax shall He not quench” 
(Matt. xii. 19-21). 

4. This leads us a step further. St. 
Paul describes this James of Jerusalem 
as “the Lord’s brother” (Gal. i. 19); a 
title which, whatever may be the precise 


* Quoted from Josephus by Origen, ‘c, Cels,’ 
4. 47, li. 13; Euseb. ‘H. E.’ ii. 23. 

3 It is not clear whether he was enabled to 
see that it was provisional. But ch. v. 1-9 
seems to make it probable. 

§ Reuss, ‘Geschichte d. heil. Schriften ’ § 144. 


INTRODUCTION. 


interpretation given to it, implies a close 
relation. Who were ‘the brethren of 
the Lord,” is a question which has been 
already discussed in the additional note 
on St. Matthew, ch. xiii. ; to which the 
reader is referred. But a few supple- 
mentary remarks may not be out of 
place here. Doubtless, it is hard to 
answer the question positively ; because 
we are lefi in ignorance of the details. 
All would have been clear, if these had 
been told. But “Something sealed The 
lips of the Evangelist :” and we are left 
to choose among hypotheses, to every 
one of which objections have been found 
or invented. It is the old story; “ there 
are objections to a plenum, and objec- 
tions to a vacuum; yet one or the other 
must be true.” That the “brethren” 
were younger sons of our Lord’s mother, 
is inconsistent with the fact that the 
charge of His mother was bequeathed 
by Him, in the hour of His death, to St. 
John. And it may be added, that their 
interference with the conduct of Jesus 
(compare Matt. xii. 46; xiii. 54-56, with 
Mark iii, 21, 31; vi. 2, 3; Luke vii 
19-21), implies that some, if not all, 
of them were older than He was. The 
argument on the other side from the 
word “first-born” in Luke ii 7 (and 
Received Text of Matt. i. 25), plausi- 
ble as at first sight it seems, is now 
generally given up ; the expression being 
(like our “son and heir”) no less ap- 
plicable to an only son, than to one who 
is “first-born among many brethren ;” 
inasmuch as it refers to the law, “ Sanc- 
tify unto Me all the first-born, whatso- 
ever openeth the womb among the 
children of Israel” (Exod. xiii. 2, comp. 
12, 15): and the idea which it ex- 
presses is that of consecration to God, 
The theory, in which Bishop Light- 
foot acquiesces, that they were sons of 
Joseph by a former wife, is in accord- 
ance with the probability that they were 
older than our Lord ; but is liable, like 
the former one, to the objection that the 
Blessed Virgin was consigned, at the 
death of Christ, to the charge of St 
John (“Behold thy Son!—Behold thy 
Mother!” John xix. 26, 27). And 
though it has much of ecclesiastical 
tradition in its favour, yet, as soon as 
we recognise the fact that the term 


INTRODUCTION 


“brother” is frequently used of any near 
relative (see Dr. W. H. Mill ‘On the 
Pantheistic Theory,’ p. 227, seg.), it 
ceases to have any real support in Holy 
Scripture. 

5. On the other hand, the amount of 
Scriptural evidence which has to be set 
aside or explained away by those who re- 
fuse to identify James the Lord’s brother 
with James “the little” (6 puxpos) son 
of Alphzus or Clopas (the identity of 
these names being sufficiently proved), is 
considerable. We have a right to assume 
that St. Paul calls him one of the Apostles ; 
not only because this is the more na- 
tural interpretation of his words in Gal. i. 
19 (érepov S€ TOV droordAwy ovK «ldor, éi 
py ldxwBov tov adcAgov tod Kupiov) ; but 
because the alternative interpretation, 
‘other of the Apostles I saw none ; but 
p saw] James,” is excluded by what fol- 
Ows in ii, 6-9, where the whole strength 
of St. Paul’s argument rests on the fact 
that the three whom he met on equal 
terms, and with whom he formally divided 
the field of Apostolic labour, were not 
only Apostles, but chief among the Apos- 
tles in the estimation of the Church,— 
“James, Cephas, and John, who seemed 
to be pillars,” of Soxodvres oriAou civar 
We are reminded of that group of Three 
within the Twelve, who were nearest to 
our Lord in some of the most solemn 
hours of His earthly life, Cephas and 
John (as here), and the other James, 
the son of Zebedee. 

Again, in 1 Cor. ix. 5, nothing short of 
the assumption of another Cephas besides 
St. Peter can justify the separation of the 
brethren of the Lord, who are there men- 
tioned, from the Apostles; and the argu- 
ment of the passage requires that they 
should all be called Apostles in the same 
sense. And in 1 Cor. xv. 5, segg., the 
appearances of our Lord after His resur- 
rection fall into two groups, 1st. Cephas, 
... the twelve, ... the five hundred ; 
and. James, . . . all the Apostles,. .. 
Me. 


1 Some (4g. Bp. Lightfoot, Ep. Gal. p. 2525 
#5, 260) have thought that this appearance was 
the turning-point in the life of James, who (not 
having believed before) was converted byit. But 
the Gospel according to the Hebrews (Hieronym. 
$de Viris illustr.’ 2), which is appealed to in 
support of this view, clearly implies that James 


107 


We conclude, then, that St. James of 
Jerusalem, the brother of our Lord, was 
an Afostie, And though that word is 
sometimes found in the Epistles in a 
sense not only lower than, but different 
from that in which it is applied to the 
Twelve and to St. Paul, being used of 
the messengers or ambassadors of a 
Church; yet this is only so in pas- 
sages where no mistake could arise; and 
cannot be admitted in any passage where 
the ambiguity would be so misleading as 
in Gal. i.19. Besides, St. Paul is speak- 
ing of one who not only was an Apostle, 
but occupied a chief place, as one of the 
Three who were accounted “ Pillars.” 

6. Nor is it more satisfactory to say 
that James in some way or other came to 
be an Apostle, though he was not so at 
the first. We see in Acts i, 21-26, how 
carefully the qualifications were marked 
out which were ordinarily requisite for 
the Apostleship, and by what solemn 
sanctions that office was guarded against 
intrusion. In the special case of St 
Paul, who had not “companied with” 
them “‘all the time that the Lord Jesus 
went in and out among” them, we see 
how formally he was called and ap- 
pointed by special revelation, and how 
“the signs of an Apostle” are indicated 
(Acts xili.; 1 Cor. ix.), And even so 
he had to maintain a continual struggle 
with the gainsayets of his authority, who 
disputed the evidences of his mission. In 
view of all this, it is not easy to recognise 
a process, by hich men grew, as it were, 
into Apostles by a gradual expansion of 
their personal influence, without Divine 
revelation or human appointment. 

7. There is, therefore, every proba- 
bility, prima facie, that James “the brother 
of our Lord” was, accurately speaking, 
our Lord’s cousin, being the son of 
“Mary of Clopas,”! his mother’s sister 


was one of the twelve who sat down with 
Christ at the Paschal supper. And the other 
brethren are mentioned as believers in Acts 
i, 14. 

1 Cleophas, in John xix. 25, is a mistake of 
the A.V., probably traceable to the Vulgate. 
The two names are, in fact, essentially distinct, 
KAwzas being = Aramaic ‘Bon (AAgaios) ; but 
KaAeomwas being a Greek name shortened from 
Kacdzatpos, as "Avtimas from *Aytimatpos. KA€oe 
might become, by contraction, either KAe:- or 


B 2 


408 


(or perhaps her cousin). And the only 
remaining question seems to be, whether 
this probability is destroyed by John vii. 
5, “Neither did His brethren believe 
on Him.” It has been hence assumed 
that none of the brethren could have 
been of the number of the Twelve. 
But this is to strain the language of 
St. John far beyond what it can rea- 
sonably be made to bear. In the 
first place, the word “belief” is used by 
the Evangelists in various shades of 
meaning. Observe, “ His disciples be- 
lieved on Him,” John ii. 11; and “ Be- 
cause of your unbelief,” said to those 
disciples who had been trying, though 
unsuccessfully, to cast out the evil spirit 
(Matt. xvii. 20). The very narrative 
which states that His brethren did not 
believe on Him, implies that they were 
among His followers; and is more con- 
sistent with the confused and worldly ex- 
pectations of adherents than with the 
designs of enemies. If they had no belief 


KaAev- (KAcioSevfs, KAevdauos), but not KAw-. 
And KaAwx- would have been peculiarly ob- 
jectionable in a Greek name, as suggesting 
«Ady. (Renan, ‘ Evangiles,’? App., has over- 
looked these considerations). It is true, that 
Jews occasionally adopted Greek or Roman 
mames which resembled their own; and thus 
Clopas and Cleopas might be names of the 
same person. But, even in this case, Clopas 
would be the original name. It has indeed been 
said that Hegesippus calls Clopas the uncle 
of James. But this is a mistake. His words, as 
quoted (Euseb. H. E. iv. 22) are wera Td papru- 
o7jga "IdkwBov Toy dlkaoy ws Kat 6 Kipios éxl Te 
ait@ Ady, wadu 6 ex Gelov avtov Supeay 6 Tov 
KAwra xablotata éxicxoros: by mpoddevto martes, 
byra avayidy Tod Kuplov, Sebtepov. Here the words 
4 é« @clov abrov are, however they are taken, 
awkward ; and, grammatically, abrod might 
tefer either to Kipios or to *IdkwBov. But the 
context, indicating that the relationship to our 
Lorp was the thing which made all agree to 
choose Symeon, would be enough to decide 
that Gefov belongs to Kupios. And this becomes 
certain when we compare another passage, in 
which Hegesippus says, uéxpis od 6 ex Oelov Tov 
Kuplov 6 mpoeipnucvos Suuedy vils KAwxa ovKo- 
gayrnbels x. 7. €. (ap. Euseb. iii. 32). Cp. Eusebius 
himself in iii. 11, Suue@va toby Tod KAwma ... 
Tov Tis avTdO& mapoixlas Opdvou Kkiov elvat doxt- 
udoa, avelidy ye, Ss pact, yeyovsta TOD Swripos* 
Toy yap obv KAwnay &deApdy Tod "lwohp tardpxew 
‘Hyfourmos ictope?. This would imply a double 
relationship, according to the /ga/ genealogy. 
And, possibly, wdAw... devrepov, in the frag- 
ment first cited, are not mere words of surplus- 
age, but suggest that Symeon and his predeces- 
@or stood in the same degree of relationship to 
ear Lorn. 


INTRODUCTION. 


in Jesus at all, they must have been de 
liberately urging Him to expose Himself 
to death. It seems more reasonable to 
ascribe to them an inadequate or erro- 
neous belief, and an incapacity for appre- 
ciating the true nature of the kingdom 
which was to be inaugurated. But, even 
if it be granted, that “the brethren ” gene- 
rally grouped themselves with those who 
tried to thwart the Son of the Virgin, 
there remains a palpable fallacy in this 
interpretation of John vii. 5. It con- 
verts a general into a universal propo- 
sition. St. John’s words are not equiva- 
lent to ‘“‘ AW His brethren came, . . .; 
for neither did any of His brethren 
believe on Him.” Yet this is what the 
argument requires. We do not know 
how many “ brethren” there were: four, 
the sons of Mary of Clopas, are men- 
tioned by name; and of His “sisters” 
it is said “Are they not a// with us?” 
There may even have been other 
cousins besides the children of Clopas 
and Mary. At any rate, one or two 
of the brethren may have been believers 
(and if so, may even have been 
Apostles), without any contradiction to 
the general statement of St. John. 

8. And various incidental considera- 
tions point to the same conclusion, 
Only two persons bearing the name of 


-James are mentioned in the Gospels or 


the early part of the Acts—the son of 
Zebedee, and the son of Alphzeus. And, 
after the death of the former, James of 
Jerusalem is spoken of without any dis- 
tinctive epithet, as if there was no longer 
another for whom he could be mistaken. 
Compare Acts xii. 2, with ver. 17 of 
the same chapter. That one Apostle 
called James should silently disappear, 
and another should silently and im- 
mediately take his place, is scarcely 
credible. Moreover, the position of 
primacy which James assumes among 
the Apostles and elders at Jerusalem, 
and the marked deference which St 
Paul shews towards him, all combine to 
indicate an Apostle, not “ born out of 
due time,” but one of the Twelve. 

g. The internal evidence from the 
Epistle of St. James, which has been 
scarcely noticed at all, is no less impor- 
tant. To the present writer, it appears 
absolutely decisive. The Epistle does 


INTRODUCTION. 


not indeed assert the writers Apostle- 
ship. It asserts nothing about him. 
But (which is equally important for the 
interpretation of the words in John vii, 
5) it is unquestionably the work of a 
constant and devoted follower of Jesus 
of Nazareth. Ifthe Epistle is read with 
reference to this point, it strikes the ear, 
from beginning to end, as an echo of 
the oral teaching of our Lord. It is 
impossible that it should have been 
written by any one who had not, through 
out the whole course of Christ’s ministry, 
drunk in His words and stored them in 
his heart, till his whole spirit was steeped 
in their inspiration. There is scarcely a 
thought in the Epistle which cannot be 
traced to Christ’s personal teaching.’ If 
John has lain on the Saviour’s bosom, 
James has sat at His feet. 

Nor is it as if this can be traced to 
the study of the written volumes of the 
Evangelists ; although there is, as might 
be expected, more likeness to St. 
Matthew (especially to the Sermon on 
the Mount)? than tothe rest. No sure 
ground exists for believing that the 
writer had had the opportunity of 


1 Reuss, ‘Geschichte d. heil. Schriften,’ 
§ 143; ‘Théologie chrétienne,’ i. 486, re- 
marks that the allusions to Christ’s discourses 
in St. James, are more numerous than in all the 
other Epistles together. 


* Compare,— 
St. MATTHEW. ST. JAMES 
v. 3 ii. 551.9 
4 iv. 9 
7,9 ii. 133 iii. 17 
8 aa 
9 iii. 18 
II, 12 Wee 2s VOLO; EE 
19 -- 1 19 seg., 255 ii, 10, 15 
22 a5 here) 
27 ii. 10, II 
34, 59 v. 12 
48 iL 4 
vi. 15 ii. 13 
19 oe Vz 2, Seg. 
24 ad eka 
25 iv. 13-16 
vii. I, seg iii, 1; iv. 11, sey. 
2 ii. 13 
7, 11 i. 5, 17 
8 iv. 3 
12 35 
16 sa) HST 
21-26 o. i. 22; ii. 143 V. 7-9 


(See Schmid, ‘ Bibl. Theology,’ § 60.) 


109 


studying any one of the written Gospels. 
Nor is the likeness such as to suggest 
this explanation: for it consists, not in 
verbal quotations, but in the reproduc. 
tion of the teaching. Limited to the 
actual discourses of the Saviour, and 
residing in the thoughts rather than 
the expressions, it suggests to us that 
the Evangelists and the writer of the 
Epistle drew from a common source 
in the living words of the Divine 
Teacher. Probably the same account 
is to be given of the parallel passages 
(which are also remarkable) in St 
James and St. Peter.1 And perhaps 
the writer's apparent reserve in regard 
to the Redemption through the death of 
Christ (which has been the subject of 
much criticism), and his controversy with 
the unloving, lifeless orthodoxy of Phari- 
saism, will become more clearly intelli- 
gible, when viewed in this light, as reflect- 
ing the actual teaching of his living Lord. 


II. 


St. James, while governing the 
Mother Church of Jerusalem, wrote to 
“the twelve tribes in the dispersion” 
(there is something ideal in the expres- 
sion; cf. Matt. xix. 28), with a sort of 
patriarchal authority, if not actual juris- 
diction. For the Jews who were scat- 
tered abroad, were wont to apply to the 
ecclesiastical authorities at Jerusalem 
for direction, and to receive decrees 
from them.? And thus those Jews who 
had believed in Christ were already 
prepared to look for guidance and doc- 


Y E.g.:— 
St. JAMES. St. PETER, 
1243 eet On 
10, II -. L243 iv. 12 
18 S65 SHER 
21 Hoe TRS Re 
ii. 7 iv. 14 
iii. 13 ii. 12 
iv. I ii. IT 
6, 7, 10 v- 5-9 
v. 20 ee. Wao 


From a comparison of these passages it is 
inferred by some that St. Peter had the Epistle 
of St. James before him. 

2 From Acts ix. 2, it appears that the high 
priest could issue his warrant to the synagogues 
at Damascus, to bind any Jews who were there 
accused of heresy, and to send them to Jerusa- 
lem for trial. 


110 


trine, tc him who stood at the head of 
the Christian Church at Jerusalem. No 
other Apostle or Bishop could claim 
their attention precisely in the same 
way. The Churches of Jewish Chris- 
tians belonged (to use a more modern 
ecclesiastical phrase) to his “obedience,” 
in the same way as those of Rome, 
Colossz, &c. (even while yet unseen) 
belonged to St. Paul’s. The care of all 
these Churches came upon him. 

It is here taken for granted that the 
“twelve tribes” (the name having be- 
come technical, though the actual number 
had been lost; see note on i. 1, and 
compare “the Thirty Towns” of early 
Roman history) are the believing Jews, 
whose faith was in a Messiah already 
come. So much seems clear ; although it 
requires to be guarded by certain reser- 
vations. For,— 

1. Gentiles admitted into Churches 
which were in the main Jewish, could 
not be excluded. They had been re- 
ceived into “ the true Israel.” 

2. There may have been “a mixed 
multitude,” a floating, indeterminate 
amount of semi-christianity,—the en- 
quiring, the doubting, and the double- 
minded,—which he could not exclude 
from his thoughts while writing from 
Jerusalem to his brethren of the dis- 
persion. 

3. And still further: as neither he nor 
they had ceased to be Jews on becoming 
Christians, but all retained their mem- 
bership in their ancient commonwealth, 
which was Church and State in one, 
asserting their nationality, and sharing 
the worship of the Temple and the 
Synagogue,! they could not forget those 
who, though still unconverted, were yet 
their brethren as Jews, and might here- 
after become so in a fuller sense, as 
Christians also. 

And therefore, although it would be 
wrong to say that the Epistle was 
addressed to the unbelieving as well as 
to the converted Jews, we may admit 
that the feeling of this brotherhood has 
had its influence in the apparently 
fluctuating way in which the suffering 
Christians and their oppressors are 


1 See ii. 2, where the Christian assembly is 
ealled “‘ your synagogue.” 


INTRODUCTION. 


spoken of, and classes of persons are 
apostrophised who can scarcely have 
pretended to be Christians in any sense, 
See the notes on iv. 2, 13; v. I. 


IIL 


Written from Jerusalem to the Jews 
of the Dispersion, the Epistle is, with- 
out prejudice to its Christian character, 
and notwithstanding the remarkable cor- 
rectness of its Greek diction (a char- 
acteristic which has scarcely received 
the attention that it deserves), essen- 
tially Hebrew in tone of thought and 
feeling, and even phraseology. In 
every paragraph it reminds us of the 
teaching of the Saviour Himself. But 
the vessel which received His words had 
first been imbued with the peculiar 
character of Semitic, and especially 
Hebrew, culture. The Proverbial Books 
of the Jews rise in our thoughts as we 
read the Epistle, alike in their general 
ethical character, and, especially, in 
their peculiar development of the idea 
of ‘Wisdom.’ It may perhaps admit - 
of doubt whether the books of ‘The 
Wisdom of Solomon’ and ‘ Ecclesiasti- 
cus’ are among the actual sources of St. 
James’s teaching, or whether they are 
merely to be looked upon as intermediate 
products of the same school of thought 
and philosophy, in which the Jewish mind 
found its congenial sphere from the days 
of Solomon to those of St. James. Yet 
the resemblances seem too many and 
too striking to be thus explained; and it 
is most probable that they indicate an _ 
actual and familiar acquaintance with 
all the so-called ‘Sapiential books.’ See 
Additional Note at end of ch. i. 

Again, the stress laid on sins of the * 
tongue and on the unruliness of that 
member, and the melancholy picture of 
the social relations of rich and poor,— 
almost synonymous with oppressors and 
oppressed,—seem to carry us back to 
the same storehouse of practical expe- 
rience. Equally characteristic and re- 
markable, especially in contrast with the 
argumentative trains of thought and 


1 Eg, royl{erOar eis dixasoclyny — adiévas 
rapextduara—nposwro nya — TporwmoAnerery 
eee xporedx ériAeo pe 
yv7s, 


INTRODUCTION. 


closely-linked statements to which we 
are accustomed in St. Paul’s writings, is 
the abrupt gnomic form of enunciation 
which often disguises the real closeness 
of the connexion of the thoughts. Here 
we often seem to pass from “the words 
of the wise and their dark sayings” to 
the oracular utterances of the prophet.’ 
So-also, instead of general statements, 
St. James is fond of placing before us in 
a concrete form representations of scenes 
vividly, almost dramatically, realising to 
our imaginations the lessons which he 
wishes to enforce.?. And with these again 
are connected the picturesque allusions’, 


1 See Cellerier on v. 19. 
9 Zig. i. 11, 24; ii. 2, segg., &c. 
5 ‘‘ There is more imagery drawn from mere 


Ill 


so numerous in the Epistle, to the pheno- 
mena of the outward world, earth, and 
sea, and sky; which bespeak the Jew, 
—the native of Palestine,—and above 
all, the devoted disciple of Him who 
“knew the pleasant way” of teaching by 
parables. 


natural phenomena in the one short Epistle of 
St. James, than in all St. Paul’s Epistles put 
together.” (Howson, ‘ Hulsean Lectures,’ p. 6, 
note.) 

1 Hug, ‘ Einleitung,’ ii. § 154, notes the local 
colouring; neighbourhood to the sea (i. 6; 
iii. 4); a country of olives, vines, and 
(ili. 12) ; where salt springs were known (iii. 11, 
12); where drought (v. 17, 18) and the hot 
wind (i, 11) were dreaded ; and the early and 
late rain (v. 7) was looked for. 


[N.B.—The Editor feels it necessary to state that the whole of the pre- 
ceding Introduction and of the following notes were set up and finally revised 


in September 1877. 


Any coincidences between this part of the work and other 


publications which have appeared since that date are purely accidental.] 


THE GENERAL 


EPISTLE OF 


JAMES. 


CHAPTER I. 


We are to rejoice under the cross, § to ask 
patience of God, 13 and in our trials not to 
impute our weakness, or sins, unto him, 19 
but rather to hearken to the word, to meditate 
in it, and to do thereafter. 26 Otherwise 
men may seem, but never be truly religious. 





Cuap.I. 1. James.) For the personal 
questions connected with this name, see the 
Introduction. 


a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ. | 
More exactly, s/ave, bondman, of Him who 
has purchased us to Himself. The word is 
not necessarily so harsh as it seems to those 
who look at slavery only on its tragic side. 
Domestic slaves were usually well treated (St. 
Luke vii. 2); though this depended on a 
master’s temper or caprice. We know of no 
household servants, except slaves, in Greece 
or at Rome (cp. Lat. familia). St. Paul 

- uses the word of himself, both with the title 
of an Apostle (Rom. i. 1; Tit. i. 1), and 
without it (Phil. i. 1); see too 2 Peter i. 1; 
Jude 1. It seems to indicate some (though 
undefined) ministry, beyond the ordinary 
Christian’s relation to his Lord (see 2 Tim. 
ii. 24). Some, comparing the usage of the 
Hebrew prophets, even think it = Apostle. 
In John xv. 15, Christ calls the disciples no 
longer ‘‘servants” (slaves), but “friends.” 
Compare what is said of Moses in Num. xii. 
7, with Exod. xxxiii. 11; Heb. iii. 2-5. 

The co-ordinate mention of God and the 
Lord Jesus Christ implies their co-equal 
dignity. And it accords with St. James’s 
view of the oneness of the old and new 
Dispensations. 


to the twelve tribes.| A name of pride to 
the children of the twelve patriarchs (really 
thirteen tribes), even when the common- 
wealth of Israel was no more. Its signifi- 
cance is both religious and political. Christ 
recognises it in connexion with the number 
of the Apostles, and (prophetically) with the 
future kingdom (Matt. xix. 28; Luke xxii. 
30; cp. Revel. vii. 4, xxi. 12-14). St. Paul 


AMES, a servant of God and ef 
the Lord Jesus Christ, to the 
twelve tribes which are scattered 

abroad, greeting. 

2 My brethren, count it all joy 

when ye fall into divers temptations ; 





(Acts xxvi. 7) uses an equivalent noun BS 
dadexadvdor, “ the dozen tribes”), which 
occurs in early ecclesiastical writers. Here 
the Christian Jews, as being the true Israel, 
are probably meant, not the who/e Church, 
St. Paul’s “Israel of God” (Gal. vi. 16); 
though Gentile converts, attached to churches 
chiefly Jewish, may be included. 


which are scattered abroad.| Literally, of 
the dispersion, i.e. who were dispersed 
abroad in the captivity and did not return to 
Palestine. Many had formed ties in the far 
East, and remained there. And there were 
others who, for commercial or other reasons, 
had followed the march of Alexander’s em- 
pire, and settled in the kingdoms into which 
it was broken up, chiefly in the cities on the 
coasts of Asia Minor. The phrase is derived 
from the LXX, Deut. xxx. 4; see Ps. cxlvii. 
2; Ezek. xxii. 15. St. Peter addresses his 
first Epistle to “the strangers of the disper- 
sion of (in) Pontus,” &c. The Jews, in 
John vii. 35, ask whether Christ will go “unto 
the dispersion of (among) the Greeks.” Al} 
these Jewish colonies were in correspondence 
with Jerusalem, and received the decrees of 
the Sanhedrim on ritual and ecclesiastical 
matters. So those who became Christians 
would still look to Jerusalem, and gladly 
receive an epistle from the pastor of that 
church. See Introduction, ii. 

greeting.| Literally, wisheth joy—a Greek 
salutation; whereas the other Epp. wish 
“mercy,” “grace,” “ peace,” the last being 
the prevalent Eastern form, even to the pre- 
sent day. See Introduction, i. note’. 

2. My brethren.] St. James, writing from 
the fulness of his heart, and knowing the 


v. 3—5-] 


3 Knowing this, that the trying 
of your faith worketh patience. 
4 But let patience have her perfect 





needs of his brethren and the troubles which 
were threatening, plunges at once into his 
subject. The comparison of 1 Thess. ii. 14, 
with Acts xvii. 1-7, throws light on the 
situation. The double tie of brotherhood in 
blood and in faith may account for the fre- 
quent use of the words “my brethren” (15 
times) in this Epistle. St. Paul and St. John 
prefer “ children.” 

count it all joy.| Nothing but joy, in spite 
of outward appearances and the suggestions 
of human weakness. 


when ye fall inte divers temptations.| We 
speak of trials of affliction, and temptations 
of allurement; but the same family of words 
in the original expresses both, though the 
verb is more commonly used of tempta- 
tion, the noun of trial. (The verb is also 
used simply of testing, 2 Cor. xiii. 5; even of 
trying, attempting, Acts xvi. 7, xxiv. 6 :—the 
noun is used by Christ of Himself, in Luke 
xxii. 28). The common notion is the risk of 
shaking faith or obedience, whether by pain 
or pleasure. Here the temptations are such 
as persons “ fall into,” or “fall in with” (cp. 
Luke x. 30, of the man who “fell among 
thieves”), and therefore are—(1) outward, as 
opposed to the inner temptations of verse 14 
(see note there); (2) not self-sought; such 
as we fall, not run, into. The risk of failure 
under trial is enough to make those who 
know their weakness pray that they be not 
led into temptation (Matt. vi. 13) even of 
this kind (see Hooker, ‘E. P.’ v. 48, 13, and 
Augustin. ib. n. 51); but those who fa// into 
it may, even while suffering, feel joy, remem- 
bering (1) its uses in detaching the soul from 
earth, disciplining it and conforming it to 
Christ ; (2) the assurance of help propor- 
tioned to their need (a Cor. x. 13); (3) the 
promise of reward great beyond all. com- 
parison of the suffering (Rom. viii. 17, seg. ; 
2 Cor. iv. 17, seg. ; cp. Heb. xii. 2-7). 

The coincidences between verses 2-12 and 
Ecclus. chap. ii. are very striking. 

The whole Epistle shews iu need there 
was to dwell on the sweetness of the uses of 
adversity. St. James views the present and 
coming troubles on their spiritual side, and 
calls them “ good,” in virtue of the fruit that 
they bear. 

3. Knowing this. Delicately teaching them, 
if ignorant, what they ought to know and 
Must recognise,—that these temptations test 
the reality and depth of faith, and that the 


of trial works and establishes pa-- 


tience. “Patience” is not merely passive 
New Test.—Vo. IV. 


JAMES. 1. 


work, that ye may be perfect and 
entire, wanting nothing. 
5 If any of you lack wisdom, let 


113 


submission: rather, enduring fortitude, the 


elastic spirit which bears up against trials 
until it conquers. So “ patient continuance in 
well-doing” (literally, exdurance of good 
work), Rom. it. 7; “let us run with patience 
the race that is set before us,” Heb. xii. 1; 
“he that shall endure unto the end, the same 
shall be saved,” Matt. x. 22, xxiv..13: see 
infra 12. In 1 Peter i. 7, “the trial of faith ” 
is connected, as here, with “manifold tempta- 
tions,” and leads to "es glory # the appearing 
of Jesus Christ ;” cp. also Rom. v. 3, seg., 
“we glory in tribulation (nearly = ‘tempta- 
tion’ here; cp. Luke viii. 13, with Matt. xiii, 
21), knowing that tribulation worketh pa- 
tience, and patience experience, and experience 
hope;” where “ experience ” is nearly the same 
word with “trying” here, varying only as ex= 
perience differs from the experiment of which 
It is the result, and so coming nearer to the 
“perfect work” (verse 4) which crowns 
“patience” than to the probation which per- 
fects it. 


4. have her perfect work.] Further mark- 
ing the energetic character of this “‘patience” 
(cp.. Rom. ii. 7; 1 Thess. i. 3); the “ work” 
being the exercise which developes and puri- 
fies patience to perfection. “ Perfect,” as 
used in N. T. of human things, implies full 
growth ; strictly of persons (as here, “ that 
ye may ’be perfect”) ; as of men (contrasted 
with babes) in Christ, 1 Cor. xiv. 20 (A. V. 
men); cp. “unto a perfect man ... that 
we be no more children,” Eph. iv. 13; and 
see Heb. v. 14; 1 Cor. xili. 10, 11. A thing 
is “ perfect,” in its kind; “entire,” in all its 
parts ;—“ perfect,” not rudimentary, “entire,” 
not maimed or incomplete. “ Entireness ” 
(A. V., “ perfect soundness”) was given to 
the cripple i in Acts ili. 16. Josephus uses the 
word of victims fit for sacrifice; the LXX 
(Exod. xx. 25), of stones unhewn. Inx Th. 
y. 23, man’s threefold nature, in the complete= 
ness of all its parts, is indicated : “your whole 
spirit and soul and body be preserved.” 

Note St. James’s habit to gain emphasis 
by repeating those words which form the 
links of his thoughts. Already we have had 
“to rejoice ” (A. V., “ greeting”) . “ joy,” 
“patience... patience,” “s perfect” . ... that 
ye may be perfect.” 

wanting nothing.| Rather, wanting in 
nothing: the same thought is expressed first 
positively, then negatively. It is not a lesson 
of contentment, but a warning against being 


contented with anything short of perfection: 
cp. 1 Cor. i. 7. 


H 


114 


him ask of God, that giveth to all 
men liberally, and upbraideth not; 
and it shall be given him. 

6 But let him ask in faith, nothing 
wavering. For he that wavereth is 
like a wave of the sea driven with 
the wind and tossed. 


JAMES. I. 


[v. 6—g. 


7 For let not that man think that 


he shall receive any thing of the 
Lord. 


8 A double minded man is un- 
stable in all his ways. 
g Let the brother of low degree | 


‘rejoice in that he is exalted : 





Thus the Christian’s sufferings are made 
to display, exercise, and develop his good gifts ; 
he is accomplished in all graces collectively, 
he is perfected in every one severally. 


5. If any of you lack (or, is wanting in) 
qisdom.| The phrase of the last verse re- 
peated : let him ask (cp. Matt. vii. 7; 2 Chr. 
1. 7) of God, whose attribute is to give—to 
give to a//—and that /iberally, with open and 
stretched-out hands; or literally, with sim- 
plicity, single-hearted good-will, without any 
such arriére pensée, or selfish consideration, as 
often modifies the bounty of men. But both 
meanings meet in one, when the word is 
used of giving: see Rom. xii. 8; 2 Cor. viii. 
2, ix. 11, &c. Elsewhere used of simplicity, 
singleness of character, Eph. vi. 5; Col. iii. 22. 

That it belongs to man to ask, and to God 
to give, is one contrast. Another is, that 
when man gives, he gives and upbraids, re- 
paying himself by the assumption of supe- 
riority, and making the receiver chafe under 
the obligation. This thought is very fre- 
quent in Ecclus.: see xviii. 18, xx. 15, xli. 22, 
and especially xxix. 22-28. 

wisdom.| See add. note at end of chapter. 

6. in faith.] Relying on God’s will to give 
(verse 5). The word is further defined, as often 
in St. James, by the negative following :—xo- 
thing wavering, or doubting, cp. Matt. xxi. 
21; Mark xi. 23; Actsx. 20,xi.12; “atodds 
with oneself, undecided, hesitating ”; in verse 
8, of two minds. The doubt of God’s sted- 
fastness is the reflex of man’s own conscious 
vacillation, whereas fulness of faith and en- 
tireness of devotion are the conditions of 
effectual prayer; see ch. v. 15. He who 
knows not his own mind in asking must have 
misgivings as to receiving. And so it turns 
out to him. This doubting is illustrated by 
an image from outward nature, found also 
in Isaiah lvii. 20, but there of sin rather than 
weakness. See too Ecclus. xxxiii. (xxxvi.) 2; 
Jude 12,13. Here the ceaseless agitation of 
the storm-driven wave represents the unrest 
of a soul not “grounded and settled in the 
faith ” (Col. i. 23). In Eph. iv. 14, the bark 
is tossed at the mercy of the winds: here we 
have the wave itself, the very element of 
instability, of restless, purposeless motion. 

On the use of natural imagery by St. 
James, see Introduction, iii. last note. 


7. For let not that man.| The doubter 
mentioned in verse 6. The change from “it 
shall be given” to “ 4e shall receive ” may refer 
the failure to the disqualification of the re= 
corey, rather than to the unwillingness of the 

iver. 


of the Lord.] St. Paul’s rule is to use this 
word (Gr. Kupios) of Christ. In the LKX 
it uniformly represents the Hebrew Jehovah, 
St. James uses it sometimes of Christ (e. g. 
i. 1, ii. 1, v. 7); but also of the Father » 
(more probably) of the Godhead in i 
without distinction of Father, Son, and Holy 
Ghost ; as here, and v. ro. 

The Lord, “ with whom is no variableness” 
(v. 17), is forcibly contrasted with the weak 
creature who asks of Him, yet knows not his 
own mind even in asking. 


8. There should be only a comma between 
vv. 7 and 8; the verses may be paraphrased, 
“Let not such an one as this expect to 
receive anything, great or small, that he asks 
of the Lord, double-minded man as he is, 
unstable in all his ways!” And this gives 
meaning to “ But” (omitted in A. V.) at the 
beginning of v. 9.—double-minded]. In iv. 8, 
where this word recurs, the context suggests 
the notion of duplicity. But it is not always 
conscious hypocrisy to serve two masters or 
cherish two minds (“a heart and a heart,” 
1 Chr. xii. 33, cp. Ecclus. i. 28). And here 
the double-minded man is not so much 
wicked as weak in faith, “halting between 
two opinions” (1 Kings xviii. 21) ; cp. “ Woe 
to fearful hearts and faint hands, and the 
sinner that goeth two ways” (Ecclus ii. 12). 

unstable in all his ways.| This word (axarae 
otatos) does not occur again in the received 
text of the N. T., though it is probably to be 
read in iii. 8. But the cognate substantive 
is common in the general sense of disorder, 
confusion, disturbance, unsettledness ; coupled 
with “ wars” and opposed to “ peace,” Lu. xxi. 
9; 1 Cor.xiv. 33: see 2 Cor. vi. 5, xil. 20:— 
below, iii. 16, “confusion and every evil work.” 

The doubtfulness in the man’s prayer 
betrays itself in all his goings. He cannot 
walk straight or aim straight at an object; at 
odds with himself, he goes two ways—and 
therefore no way. 

9. Let the brother.| Read “But let the 
brother.” The difficulty which probably 


¥. 30—11.] 


10 But the rich, in that he is made 

low: because as the flower of the 
he shall pass away. 

11 For the sun is no sooner risen 


JAMES. I. 


with a burning heat, but it with- 
ereth the grass, and the flower 
thereof falleth, and the grace of the 
fashion of it perisheth: so also 





made our Translators leave out the word, 
disappears with the wrong punctuation; see 
note on v. 8. We have a regular series, 
S@rmmnceity a0. -; let .patience). 4 «let 
him ask ....; let not that mam.... 
But let the brother... .” 

Vv. 9, 10, should be compared with the 
“ Beatitudes” in Matt. ch. v., and the parable 
of the Pharisee and Publican, Lu. xviii. 10, 
seqg.: see too 2 Cor. xi. 30; and especially 
1 Cor. vii. 22, “he that is called in the Lord, 
being a servant, is the Lord’s freedman: like- 
wise he that is called, being free, is Christ’s 
servant.” Whether poor or rich, the Chris- 
tian, as such, is placed so high that he looks 
down on and beyond worldly distinctions,— 
except in so far as he may find rank and 
riches a temptation to descend to earthly 
things, or low estate a help to reach spiritual 
blessings :—which thought again suggests the 
connexion between temptation and blessing, 
see vy. 2,12. The humble brother’s exalta- 
tion must consist in the spiritual blessings 
(v. i. 18; ii. 5), which more than make up 
for his outward lowliness; and in his being 
conformed to his Saviour’s image. 


10. But the second part of the precept 
(v. 10) is more difficult. Bouman (‘Comm. 
in Ep. Jac.’ Traj. ad Rhen., 1865) even 
proposes to supply “ not in his riches” after 
“humiliation.” It seems clear that we must 
(1) recognise “the rich” as a “brother” 
equally with him “ of low degree ” ;—(2) sup- 
ply, “let him rejoice,” in this verse, as found 
in v. 9;—and (3) understand the word para- 
phrased “in that he is made low” (lit. “in 
his humiliation”) in the usual Christian sense, 
not as implying moral degradation. 

Thus both poor and rich are treated as 
disciples who are to be taught to go on to 
perfection. True, not many rich or mighty 
were among them (1 Cor. i. 26): yet even 
before the crucifixion we read of a Nicodemus, 
a Zaccheus, a Joseph of Arimathea. And 
both classes are recognised here, and taught to 
become Christians indeed, the poor being 
exalted, the lofty being humbled. Each has 
the contraries reconciled in himself; the 

or, rich in faith (infra, ii. 5); the rich, poor 
in spirit (Matt. v. 3); that both may inherit 
a blessing. The will of God, to which theirs 
must be conformed, is the exaltation of the 
lowly, the abasement of the lofty (Lu. i. 48, 
seq.) And this is wrought, (1) outwardly, 
inthe uncertainty of riches (1 Tim. vi. 17), 
through which, if he is merely a rich man, he 


shall fade away as they do; (2) inwardly, 
in the change of heart, which makes him 
count as loss all things that had seemed gain 
to him, that he may win Christ (Phil. iii. 7). 
See in Mark x. 17, and the parallel passages, 
how Christ tried the rich young man who 
came running to Him; noting how nearly 
Christ there identified the Aaving riches with 
the trusting in them. Again, the rich Chris- 
tian by the contrast of eternal things can 
take the true measure of his earthly wealth, 
Thus by abasement he rises to the spiritual 
level of those who have had no such encum- 
brances; and he is on the way to share the 
exaltation of the poor in that world where 
these differences disappear. Above all, this is 
directly to follow the steps of Christ, who, 
being rich, for us became poor, and because 
He humbled Himself was highly exalted by 
His Father (2 Cor. viii. 9; Phil. ii. 6-11). 


11. This verse, when exactly rendered, 
gives a vivid picture of what is wont to 
happen, by describing in the past tense one 
representative instance of it:—“ for the sun 
arose, and the fiery blast, and scorched the 
grass; and the flower thereof dropped off, 
and the comeliness of its form perished.” All 
is over before the sentence is uttered! So 
infra, v. 24, where see note. 

The burning heat here may be merely that 
of the sun when he goeth forth in his might. 
But more probably it is the burning wind, 
blowing like the hot blast of a furnace 
from the torrid wilderness: for this, rather 
than the mere power of the sun’s rays, is the 
scourge of Palestine, not merely exhausting, 
but scorching and shrivelling up the vegeta- 
tion (Ezek. xvii. 10). In the LXX the word 
(xkavowr) is used of “ the wind from the East, 
from the wilderness,” Job i. 19; Jer. xiii. 24. 
In Lu. xii. 55, it is the South wind, which 
also brings with it a Simoom-like influence 
from the desert. Matt. xx. 12 leaves the 
question undecided. But cp. Jonah iv. 8, 
“When the sun did arise, God prepared a 
vehement east wind; and the sun beat on the 
head of Jonah, that he fainted.” See also 
Matt. xiii. 6 and 21. 

the grass.| Here as elsewnere compre- 
hending all the gorgeous wild flowers of 
Palestine ; cp. Matt. vi. 28, 30, “‘ Consider the 
lilies of the field . . .; if God so clothe the 
grass of the field,” &c. ence the grace or 
comeliness of its form (lit. “face”) here 
spoken of. See Ps. ciii. 15, 16; Isai. xl. 6, 
7; 1 Pet. i. 24, for similar comparisons. 


118 


116 


shall the rich man fade away in his 
ways. 

12 Blessed is the man that en- 
dureth temptation: for when he is 
tried, he shall receive the crown of 
life, which the Lord hath promised 
to them that love him. 


JAMES. I. 


[v. 12—14 


13 Let no man say when he is 
tempted, I am tempted of God: for 
God cannot be tempted with ‘evil, 
neither tempteth he any man: 

14 But every man is tempted, 
when he is drawn away of his own 
lust, and enticed. 





shall... fade away in his ways.) Not 
generally, “ paths of life ;” but literally, “his 
goings, journeyings,” cp. Lu. xiii. 22. Herder 
draws the picture of an Oriental merchant 
cut off while journeying from place to place 
with his merchandise. 


12. St. James returns to the thought of 
verse 2, with the expression so familiar to us 
in Ps. i., Matt. v. 3, segg. The blessing is 
not in the temptation (trial, see verse 2), but in 
its work on the soul, in the courageous endu- 
rance of it (v. 1 Pet. ii. 20), in the strength of 
faith in the Lord’s (the holy name is not 
found in the best authorities, A B &, &c., 
being reverently suppressed and easily under- 
stood) promise of the crown; cp. 1 Pet. v. 4, 
where the crown is amaranthine, “that fadeth 
not away ;” as here it is the croqa of life, in 
contrast with the rich man’s fading away in 
his ways.—When he is tried] not tempted, but 
tested (verse 3, “the trying of your faith”) ; 
when he has come forth approved from the 
trial; i.e. when patience has had her perfect 
work (verse 4). In St. Paul the figure of 
the crown is evidently taken from the Greek 
games (1 Cor. ix. 25; 2 Tim. iv. 8, cp. ib. ii. 

But this is alien from ordinary Jewish 
habits and religious associations. Josephus 
‘ Antt.’ xv. 8, 1) describes the irritation of the 
poe when Herod instituted games of this 
sort. In Rev. ii. 10, the “crown of life” is 
the reward of “ faith unto death;” cp. 1 Pet. 
v. 4. Zechariah (vi. 11, 14, where LXX, 
6 orepavos eorat Tois Uropevover) seems to 
allude to the holy crown which formed part 
of the high priest’s mitre; while the various 

assages in the Revelation rather suggest a 

ingly crown. Perhaps they are combined 
here, as “ He hath made us kings and priests 
to God and His Father” (Rev. i. 6); “a 
royal priesthood ” (1 Pet. ii. 9). 

The crown of /ife is, according to some, 
“worn through eternity,” the living, ever- 
lasting crown :—and perhaps that thought is 
presen But the eternal life is itself the 
crown. In the very similar passage, 2 Tim. 
iv. 8, it is “a crown of righteousness (where 
‘righteousness’ is the reward, not the thing 
rewarded), which the Lord will give to all 
them that love His appearing.” This is the 
dove by which faith worketh (Gal. v.6). The 
sureness of His “ promise” is the ground of 
faith ; the nature of it is the motive of love. 





13. Let no man say, ds’c.] Not referring to 
deliberate blasphemers, but to those who, in- 
stead of enduring, give up the struggle against 
temptation in despair, as if an irresistible force 
were pressing them; illustrated by Gen. iii, 
12, seq.; Ezek. ch. xviii. The error is core 
rected, and the actual work of God shewn in 
1 Cor. x. 13, “God is faithful, Who will not 
suffer you to be tempted above that ye are 
able; but will with the temptation make a way 
to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.” 

The temptations in verse 2 were outward 
things, which give the opportunity of choos- 
ing or resisting sin. These are harmless, or 
rather useful, unless the outer fire touches 
fuel within, and so a man “ is (allows himself 
to be) tempted.” ‘This is a very different 
thing from “ falling into temptations.” Even 
in the first and typical temptation, where it 
might have been least expected, Eve thought 
she saw more inducements than the Tempter 
suggested (Gen. iii. 6). In 1 Cor. vii. 5, itis 
because of our incontinency that Satan tempts 
us. The occasion, indeed, may be “ of God ” 
in the order of His previdence and of our 
spiritual training : but the inclination is not 
of Him. Evil has no place with Him, and 
had none in His creation on the day when 
He “saw every thing that He had made; 
and behold, it was very good ” (Gen. i. 31). 

God cannot be tempted.] His nature cannot 
be reached or touched by any power of evil: 
nor is He the author of it to others. (This 
is not inconsistent with the use of the word 
for trying, making proof of obedience or faith, 
as the LXX use it of God proving, not only 
Abraham, Gen. xxii. 1, but also the Israelites, 
Exod. xvi. 4, xx. 20; Deut. xiii. 3, &c.) But 
it is in the nature of weak sinners to throw 
the blame on God,—“* Why hast thou made 
me thus?” Not “enduring” the temptation, 
they first surrender themselves, and then 
plead that they were tempted by a Power 
which could not be resisted. See Ecclus xv. 
II, 12, 20; and Prov. xix. 3 (in LXX), “ine 
foolishness of man perverteth his way; out 
he accuseth God in his heart.” 

He.] airds, probably “neither Himself 
tempteth any man,” as antithesis to “ tempted 
of evil” immediately before. Others, not 
so well, explain it, “neither ... He [but 
some thing else].” 

14. Of bis own lust.) It is not important 


Ox, evils 


— 


i adie = Ane ee ht ee eee ee 


Pee IE hm CRT mee he oe a 


v. I5—17.] 


15 Then when lust hath con- 
ceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, 
when it is finished, bringeth forth 
death. 


whether these words be taken in the second 
clause (as A. V.) or in the first. But the 
correspondence with verse 13 is more precise, 
and the contrast stronger, if we say, “ But it 
is by his own lust that every man is tempted, 
being drawn away and enticed.” 
It has been thought that the figure drawn 
away (dragged out) and enticed, is from a fish 
- caught by a baited hook. Certainly, dedca¢s- 
pevos contains the notion of a dait: but then 
the words would need to be transposed ; for 
the bait must be swallowed before the prey is 
dragged out. They probably express generally 
the twofold character of lustful temptation,— 
appetite and lasciviousness,—the passion which 
hurries away the will, and the pleasure which 
bribes the judgment. See 2 Pet. ii. 14, 18: 
and perhaps there is an allusion to Prov. vii. 
10-23. And this is of Ais own Just; some- 
times dormant, but always lurking within, 
awaiting opportunity. Cp. Mark vii. 21, seqq. 


15. Compare the figure in Ps. vii. 14. But 
the personification and the genealogy of lust, 
sin, and death (elaborated from this passage 
by Milton, ‘ Par. Lost,’ ii. 747-800) is quite in 
the manner of the Greek Poets, e.g. A’schy- 
lus, “‘ Agam.” 751-771. Chrysostom remarks 
that joy follows the pangs of childbirth, but 
here the agony of death is the end. In the 
similar passage, Rom. vii. 7, segg., “sin” pro- 
duces “lust.” But St. James does not carry 
his analysis back to that Power of Evil, 
which works to produce its own likeness in 
us. In his practical way he is content to 
begin with the “lust” which is the first 
manifestation of the inward corruption. 
This gradually becomes definite in a deter- 
Mination to some specific sin : and this, again, 
takes a body in an outward sinful act; and 
having arrived at full growth, brings forth its 
offspring—death. 

It is questioned, whether, in this gene- 
alogy, (1) conception and birth are both 
represented as taking place within the heart, 
a specific sin of intention being developed out 
of the general corruption, though not yet 
committed in act ; and this afterwards being 
“finished ” or completed by the outward act 
of sin, by which the fruit, death, is brought 
forth ; or whether (2) “the bringing forth 
of sin” describes the step from the inward 
inclination to the actual commission of sin; 
and “the finishing,” its coming to maturity in 
the formation of a habit by indulgence,—thus 
arriving a: the same consummation. Proba- 
bly, siu is treated as positively existing, when- 


JAMES. I. 


16 Do not err, my beloved brethren. 
17 Every good gift and every per- 
fect gift is from above, and cometh 
down from the Father of lights, with 


ever it has taken a definite shape in the heart ; 
and its outward commission is described as 
its maturity, and its travail of death. When 
it is finished, = when it has come to full growth 
(see note on verse 4), which exactly suits the 
figure here. St. Paul by another metaphor, 
calls death “the wages of sin,” in contrast 
to life, the gift of God, Rom. vi. 23. Here, 
as there, death implies not merely the disso- 
lution of the body, but exclusion from that 
life which is “the gift of God,” the crown 
of life which He has promised. “And this 
adds a proof that temptation does not come 
from God. That which ends in death can- 
not be derived from the Author of life. 


16. Do not err, d°c.| This is a link be- 
tween verses 15 and 17; “ Do not be deluded 
into thinking either that God is the author 
of evil to you (see above), or that you can 
expect good from any other Giver than Him 
(below, verse 17). But “be not deceived,” 
“do not err,” &c., usually refer to something 
following; see 1 Cor. vi. 9, xv. 33; Gal. vi. 
7; 1 Jo. ili. 7; and introduce a warning or 
precept arising out of what goes before ; and 
indicate some danger which is really serious, 
though thought trifling. Here the severity 
of the phrase is tempered by the usual my 
beloved brethren. 


17. The first part of this verse has been 
thought to be a quotation, perhaps from a 


hymn. It forms (in the Greek) a heroic 
verse, 
gif... gift.| Two different words is 


the original, the second more emphatic than 
the first; cp. Prov. xxi. 14.—“ Every 4ind of 
gitt that is good, every one that is perfect i 
its kind, comes down to us from on high, 
from God.” The words also suggest the 
converse thought, “ All that are good—and 
none else;” though this is not actually ex- 
pressed. Verse 18 records the best gift, the 
most perfect grace of all; cp. Matt. vil. 11 
with Lu. xi. 13. 


is from above and cometh down from .. .| 
Or, coming down from above, from... ,as 
in ili. 15; the participle perhaps implying the 
continual illapse of the heavenly grace. 

the Father of lights.| (1) of the material 
lights of the created heavens, cp. Jerem. iv. 
23 LXX; but (2) of those intellectual and 
spiritual lights. of which the former are the 
least inadequate emblems ; the thought which 
culminates in “Light of Light,” following 
“ God of God,” inthe Nicene Creed. God is 


117 


516 


whom is no variableness, neither 
shadow of turning. 
18 Of his own will begat he us 


JAMES. I. 


[v. 1& 


with the word of truth, that we 
should be a kind of firstfruits of his 


creatures. 





“Very Light” (airégas). All else, material 
or spiritual, that shews light has received it 
of His; “in Thy light shall we see light,” Ps. 
xxxvi. 9. Hence in a derived sense Chris- 
tians, being “ children of light,” are themselves 
“light in the Lord,” Eph. v. 8: cp. Jo. i. 8, 
seq., with ib. v. 35, of the Baptist’s relation to 
Christ (in verse 35 the word used is /amp, not 
light). See too Job xxxviii. 7, “the morning 
stars sang together, and all the sons of God 
shouted for joy,” compared with ib. i. 6.— 
The lights of heaven, though imperfect (Job 
xxv. 5), set forth their Maker by their glory 
and purity (Ps. viii. 3, xix. 1). This it was, 
that enticed men to give them the honour due 
to Him (Job xxxi. 26-28; Wisd. xiii. 1-9). 
The inadequacy of the material type is cor- 
rected by the following words, which exclude 
the imperfections inherent in it. These 
heavenly bodies, bright though they be, come 
and go, appear and disappear, change shape, 
inflict and suffer eclipse. Not so with the 
Father and fountain of lights: ‘“ God is light, 
and in Him is no darkness at all,” 1 Jo. i. 5. 


no variableness, neither shadow of turning.] 
Imperfections incident to the material lights 
of heaven, but not to God. Variableness (or 
variation); shadow (such as is cast by one 
body on another; e.g. by the gnomon of a 
sun-dial); turning (cp. the word tropic); 
all seem to be allusions to astronomical phe- 
nomena; though the variety of suggested 
explanations shews that we cannot identify 
them precisely. It is enough to say that 
“variableness” may be well applied to the 
alternation of day and night, the rising and 
setting of sun, moon, stars: and that “ shadow 
of (or ‘caused by’) turning” may refer to 
the changes of the moon (cp. the intermittent 
revolving light in a lighthouse); or (but less 
probably) to eclipses; or to the advent of 
night by the earth’s rotation. Wisd. vii. 18, is 
singularly like this passage, cvoracw xocpou 
kal évépyevav orolxelwv, . . . TpoTav adddayas 
kat petaBodas Kaipav, eviavT@v KUKAOUS Kal 
dorépor Oéces. Cp. Bp. Jebb’s ‘Sacred Litera- 
tur” XV. p. 316, segg. But the language is 
phenomenal, not scientific ; describing things 
as they appear to the eye ; and vividly teaching 
that the Father who lightens our darkness is 
free from the imperfections of His creatures ; 
that in His unchangeableness we have the 
foundation of our faith, and the assurance 
that as He is the author of all good, so the 
good of which He is the author is unmixed. 


18. This verse is very important as the 
basis of the more exclusively moral and prac- 


tical precepts which follow. It declares the 
grace of God in the regeneration of the 
believer to be the starting-point of the Chris- 
tian life. The works, so much dwelt on 
afterwards, are the fruits of this first work of 
God in us. 


18. Of bis own will,] He did it not for any 
work or merit of ours (Tit. iii. 5); so Eph. 
i. 5, 11, “according to the good pleasure of 
His will . . . after the counsel of His will.” 
This is connected with the position that every 
good gift comes from God. And this one 
blessing implies all others. 

The instrument of this regeneration is 
the Word of truth; so 1 Pet. i. 23, 25, 
“born again not of corruptible seed but of 
incorruptible, by the word of God, which 
liveth and abideth for ever, ... the word 
which by the gospel is preached unto you” 
(cp. i. 3). In Eph. i. 13, “the word of 
truth” = “the gospel of your salvation” (cp. 
Col. i. 5); and in Eph. v. 26 (where the 
concrete p7ya is substituted for Adyos) it is 
annexed to the ‘“‘ washing (laver) of water” in 
baptism (cp. Tit. iii. 5). So infra, 21, “the 
engrafted word which is able to save your 
souls.” But moreover the Fathers recognise 
in this Word of Truth a mystical allusion to 
the Personal Word of God. He is called 
both “the Word” and “the Truth :’—but 
this is scarcely sufficient. Probably St. James 
is not directly speaking of God the Word: 
but he shews a consciousness of the relation 
between the notion of the Personal Word 
and that of the word of Revelation whereby 
we receive Him. In the N. T. usage we 
trace a gradual ascent from (a) the concrete 
“message” as conveyed to man by personal 
agency, through (4) “‘ the Word,” the revelation 
of God to man which the message embodies, 
forming, as it were, its life and soul,—to (c) 
“THE WorD” Who, being Very God, not 
only reveals, but imparts Himself to us, “is 
formed in us” (Gal. iv. 19) thereby. See 
Acts x. 36-38, where St. Peter passes, as if 
developing one thought, from (4) to (a), and 
thence to (c); “the Word (Acyov) which God 
sent... that word (pnya) ye know, ... 
Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed Him,” 
&c. (not merely, “how God anointed Jesus,” 
as in A. V.). 


begat be us.) ‘The Greek word belongs to 
the mother, not the father, being the same 
as in verse 15, “bringeth forth death,” to 
which this supplies a contrast: cp. the lax 
way in which the same figure is used in Gal 
iv. 19. But it is an intelligible description of 


v. I9—21.] 


19 Wherefore, my beloved breth- 
ren, let every man be swift to hear, 
slow to speak, slow to wrath : 


the regeneration or new creation; “ He is our 
Father and Mother in One” (Bengel) ; cp. Ps. 
XXvii. 10, and Isai. xlix. 15, where the deeper 
tenderness of the mother’s love is recognised. 


a kind of first fruits of his creatures.| Else= 
where the first converts (as of Asia, Achaia, 
Rom. xvi. 5; 1 Cor. xvi. 15) are called “ first- 
fruits;’ and some understand the phrase 
so here, comparing Eph. i. 12, seg.. and 
identifying “ us” with the Jewish Christians, 
as the nucleus of the future Church. But 
this seems inconsistent with St. James’s view: 
nor is the interpretation adequate. The 
word, like “ first-born,” signifies consecration 
to God, rather than priority among men. 
The “ first-fruits” were offered in the Tem- 
ple-service on the morning after the Paschal 
Sabbath (Levit. xxiii. 10-15, &c.), ie. on the 
morning of the Resurrection. Hence the 
word derives a higher meaning, as applied, 
(1) to Him, “the first-fruits of them that 
slept” (1 Cor. xv. 20, 23), “the first-born 
from the dead” (Col. i. 18; Rev. i. 5); 
(2) from Him, to “the church of the first- 
born” (Heb. xii. 23, see the type in Exod. 
xiii. 2, &c.); cp. Rev. xiv. 4. And as He 
is styled “first-born of every creature” 
in Col. i. 15, “the first-fruits of His crea- 
tures” here is the designation of the Body 
of Christians, in their degree. Inthe natural 
world mankind hold this pre-eminence, 
though last created. In the New Creation, 
the Only-Begotten is THE First-fruits; but 
the adopted children are (as the word is 
carefully qualified) “a sort of first-fruits” 
among mankind. So of Israel, Exod. iv. 22. 
This double application of the word makes 
it probable that there is a secondary reference 
in “the Word of truth” also. 


19. Wherefore.| For “wherefore (aate),” 
&c., A BS C, Vulg., Memph., have “ Kzoaw ye, 
or rather ye know (tore), my beloved brethren: 
—but (6¢ inserted in B 8 C, Vulg., Memph.: 
vm. 31 K L, both Syr.: A has kai éoro) 
tet every man,” &c.:—a difficult reading; 
for Ye know, or Know ye this, are elsewhere 
connected with what follows; but here must 
refer to something going before, probably 
verses 16-18. Whether “wherefore” or 
“but” be the link, the connexion of the 
thoughts is obscure. But noting the stress 
laid throughout on quiet and endurance as 
the chief and hardest manifestations of faith 
(cp. i. 3, 4; iii. 1, 13-18), we may trace this 
#8 following from the regeneration through 
the word. The new life is not to shew itself 
ny. stirring, but rather, in relation to she 


JAMES. I. 


20 For the wrath of man worketh 
not the righteousness of God. 
21 Wherefore lay apart all filthi- 





word, by listening. Our duty is (1) to 
hear that Word ;—especially important for 
those who are to be ‘ masters’ (d:ddcxador) 
of others (iii. 1) :—but also (2) generally, to 
hear, to listen and learn, rather than to speak 
and teach (verses 21, 26). Ecclus. iv. 293 
v. 11, may be compared; though there is no 
actual quotation. 

slow to wrath, follows “slow to speak;” 
cp. what is said of the work of the tongue 
generally in ch. iii.; perhaps also with specific 
reference to unholy zeal and jealousy com- 
bined with the ambition of teaching (iii. 1). 


20. worketh not the righteousness of God.] 
There are here two distinct interpretations, 
according to the meanings in which “ work- 
ing” is used :—either (a) to produce, cause an 
effect or end; e.g. to work wrath, death, glory 
(Rom. iv. 15, vil. 13, and 2 Cor. iv. 17) :—or 
(4) to do a work whose end is in itself; e.g. 
to work unseemliness, evil, sin, the will of the 
Gentiles (Rom. i, 27, ii. 9; infra,ii. 9; 1 Pet. 
iv. 3; see Rom. vii. 15-20). 

If we take (a), the sense is “ doth not exe- 
cute the righteousness of God, is no fit 
instrument of His judgments or vengeance.” 
But as to “ work the righteousness of God ” 
is not merely contrasted with “the wrath of 
man,” but implicitly recognised as the duty 
of God’s children, the second interpretation 
is simpler and better. See the phrase in Acts 
x. 35; Heb. xi. 33. True, it is not merely 
“ worketh righteousness,” but “ the righteous- 
ness of God.” But cp. 1 Cor. xvi. 10, “he 
worketh the work of the Lord:” and in Acts 
x. 35, the words are, “he that worketh 
righteousness is accepted of Him.” So here 
the work which beseems the sons of God, 
and is incompatible with the indulgence of 
sinful wrath, is to work that righteousness 
which comes of the grace of God, and avails 
to please Him. If, however, with Hofmann 
we take “slow to wrath” as a warning to him 
who “speaks” as a teacher, not to lose tem- 
per if his efforts fail, then “the righteous- 
ness of God” must be that righteousness 
which a Christian teacher must try to 
“work” in the hearers. 

21. filthiness and naughtiness (the latter 
word is usually better rendered malice in 
N. T., eg. Eph. iv. 31; Col. iii. 8; Tit. iti. 3, 
&c.; maliciousness, Rom. i. 29) comprise two 
classes of sins,—the sensual and the malige 
nant; sins against one’s own personality 
(1 Cor. vi. 18), and sins against one’s neigh 
bour; the one opposed to holiness, the other 
to righteousness: cp. Rev. xxii. 1.3 3 Con 


119 


120 


ness and superfluity of naughtiness, 
and receive with meekness the en- 
grafted word, which is able to save 
your souls. 

22 But be ye doers of the word, 
and not hearers only, deceiving your 
own selves. 

23 For if any be a hearer of the 


JAMES. I. 


[v. 22—eg. 


word, and not a doer, he is like unto 
a man beholding his natural face in a 
glass : 

24 For he beholdeth himself, and 
goeth his way, and straightway fore 
getteth what manner of man he 
was. 

25 But whoso looketh into the 





vil. 1. ‘ Superfluity of naughtiness” is rather 
ambiguous :— abundance, overflow of 
malice would better describe the evil which, 
having filled the heart, overflows in the 
outer conduct; “ out of the abundance of the 
heart the mouth speaketh,” Matt. xii. 34; 
Lu. vi. 45. Cp. “the overflowings of un- 
godliness” (Ps. xviii. 3 (4, Prayer Book); 
where the A.V. has, “floods of ungodly men” 
or “ Belial”). 

lay apart.| Put off all this, as filthy gar- 
ments (see for the literal sense Acts vil. 58 ; 
for the figurative, Eph. iv. 22-25), and receive 
the word (“swift to hear”), with meekness 
(“slow to wrath”) :—t4e word mentioned in 
verse 18, where see note: cp. Rom. i. 16, 
“the gospel....is the power of God 
unto salvation to every one that believeth.” 
But Bp. Wordswerth points out that there 
is a higher significance in the expression, if 
we recognise the Personal indwelling of the 
pass of God; cp. Acts xx. 32; Gal. iii. 27; 

ol. ii. 6. 


engrafted.| éypurov,a word not elsewhere 
found in the N. T.; but see Wisd. xii. ro, 
“ malice bred in them.” Here it is not “in- 
born, native ;” rather, as sometimes in classi- 
cal Greek (Hdt. ix. 94, cp. Odyss. xxii. 348), 
“divinely implanted or given,’—the con- 
trast being between that which is acquired 
by teaching or study, and that which comes 
to us either as a zatural gift (as the phrase 
is) or by inspiration; towards which we 
contribute nothing ourselves, but simply “re- 
ceive” it. Cp. 1 Pet. i. 23. 

your souls.) “Soul,” here and in verse 20, 
is the living and abiding principle of man’s 
personality, of which Christ speaks in Matt. 
x. 28, &c., xvi. 26, &c. 

22. be ye.) Rather become ye; it re- 
quires effort and practice. 

doers of the werd.) As “doers of the 
law,” infra, iv. 11; Rom. ii. 13; £e. of the 
things contained in it. The contrast of 
“doers” and “‘ hearers” shews the ineffectual 
character of the hearing. Indeed the word 
“hearer” (axpoarns, Cp. axpoadcOat, axpoapua, 
axpoarnpiov) suggests listening for amuse- 
ment to a , Tecitation, or public per- 
formance. 


deceiving your own selves.| Le. “not 
hearers only ; for this would be to deceive 


yourselves.” On this wilful self-deception, 
see infra, 26; Gal. vi. 3; 2 Tim. iii. 13; also 
Matt. vii. 21-23. 

23. his natural face.| Literally, the face 
of his birth (so LXX in Gen. xxxii. 9, “ the 
land of thy birth”); not contrasted with 
the new birth (18); but the material and 
visible features, in contrast to the mental and 
spiritual form revealed in the mirror of the 
“perfect law of liberty.” 


in aglass.| Mirror. The ancient mirrors 
were of polished metal (Exod. xxxviil. 8) ; see 
1 Cor. xiii. 12, we see by means of a mirror, 
i.e. not the things themselves (as we might 
“ through a glass”), but only their images. So 
Ecclus. xxxiv. 3, of dreams. Cp. 2 Cor. iii. 18, 
where the argument (from Exod. xxxiv. 29- 
35) seems to require the translation “reflect- 
ing,” instead of “ beholding as in a glass” the 
glory of the Lord. See also the next note. 

24. For he beholdeth, dc.) This brings 
out the point of likeness—not in the mere 
“ beholding,” which might be careful or care- 
less (in Acts xxvii. 39, the word is used for 
“ observing,” “taking notice of” a creek in 
an unknown shore)—but in the particular 
mode, viz. glancing carelessly, and passing 
by without a second look. We might have 
expected “when,” instead of “for;” but, as 
if the full description had been given in 
verse 23, this verse gives one representative 
instance; cp. verses Io, 11, and the note. 
And the tense is emphatic here, as there, the 
literal version being “ for he ‘ beheld ’ himself, 
and ‘is gone’ away, and straightway he 
‘forgot,’ ” &c., é. e. he gave but one glance at 
himself, went away, and never came back 
(the continuous absence is indicated), and se 
straightway forgot what he looked like. 

The mirror of the Word shews us our 
true selves,—the likeness of God, and the sins 
that have defaced it; but, to what end, if we 
turn away and take no heed to maintain or 
restore that likeness? 

25. looketh into.| An emphatic word, 
mapaxu cli in oe Saat ae 
xX. 5, stooping down [and looking m 
saw,” &c.; cp. 1 Peter i. 12. "he attiiede 


SS 


v. 20—27.] 


perfect law of liberty, and continueth 
therein, he being not a forgetful 
hearer, but a doer of the work, 
this man shall be blessed in his 
"deed. 

26 If any man among you seem 
to be religious, and bridleth not his 


JAMES. I. 


tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, 
this man’s religion s vain. 

27 Pure religion and undefiled be- 
fore God and the Fathe: is this, To 
visit the fatherless ana widows in 
their affliction, and to keep himself 
unspotted from the world. 





of the eager observer is caught, as he bends 
over and gazes. And he “ continueth there- 
in.” The object of this study is “the perfect 
law, that of liberty (two distinct thoughts, 
the latter flowing from the former); “the 
law,” virtually = “the word” in verses 22, 
23, but viewed (from St. James’s standing- 
point) as a rule of practice—“ the royal law” 
of ii. 8, cp. Matt. v. 17, segg.: not a different 
and more perfect law (for the law itself is of 
God), but the law fulfilled in perfection such 
as Judaism could not reach, and now at one 
with the springs of action in the Christian’s 
inner man. Cp. Rom. vii. 12, 14, with viii. 
I, 2, 13; Xili. 8-0. 

that of liberty.| St. Paul speaks of “the 
law of faith” (Rom. iii. 27), and of “the 
obedience of faith ” (ib. i. 5, xvi. 26; cp. Xv. 
18; Acts vi. 7). Moreover, St. James had not 
become a Christian by any violent change, 
but by a regular progress from the imperfect 
Law to the perfection of the Gospel (Matt. 
v.17). But he marks the reality of this pro- 
gress by this word “ perfect,” adding “ that of 
liberty,” to shew its character. Cp. Rom. 
viii. 1, 15; Gal. iv. 24-31. In Gal. v. 13, we 
find freedom disciplined by rule; here we 
have the rule tempered by freedom. 


aforgetful hearer... @ doer of the work.) 
Literally, a “hearer of forge’ ess...a 
doer of work: ie. “a forgetful hearer... a2 
working, energetic doer” of this law (cp. 
“a hearer, a doer of the word,” verse 23). 
The idiom is found in Luke xvi. 8, 9, “the 
steward, the mammon, of unrighteousness” 
(i. 11, “the unrighteous mammon”) &c.; 
wv. infra, ii.4. The “ forgetful hearer” is the 
one represented in verses 22-24. (EmAnopo- 
avr is the regular Greek form: but émAno- 
povn occurs in Ecclus. xi. 25.) 


shall be blessed in his deed.| Rather, in 
his doing: the doing of these things being 
an end in itself, containing its own reward. 
Shall be does not necessarily refer to the 
future day of restitution, but is “the future 
of promise,” expressing the result which 
follows from given premisses. Cp. the Beati- 
tudes in Matt. v. 4-9. 


26. religious ...religion.| Devout... 
devotion (as Tyndale and Cranmer) would 
be a better rendering. Two families of 


words are used in N. T. of the outward ser- 
vice of God: one ritual, and specially bee 
longing to the worship (Aarpevew, Narpeca) Of 
the Temple, see Rom. ix. 4, xii. 1; Heb. ix. 
1,6; John xvi. 2 (the ministerial service is 
usually denoted by another, Aecroupyeiv, ~yia) ; 
the other (as here, @pioxos, Opnoxeia) not 
denoting rites of worship (though pos- 
sibly including them in the general sense of 
worshipping, e.g. of angels, Col. ii. 18, cp. 
Wisdom xi. 15, xiv. 16, 18, 27), but special 
devotion exhibited in one’s conduct: and way 
of life. ‘This word is used of the Pharisees, 
“the straitest sect of our religion” (Acts xxvi. 
5). It is used by Herodotus of observances 
based on religious feeling, but belonging to 
ordinary life: e.g., of abstinence from parti- 
cular kinds of food (ii. 18): in ii. 37, the 
words ad\has te Opnoknias emirehéovor pupias 
sum up his list of various customs in refer 
ence to clothing, washing, shaving, &c., 
which were observed as religious duties; see 
also the verb @pyoxeva, ib. 64, and Dionys. 
Hal. ii. 63. And so here the word refers, 
not to acts of worship, but to the general 
tenor of religious duty which marks a life 
as dedicated to God’s service. If a man 
thinks himself, claims to be thought (see 
1 Cor. ili. 18; Gal. vi. 3; Phil. iii. 4: the 
warning is against self-deceit, rather than 
false appearances), in this sense “ religious ” 
or “devout” (St. James says), his devotion, 
if real, will take a practical shape in the 
habitual discharge of duty. 


and bridleth not his tongue.| Literally, zot 
bridling his tongue, dut [thus] deceiving his 
own heart. One might have expected, “ this 
man deceiveth his own heart, and his reli- 
gion is vain.” See infra, ili. 2-4, &c.; supra, 
verses 19-22 


vain.| “ Of none effect, unavailing before 
God,” as Matt. xv. 8; 1 Cor. xv. 17, and 
therefore “unreal.” This description of the 
true religious life, negatively and positively 
defined, seems abrupt. But this (as usually 
in St. James) is rather in the gnomic 
form of expression than in the matter. ‘The 
dominant thought is, “Be ye doers of the 
word” (verse 22): and this is pithily put in 
a double antithesis: doers, zot bearers only, 
(verses 22-25)—doers, not talkers (verses 26 


127 


I22 


JAMES. II. 


27). The negative test here may seem nar- 
row, but it meets a temptation frequently 
yielded to even by persons who keep a watch 
over their doings. So in Matt. xii. 34-37, 
Christ treats sins of the tongue as the most 
direct evidence of a corrupt heart. 


27. pure... and undefiled.| Thesame idea, 
expressed (as usual) positively and negatively. 
Yet perhaps pure refers more to the inward 
source: undefiled to the freedom from evil 
contracted by converse with others; see 
1 Peter i. 19; Heb. vii. 26; and cp. Titus 
1. 15. Perhaps there is an allusion to the 
outward purifications, in which the Jews 
trusted so much (Mark vii. 2-8; Matt. xxiii. 
25, seg.; Heb. ix. 10). The outward and 
inward cleansing are combined in Heb. x. 22, 
and (of the Church) Eph. v. 26, seg. In 
Luke xi. 41, Christ says, “Rather give alms 
of such things as ye have; and behold all 
things are clean unto you.” ‘This teaching 
is the more impressive in a writer who was in 
his own person a pattern of rigid conformity 
to the Law. Before God and the Father (see 
1 Peter ii. 20) contrasts His judgment with 
man’s; cp. Matt. vi. 1-18. 

God and the Father.] I. e. God who is our 
Father. In Matt. v. 48, we are taught to 


[v. x. 


emulate His perfections (in Luke vi. 36, His 
mercies), because He is our Father; cp. 
Ixviii. 5, “‘ Father of the fatherless, and Judge 
of the widows :” these representing the class 
who have God for their especial helper, be- 
cause they have none else (Deut. x. 18; Job 
xxix. 12, segg.; Ecclus. iv. 10). “To visit” 
the afflicted, is an act of charity which the 
Son of Man recognises as done to Himself, 
Matt. xxv. 34, seqq. 


to keep himself] See 1 John v. 18, where 
these words stand absolutely. Here probably 
two thoughts are combined: “to keep hime 
self unspotted” (cp. 1 Tim. v. 22), and “to 
keep himself [safe] from the world” —as 
“from the evil,” John xvii. 15; cp. Prov. vii, 
5. Active charity and moral purity make 
up the definition of the religious life (as in 
Christ’s discourses the second table of the 
Decalogue is often made the test of duty); 
the more direct duty towards God being 
assumed as the root of all, and being suffi- 
ciently indicated by the word “religion,” and 
the reference to the judgment of God. 

See Coleridge’s ‘Aids to Reflection, Ine 
trod. Aphorism xxiii. But he identifies St. 
James’s “religion” with ritual observances 
(Opnoxeia with Narpela), 


ADDITIONAL NOTE on Chap. I. verse 5. 


Why is wisdom the grace specified here, 
and not faith or patience, as in verse 4? 
Probably, as comprehending the sum of prac- 
tical religion according to the ethical view, 
rather Hebrew than Greek, so prominent in 
the Book of Proverbs, and, later, in those of 
Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus. (See Intro- 
duction,, iii.) This Wisdom is (1) the 
Spirit of God, present with Him in all His 
works, and showering the gift of Himself on 
those who seek Him; (2) this gift and inspi- 
ration, enlightening the soul, but still more, 
purifying and hallowing it,—the grace of 
practical holiness,—wisdom unto salvation. 
In ili. 13-17, it is described as coming down 


CHAPTER II. 


1 it ts not agreeable to Christian profession 
to regard the rich, and to despise the poor 
brethren: 13 rather we are to be loving, 
and merciful: 14 and not to boast of faith 
where no deeds are, 17 which ts but a dead 


from heaven, and contrasted with the serpente 
wisdom of this world. Note how the Psalms 
identify sin and folly, sinners and fools; and 
how. St. John uses the word truth in re- 
ference to practice rather than speculation, 
as that which we are not only “to hold,” 
but “todo” (iii. 21; 1 Ep. i. 6). Wisdom, in 
St. Paul, is rather different in meaning, even 
when it is the true wisdom of which he 
writes. He connects it more directly with 
the sanctified intellect; yet see 2 Tim. iii. 15. 
“ Wisdom,” then, presupposes the “ faith” 
which asks for it, and transcends “ patience” 
as containing the “perfect work” of patien 
the Christian character “ perfect and entire.’ 


faith, 19 the faith of devils, 2% not of 
Abraham, 25 and Rahab, 

Y brethren, have not the faith 

of our Lord Jesus Christ, the 

Lord of glory, with respect of persons. 





Cuap. II. 1. the faith of our Lord Jesus 
Christ.; I. e. the faith 2 Him: as Gal. ii. 
16; Acts iii. 16. To save this is probably 
not to hold ¢ée faith (objective, the doctrine 


believed), but to have the faith which bes 
lieves (subjective); as Mark xi. 22, “have 
faith in (of) God.” The question whether 
the disciples held the true faith or not is not 


i 


v. 2.] 


2 For if there come unto your 


7 "assembly a man with a gold ring, 


_—_ —— 


raised. They had received it; they pro- 
fessed it. St. James therefore argues from 
it to shew how lifeless that faith must be 
which does not conquer evil temper, indo- 
lence, unbridled tongues, or (as here) respect 
of persons. One point of practical unchristi- 
anity is touched after another, till the belief 
of devils crowns the whole with terrible 
irony (cf. Rom. i. 18). 


of glory.] Cp. “crucified the Lord of 
glory,” 1 Cor. ii. 8; “the God, the Father 
of glory,” Acts vii. 2 ; Eph. i. 17 ; emphatically 
of the Divine glory. See the reference to the 
Shechinah, in Rom. ix. 4, compared with 
1 Kings viii. 11. The order of the words 
here is remarkable: cp. 1 Thess. ii. 13, where 
the true order, “ye received the word, which 
ye heard of us, of God,” tells that, though 
received through the ministry of men, it was 
God’s word, not man’s (wv. segq.). Here it 
may be paraphrased, “ Why pay such defer- 
ence to the persons of men, when you have 
for the object of your faith the Lord Jesus— 
the Christ of glory?” See the contrast in 
John v. 44, where “ honour” represents the 
same word (60£a) as “glory ” here. 


with respect of persons.| A Hebrew phrase, 
frequent in O. and N. T.; v. Levit. xix. 15; 
Luke xx. 21; Rom. ii.11; Jude 16; favour, 
acceptance shewn to the person, ie. the 
outward show and accidents, instead of the 
substantial merits of the case ;—expressed 
rather differently in Matt. xxii. 16; Mark 
xii. 14; John vil. 24. In Exod. xxiii. 2, 3; 
Lev. xix. 15, the warning is equally against 
subserviency to the great, and partiality 
to the humble. But the danger is nearly 
all on one side; and in the N. T. the former 
Meaning is found alone. This verse exposes 
one flagrant breach of that “pure religion” 
which is shewn in love to those who are 
most in need of it. Others are indicated iu 
this and the next chapter. Chapter iv. deals 
with offences against the other portion of 
i. 27—“ unspotted from the world.” 

Again an individual instance (perhaps the 
description of an actual scene) is substituted 
for an abstract precept; v. especially verse 4. 
—into your assembly) literally synagogue—the 
only place in the N. T. where this word is 
distinctly applied to a Christian assembly. 
In Rev. ii. 9, iil. 9, “the synagogue of Satan” 
may perhaps, in accordance with the Hebrew 
imagery of the book, have a Christian refere 
ence. Elsewhere in the N. T. (except Acts 
xiii. 43, where the A. V. has “when the con= 
gregation was broken up”) always used of 


the material building. In the O. T., only 


JAMES. II. 


in goodly apparel, and there come in 
also a poor man in vile raiment ; 


found in A. V. of a late Psalm (Ixxiv. 8), where 
the LXX have a different word. But 
guvaywyn is very common in the LXX of 
an assembly of the people, whether for worship 
or other public purpose, especially in Exodus, 
Leviticus, and Numbers, as = Hebrew édah, 
whereas in Deuteronomy the word used is 
kabal, LXX éxexdnoia (cp. Acts vii. 38). 
There was no real distinction between the 
words; see Num. xx. 8, 10; Judges xx. 1; 
Proy. v. 14. Nor is any distinction made 
here between the old and the new assembly. 
All the brotherhood are, as it were, taken 
into Israel, not distinguished from it. The 
“footstool,” and the arrangements incident- 
ally noticed, suggest that both the place and 
the assembly are included. But it was not 
necessarily a separate building. A chamber 
in a private house would suffice, as in Acts 
i. 13, xx. 8; as we read of “churches” in 
Rom. xvi. §; Col. iv. 15; Philem. 2. 

Nor is it necessary to decide whether the 
“rich man” is supposed to be a Christian. 
The brethren in Judea were indeed generally 
poor (v. Acts xi, 29; Rom. xv. 25; 1 Cor. xvi. 
3, compared with 2 Cor. ch. viii., ix.); yet 
there were exceptions from the first. But 
the scene represents rich and poor, as such, 
without filling up all the details :—indeed we 
might remark that doth seem to enter the 
assembly as strangers; and that first the one 
and then the other is distinguished from the 
disciples (6, “ye have despised the poor. ..; 
do not rich men oppress you ?”) 

Nor is anything as yer said in disparage- 
ment of the rich man. His apparel is goodly 
(gay represents the same word), bright in 
colour or glossy in texture (in Lu. xxiii. 11, 
“gorgeous” is an exaggerated translation ; 
see note there); or perhaps brilliantly fresh 
and clean, opposite to “vile... . filthy.” 
No doubt, there is a temptation to luxury 
in dress and ornaments. But there is neither 
fault in “ goodly,” nor merit in “ filthy” ap- 
parel. A gold ring, under the Romans, 
might be the simple badge of the wearer’s 
rank. Josephus (‘B. J.’ ii. 14, 9) speaks of 
Jews who were Roman knights: and every 
Roman knight wore a gold ring. The re- 
buke is for those whose “ respect” was paid, 
not to merit, not even to “ person,”—but to 
apparel ! 

Some think that the assembly here named 
was not for religious rites, but fc- the trans~ 
action of general business among Christians, 
comparing 1 Cor. vi. The Jewish Synagogue 
was so used: and its officers had in some 
cases judicial functions. But here, the rebuke 
implies that “rich and poor were meeting 


123 


124 


fomly. 


3 And ye have respect to him that 
weareth the gay clothing, and say 


Os, wel, unto him, Sit thou here 'in a good 


place ; and say to the poor, Stand 
thou there, or sit here under my 
footstoo: : 

4 Are ye not then partial in your- 
selves, and are become judges of evil 
thoughts ? 


JAMES. II. 


[v. 3—6. 


5 Hearken, my beloveu brethren, 
Hath not God chosen the poor of this 


world rich in faith, and heirs of 'the = @het 


kingdom which he hath promised to 
them that love him? 

65 But ye have despised the poor. 
Do not rich men oppress you, and 
draw you before the judgment 
seats? 





together” not as members of a Society in 
which such distinctions must be recognised, 
but as in presence of “the Maker of them 
all,” before whom they are absolutely equal. 
In 1 Cor. xi. 20, segg., we read of somewhat 
similar evils; and there the scene is a reli- 
gious assembly, “the Church of God.” See 
note on verse 6. 

8. have respect.| Not the same word asin 
verse 1; but the same as in Lu. i. 48 (cp. ix. 
38), meaning “to look with favour on one. 


Sit ... here, ds’c.] Some suppose that a bust- 
ling official is represented, marshalling the 
congregation to seats according torank. But 
this is an anachronism. It is the officious act 
of one who himself has a good seat (‘‘4ere in 
a good place”) with a “ footstool ;” and who 
offers the rich man a similar one: 4ere, evi- 
dently in the best part of the room: there, by 
contrast, ‘‘ away, in yonder corner.” Stand 
thou there or sit here may either be two alter- 
Mative speeches, or one speech mocking the 
eed man with the choice of two positions, 

th uncomfortable :—the opposition between 
“thou ... thou” rather favours the latter 
view. 

under my footstool.| i.e. on the floor at my 
feet. The customary attitude of the disciples 
of Jewish Doctors; whence St. Paul’s phrase, 
“brought up ... at the feet of Gamaliel” 
(Acts xxii. 3); cp. Mary in Lu. x. 39, and 
w. Deut. xxxili. 3. But here a humiliating 
distinction is made between two of the 
hearers (cp. Ps. cx. 1). The fondness of the 

ews for “the chief seats in the synagogues” 
ts touched upon in Matt. xxiii. 6, &c. 


4. Are ye not.| Were ye not, asif describing 
one actual and typical instance; see i. 11, 24. 
So in vv. 5, 6, God chose... ye despised 
(not “hath chosen . . . have despised”). 


then.| Greek and: but=and so, then: so 
LXX often; and in N. T., 2 Cor. ii. 2, “If I 
make you sorry, and (=then) who is he that 
maketh me glad ;” cp. also Phil. i. 22. 

But the meaning of dvexpi@nre (A. V., are 
y¢ partial) is doubtful. The active verb may 
mean to draw a distinction between one and 
another (Matt. xvi. 3; Acts xv. 9, &c.) 
But the passive is commonly to be doubtful, 


as opposed to faith (see note on i. 6, and 
references there). Here it probably means 
that this respect of persons shewed that th 
were halting between God and the worl 
double-minded. 

and are [were] become judges of evil 
thoughts ?| i.e. judges possessed, biased by 
(cp. “ forgetful hearer,” i. 25, &c.) evil, unfair 
modes of thinking and deliberation. Used 
in Matt. xv. 19; Lu. v. 21, seg., of reason- 
ings, either with oneself or with others; 
processes which lead to a conclusion, whether 
in action or in judgment. 

5. Hearken, my beloved brethren.) Cp. i. 
16, 19, &c. 

Hath not God chosen.| Rather, Did not 
God choose; the tense carries us back to 
the very act of God’s e/ection (the same word ; 
cp. 2 Peter i. 10; Rom. viii. 33, xi. 5, 7, &c.), 
prior to the faith of the chosen; therefore, 
not “quho are,” but “to de rich,” &c.; for 
though the kingdom is in a true sense already 
come, the mention of faith and 4eirs (not 
partakers) refers us to its future perfect 
revelation. Cp. the construction in 2 Cor. 
ili. 6, “ Who hath fitted us [to be] ministers.” 


poor of this world.| Either in the thing 
of, or in the estimate of, this world; probably 
the latter. Cp. 1 Cor. i. 26, segg. 

rich in faith.| (1) Abounding in faith, 
faith being the riches: as is “rich in 
mercy,” Eph. ii. 4; or (2) by virtue of faith 
rich [in heavenly riches], #. e. in the inherit- 
ance of the kingdom; cp. “though He was 
rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, 
that ye through His poverty might be rich,” 
2 Cor. viii. 9. The latter seems the er, 
as contrasting their worldly poverty with their 
heavenly riches. Cp. “the riches of the glory 
of His inheritance in the saints,” Eph. i. 18. 


_ heirs of the kingdom] See Matt. v.3; Luke 
VL. 20. 


6. But ye have despised the poor.| Kather, 
but ye despised the poor man, i.e. the 
man spoken of in verse 2, segg. Note the 
contrast : “ God chose the poor—ye did de= 
spite to the poor man” (mroxés is a very 
strong word, almost =“ pauper ” or “ beggar;* 





v. 7—9.] 


7 Do not they blaspheme that 
worthy name by the which ye are 
called? 

8 If ye fulfil the royal law ac- 
cording to the scripture, Thou shalt 


cp. Ar. Plut. 548-554.) Note, too, the deli- 
@acy of conduct towards the poor, taught 
by the Law, Deut. xxiv. 10, segg. The Book 
of Proverbs is full of this subject ; cp. also 
Wisdom ch. ii.; Ecclus. xiii. These words 
belong to verse 5, contrasting man’s treatment 
of the poor with God’s love for them. 


Do not rich men.| Rather, the rich as a 
class, opposed to “the poor,” verse 5). An- 
other suggestion,—‘‘ How ill do they, as a 
class, deserve the attention that you pay 
them !” 


draw you before the judgment seats.| Per- 
haps “themselves” should be added, i.e. 
with their own hands drag you, as in Matt. 
XVili. 28; cp. 7d. v. 25 for this summary pro- 
cess, which may be illustrated by Livy’s 
description of debtors and creditors in the 
early times of the Roman Republic ¢¢. g. ii. 
23, 27):—add Luke xii. 58; Acts viii. 3, 
xvii. 6. 

From the phrase “judgment seats” (tri- 
bunals, law-courts), some have inferred that 
verse 2 describes a secular assembly for the 
settlement of disputes between Christians 
without appeal to Heathen courts (see 1 Cor. 
vi., where the same word xpitypiov is used, 
not indeed of the tribunal, as here and in 
Hist. Susann. 49, but of the matter in dis- 
pute) ; and that the special offence imputed 
to the rich was their appeal from the Court 
Christian to the Roman Law-court. 


7. that worthy name.] The name of 
CHRIST ; cp. Acts v. 41, “to suffer shame 
for His (rather te) name;” 25. xv. 17 (from 
Amos ix. 12), “the Gentiles on whom my 
fame is called.” Here, too, the literal 
rendering would be, “that name which zs 
called on you;”’ the covenant-name, in which 
they are callea His people and He their 
God ; a name “invoked over them” in the 
form of baptism. Certainly not “the re- 
spectable name of the Poor,” as Herder and 
others think, supposing that the Edionites 
(Ebion, in Hebrew = poor) might claim 
St. James as their representative. But 
though it is the name of CHRIST, it does 
not follow that the word Céristian is alluded 
to. Christianus is a word of Latin forma- 
tion (Tacitus, ‘Ann. xv. 44), first used at 
Antioch (Acts xi. 26), used by Agrippa (2b. 
xxvi. 28), and by St. Peter (1 Ep. iv. 16); 
nowhere found in St. Paul; and not likely to 
have been current at Jerusalem, where the 


JAMES. II. 


love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do 


well : 

g But if ye have respect to per- 
sons, ye commit sin, and are con- 
vinced of the law as transgressors. 


believers were called Nazarenes or Galileans 
by their enemies (Acts xxiv. 5; John vii. 52), 
and among themselves, “the disciples,” “ the 
brethren,” and “the Way.” (Acts ix. 2, xix. 
9, 23, Xxiv. 14.) 

they blaspheme that ...name.| Some say, 
“act so as to make the enemies blaspheme it :” 
a thought expressed in 2 Sam. xii. 14, and in 
Rom. ii. 24. But we must understand the 
word, as usual, of actual blasphemy against 
the name, doctrine, word, way of God 
@ Dims we 1; Titus i. 55, 2 Peter it. 2, 
&c.). It is indeed originally used of all 
scurril, slanderous speaking (so in N. T., 
Rom. iii. 8; 1 Cor. iv. 13; 2 Peter ii. 11, 
&c.); but usually in reference to persons 
or things which have a halo of sanctity about 
them (e.g. “against Moses and against God,” 
Acts vi. 11; cp. ib. 13), and most often, 
specifically, of a sin against God. 

These rich, then, blasphemed the name of 
CHRIST; and are thus, at last, contrasted 
sharply with the brethren. Nor is this in- 
consistent with verse 2; cp. 1 Cor. xiv. 23, 
seq., Of unbelievers coming into an assembly 
of worshippers. See below on iv. 2, 13, Vv. I. 
But here note that as it is the poor, as a class, 
—and yet not all the poor, or only the poor 
as such—that God chose (“to the poor the 
Gospel is preached,” Luke vii. 22, cp. Isai. 
Ixi. 1, confirmed historically, John vii. 48, 
seqg.; Mark ii. 15, xii. 37; 1 Cor. i. 26, seg., 
&c.), so it is the rich, as a class,—yet not 
simply as such, but in so far as they trust in 
riches (Mark x. 23-27)—who are shut out 
of the kingdom; see Luke xvi. 25, and cp. 
Ecclus. xiii. This language, harsh as it 
sounds, is but the echo of Christ’s warnings. 
against the dangers of riches (Luke, /. ¢.). 
True, the temptations of riches assumed in 
that age very gross forms of sensuality or of 
greed; but do they become less dangerous. 
by losing a portion of their grossness ? 


8, 9. the royal law.| That kingly law to 
which all others minister, each in its own 
sphere: being, in fact, the second of those two 
Commandments, on which “ hang all the law 
and the prophets” (Matt. xxii. 36-40, and 
parallel places) ; see Rom. xiii. 8-ro; Gal. v. 
14; called above, i. 25, “the perfect law, that 
of liberty ;” cp. 12, infra, and Cicero ‘ Offic” 
i, 12, ‘ Regalis sententia.’ 

according to the scripture.| Not a mere 
form of citing the text which follows from 


125 


Or, that 
law which 


ondd 


10 For whosoever shall keep the 
whole law, and yet offend in one 
point, he is guilty of all. 

11 For "he that said, Do not 
commit adultery, said also, Do not 
kill. Now if thou commit no adul- 


JAMES. [I. 


[v. 1o—1g. 


tery, yet if thou kill, thou art become 
a transgressor of the law. 

12 So speak ye, and so do, as the 
that shall be judged by the law of 
liberty. 

13 For he shall have judgment 





Levit. xix. 18, but “according to the real 
spirit of the scriptural precept.” See Christ’s 
teaching in Matt. v. 43-47, illustrated by the 
parable of the good Samaritan, Luke x. 29, 
$694 

ye do well.| Probably ironical (as in 19). 
“True, if you really act up to the spirit of 
that law, you do well; but you have otner 
neighbours besides the rich: do you treat 
them all alike? The poor needs your lowe 
most. If you treat him as an enemy, and 
the rich man as a neighbour (Matt. v. 43), 
ye commit (work, practise, implying a habit, 
not a single act) sin;” v. Matt. vii. 23; Acts 
i957) Seb: Xisaee 


convinced.| Rather, convicted, according 
to the modern distinction between the two 
words, which are originally the same; cp. 
John viii. 9, with ib. 46. 


of the law.] Either, the whole law as 
forming one code; or, more probably, that 
very law, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as 
thyself, to which the appeal was made in 
verse 8; see Rom. ii. 23. 


as transgressors.| More specific than 
“sinners;” “breakers of a positive law ;” 
cp. “ where no law is, there is no transgres- 
sion,” Rom. iv. 15 ; though the Christian rule 
is, ‘‘ whosoever committeth sin transgresseth 
also the law; for sin is the transgression of 
the law,” 1 John iii. 4. 


10. the whole law... one point.) Ie. 
every jot and tittle except one precept, see 
Matt. v. 18, seg. Not as if the breach of 
one were as sinful as the breach of all; but 
(1) The principle of duty, and of obedience 
to all the Commandments, is one; so that if 
we choose for ourselves nine commandments 
to keep, and one to break, we are not doing 
God’s will, but our own. (2) All the precepts 
are alike expressions of one Divine will. and 
rest on one authority (‘‘ He that said,” &c.). 
(3) All the precepts are manifestations of /ove 
at work—love first to God, then to our 
neighbour; and each particular failure shews 
defect in this. ‘ Love is the fulfilling of the 
law” (Rom. xiii. 10), inasmuch as it keeps 
not one or another Commandment, but every 
one alike, working zo ill to his neighbour. 
It is the spirit, of which the several precepts 
are ial expressions. VY. Augustin. Ep. 
167 (29). 


guilty of all.) The same word (évoyos) 
occurs in Matt. v. 21, 22, xxvi. 66; 1 Cor. 
xi. 27: the one common meaning in all 
these places being “ within tne grasp, scope, 
of a law;” and so, either “guilty” of that 
which it forbids; or “liable to, in danger of,” 
its penalties. Cp. Rom. iii. 19. 


11. be that said.| The one Lawgiver, 
Whose will and authority are the same in all 
the Commandments, and Who, literally, spoke 
them (Exod. xx. 1). Compare the paragraphs 
treating of these particular Commandments 
in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. v. 21 
$eqq., 27, seqq.).. There they are mention 
in the same order as in Exod. xx. and Deut. 
v.; whereas here, and in Mark x. 19, Luke 
xviii. 20, Rom. xiii. 9, the sixth and seventh 
Commandments are transposed: for which 
there must have been some (now lost) tra- 
ditional authority; for Philo Judzus (‘de 
Decal.’ 2. 189, 201, 207) argues from it to 
prove the heinousness of adultery. 


12. So speak ye, and so do.| The assertion 
of equal responsibility for words and deeds 
is characteristic of St. James; see i. 19, 26; 
iii, 2-11; iv. 11. The key-note is in Matt. 
Xli. 36, seg. 


as they that shall be judged.| I. e.“ as being 
persons who shall... ”; not “like those 
who...” Note that this law is still the 
standard of their judgment. 


the law (rather, a Jaw) of liberty.) Ie. “the 
royal law” (8), “the perfect law, that of 
liberty ” (i. 25); not a law of outward com- 
pulsion or minute detail, but an inward prin- 
ciple, moulding man’s spirit by the working 
of the “free Spirit” (‘“‘ principalis Spiritus,” 
Vulg. Ps. li. 12) of God. The teconcilia- 
tion of law with liberty, issuing in a service 
which is perfect freedom, is attained through 
the Spirit of Christ: “the law of the Spirit 
of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free” 
(Rom. viii. 2), the spirit of adoption super 
seding the spirit of bondage (#4. 15), that 
love may cast out fear (Bp. Bull, ‘Harm. 
Apost” 1. 3,§ 2). Law, then, is no longer 
a law under which, but a law 4y which we 
act, becoming a law of our spiritual nzture, 
in a sense somewhat analogous to that in 
which the word is applied to the order of 
physical things. 

18.] God’s mercy is restrained and His 


v. 14—18,] 


without mercy, that hath shewed no 


05, mercy; and mercy 'rejoiceth against 


judgment. 

14 What doth it profit, my breth- 
ren, though a man say he hath faith, 
and have not works? can faith save 
him? 

15 If a brother or sister be naked, 
and destitute of daily food, 


pardon forfeited, if, after all, the spirit of 
bondage revives. See the parable of the un- 
mercifal servant, Matt. xvili. 23, segg., espe- 
cially 35. “Love of neighbour” is here 
“mercy,” probably because viewed (as in the 
Lord’s Prayer) in connexion with God’s 
love fo sinners. Where the Spirit is thus 
revealed, the rigour of justice is not felt; 
“mercy,” the spirit of brotherly love in us, 
“rejoiceth against judgment,” triumphs over 
it. God is not the Judge, but the Father, of 
those in whom He beholds the Spirit of His 
Son moving. See Christ’s words, Matt. vi. 
14, seg., XXV. 34-46;—“I will have mercy, 
and not sacrifice” (Matt. ix. 13, &c.). Here, 
as in the parables, it is not injustice, but the 
rigid exaction of justice, which is condemned. 
Woe to those who receive justice, simple 
and unmitigated, at God’s hand! Cp. also 
Rom. v. 7. 

This verse is probably thus connected with 
the foregoing—“ Unless ye keep the royal 
law, ye are transgressors. By mercy it is 
kept, and transgressions are blotted out; but 
the unmerciful remain, as transgressors, in 
danger of the law.” 


14—26.] On this paragraph, see Ex- 
cursus, “St. James and St. Paul.” 


14.| The works (which carry us back to 
1, 22, 27) are tacitly identified with the second 
table of the Decalogue, i.e. the “royal law” 
of verse 18. They are equivalent to Jove, 
and contrasted with an unworking, unloving 
faith. The words, though a man say that he 
bath faith, are more guarded than St. Paul’s, 
“Though I have all faith, so that I could re- 
move mountains, and have not charity (love), 
I am nothing” (1 Cor. xiii. 2). Cp. Gal. 
v. 6, “In Jesus Christ neither circumcision 
availeth anything, nor uncircumcision; but 
faith which worketh by love.” ‘The profes- 
sion of faith is assumed throughout. See i. 
17-21, for the regeneration, the gift of God, 
the Divine and saving Word. To make this 
more clear, we should express the definite 
article of the original: “Can the faith thus 
described—this faith of his, such as one can 
have who has no works—save him?” The 
opportunity of working is of course assumed. 


JAMES. II. 


16 And one of you say unto them, 
Depart in peace, be ye warmed and 
filled ; notwithstanding ye give them 
not those things which are needful to 
the body ; what doth it profit? ; 

17 Even so faith, if it hath not 


127 


works, is dead, being "alone. Psa 


18 Yea, a man may say, Thou 
hast faith, and I have works: shew 





save him?| Connected with “ judgment * 
in verses 12, 13; referring not to the past 
epoch of their conversion, nor even to their 
present state of salvation, but to the Day of 
Judgment. 


15. If @ brother, dc.| Or, But if: pere 
haps, “Nay, to take another case, which is 
strictly parallel (faith and charity being sister 
graces (1 Cor. xiii.) and both essentially 
practical), but which is more self-evidently 
absurd.” Faith in words, and charity in 
words, are alike null: but there might be a 
mistake about the former; there could be 
none about the latter. 


a brother or a sister.; One of the Chris- 
tian brotherhood (1 Peter ii. 17), to whom 
the first offices of love are due. Mark the 
significance of the phrase which St. James 
uses so often. 


naked.| Often used of persons without 
the upper garment; here, evidently of one 
who is insufficiently clad, as in the parable, 
Matt. xxv. 36, segq. 


destitute of daily food.| Lacking (i. 5) day 
by day the food which would suffice for the 
day; unable to procure it by daily labour, 
either because hired by no man (Matt. xx. 7), 
or because the wages were withheld (v. 4). 


16. one of you.] Gently expressed; but 
followed by, ye give them not, as if, though 
one had spoken, the neglect had been generul. 


Depart in peace.| A Hebrew phrase. The 
meaning is not, “Go, get these things for 
yourselves ;”—that would have been churl- 
ishness; but this is hypocrisy—‘ May God 
grant you them!” a plain mockery in the 
mouths of men who had the opportunity of 
being God’s instruments to supply these ne= 
cessities (cp. 1 Tim. vi. 18), but who re= 
jected the privilege offered to them. 


what doth tt profit.) First, and most simply, 
“profit the hungry and naked brother.” But 
“they shall be filled” (Matt. v. 6), and verse 
14 suggest the profit that it would have been 
to him who might have done this to Christ, 
but did it not (Matt. xxv. 45). 


17. Evex so fasto.| Tho faith of which 


128 


JAMES. II. 


t Some co™ me thy faith "without thy works, and 


ae 


I will shew thee my faith by my 
works. 

19 Thou believest that there is 
one God; thou doest well: the de- 
vils also believe, and tremble. 


[v. 19—21. 


20 But wilt thou know, O vain 
man, that faith without works is 
dead? 

21 Was not Abraham our father 
justified by works, when he had offered 
Isaac his son upon the altar? 





we are speaking, deing alone, isolated, by it- 
self. Others, “dead in itself,” z. e. not merely 
outwardly ineffectual, ‘‘ but in its inner state 
and character dead.” But the former is 
better. Cp. the LXX in Gen. xliii. 32, “for 
him by himself, and for them by themselves,” 
&c. ; 


dead.| Retaining, it may be, the outward 
semblance of the living thing; but a corpse, 
powerless to perform the functions of life. 


18. Yea, a man may say.) Greek, But 
gome one will say. ‘This expression else- 
where introduces an objection to the pre- 
vious argument or assertion, see 1 Cor. xv. 
35; Rom. ix. 19; whereas the present verse 
supports St. James’s foregoing argument. 
The difficulty is much less if we take, “ What 
doth it profit, if a man say that he hath faith” 
(verse 14), and “ But rather and more natu- 
rally some one will say,” &c. (18), as an 
antithesis, the particular instance in vv. 16, 17 
being parenthetic. ‘Thus a friendly speaker 
is introduced, arguing, ad hominem, “You 
claim credit for faith without shewing any 
evidence of it, while I work its works. Prove 
the existence of your faith, if you can, by any 
evidence except that of works; while I, by 
working, exhibit my faith in the only way 
in which proof of it can be given.” So in 
Luke v. 18-25, the visible miracle is made 
the evidence of the spiritual. If a man say 
that he has faith, no one can contradict him. 
But the works of faith can be seen, and 
these will prove that, though invisible, it is 
present. 

without thy works.| Literally, apart 
from them; supply, “if thou canst.” Some 
read “ by” them, but with less authority and 
less satisfactory meaning (cp. verses 14, 17). 


19. that there is one God.| Rather, that 
God is one, asserting the unity as well as 
the existence of God,—against polytheism 
rather than atheism (1 Cor. viii. 4,6); for the 
argument is with a Christian Jeqw, zealous 
in the assertion of this verity, as being the 
groundwork of the revelation to Moses, 
“Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one 
Lord” (Deut. vi. 4, &c.), where His abso- 
lute right to their allegiance is rested upon it. 
It is not an exclusively Christian article of 
faith; but it heads the Nicene Creed as well 
as the Decalogue; and it is pressed here on 
those who were at once Jews and Christians. 


The mention of the devils believing seems te 
connect this with their confession of Christ, 
Mark i. 24, v. 7. Note the absence of any= 
thing beyond the bare historical belief of 
a fact. ‘“‘ What so great a thing is it, if thou. 
sayest that Christ is the Son of God? Peter 
said it, and was answered, ‘ Blessed art thon, 
Simon Bar-jona.’ The devils said it, and 
they heard, ‘Hold your peace” The word 
is one and the same; but the Lord tests not 
the flower, but the root” (Augustin. ‘Serm. 
ad Pop.’ 158. 6). 

thou doest well.| “So far, well!” Ironical: 
cp. Mark vii. 9, Rom. xi. 20; 2 Cor. xi. 4. 


tremble.| Nay, shiver or shudder, with 
such horror as makes the hair bristle; 
Job iv. 15. Such is the faith which works 
not, because it loves not; the assurance of 
judgment to come; the foretaste of the “tor- 
ments ” of “the pit ”! 

20.] It may be doubtful whether vy. 18, 
19 are to be taken together, or whether St. 
James himself speaks in verse 19; but, any- 
how, v. 20 resumes the argument of v. 17. 


wilt thou know.] Rather, hast thou the 
will to know; bringing out two truths :— 
(1) The real obstacle to the reception of the 
truth resides in the corruption of the will. 
(2) The intellectual assent at once involves 
practical consequences. Cp. “I would not 
have you ignorant,” Rom. i. 13, xi. 25, &c. 

vain man.| Not in reference to self-con- 
ceit, though, perhaps, to self-deceit. It is 2 
grave rebuke; cp. Judg. ix. 4, xi. 3, with 
1 Sam. xxii. 2, where the Hebrew word is 
identical with “‘ Raca” in Matt. v. 22. 


without works.) “ Apart ;’ severed from. 
its characteristic works, as in verse 17: cp. 
John xv. s. 


dead ?| See verse 17 ; but others read idle, 
unworking, and so “useless” (apy7 BC*, 
&c.); cp. the “idle word,” Matt. xii. 36; 
“neither barren nor unfruitful,” 2 Peter i. 8. 
This gives a characteristic antithesis, ‘‘ work,” 
“ workless,” and points to cuvypye:, in verse 
22; but the reading is not certain. 


21. Abraham our father.| Father of the 
Jews, according to the flesh; and of all the 
faithful, by that adoption which makes them 
heirs of his blessing ; see Gal. iii. 7-9, &c. But 
St. James’s view is that the believing Gentile 
is taken into the true Israel, while the birth= 


v. 22—23.] JAMES. II. 129 
0x,Tiew = 22 'Seest thou how faith wrought which saith, * Abraham believed God, ¢ Gem am 


with his works, and by works was and it was imputed unto him for Rom» 











faith made perfect ? 
23 And the scripture was fulfilled 


righteousness: and he was called the 
Friend of God. 





right of the unbelieving Jew falls into abey- 
ance; see John viii. 37, 39—“I know that 
ye are Abraham’s seed: but . . . if ye were 
Abraham’s children, ye would do the works 
of Abraham:” where “the works” are pro- 
bably those specific things by which his faith 
was tested (cp. #5. 56). So here “ works” 
(plural) are named (Abraham representing a 
class, typically); but the reference is not so 
much to the general tenor of his life, as to 
that one act of faith by which he was speci- 
ally tried, for which he received the blessing, 
Gen. xxii. 16, segg.: “Because thou hast 
done this thing, and hast not withheld thy 
son, thine only son, in blessing I will bless 
thee, &c. . . . because thou hast obeyed my 
voice.” (cp. xxvi. 5). Not that this was 
Abraham’s first trial, or first promise (see 
Gen. xii., xiii., xv., xvii., xviii, &c.; Heb. xi. 
8-19); but the crowning trial and temptation 
of his life was “when he offered Isaac his 
son upon the altar.” And hence his faith 
and its reward (in short, his justification) 
are concentrated in this incident. 

The weightiness of this trial, for the argu- 
ment, is not in the violence done to a father’s 
feelings. The Scripture shews us that the 
real trial was of the faith which wrought 
obedience. As Abraham believed God in his 
departure from his own country, and in the 
conception and birth of Isaac, so it was espe- 
cially in this sacrifice; however much the 
command seemed to contradict the distinct 
assurance that Isaac, and not another, should 
be the heir of the promises (Gen. xvii. 19, 
xxi. 12); see Heb. xi. 17, seqg., especially. 
verse 19, “accounting that God was able to 
raise him up, even from the dead.” ‘These 
last words are the key to the whole. The 
obedience of Abraham was rooted in faith, 
and that, faith in the resurrection from the 
dead. Believing that God would find the 
way to fulfil His own promise, he did not 
hesitate to obey the command which seemed 
to make it impossible. But all this depends 
on the historic truth of the fact that He who 
ca the command was the same God who 

given the promise. 

Abraham’s faithfulness, with its motto, 
“The Lord will provide,” may be contrasted 
with the conduct of Rebekah and Jacob. 


22. faith wrought with bis works.| Or, 
“wrought with him in his works;” i.e. 
helped him, so that his works through this 


by Rom. viii. 28, “ All things work (or, God 
worketh all things) together for good to 
them that love God.” (The words “ fellow- 
worker,” &c., are more usually followed by 
the thing or person for which, than by the 
person with whom, one labours; cp. in the 
Greek, 3 Jo. 8; 2 Cor. i. 24, vili. 23; Col. 
iv. 11. Even in 1 Cor. iii. 9, “ God’s fellow= 
labourers” is probably “ fellow-labourers in 
Gou’s service.”) Thus the words “ faith 
helped in his works” state one side of the 
question, and “by works was faith made 
perfect,” the other. ‘“ Faith creates works: 
works perfect faith” (Stier). “Work is 
faith ripened” (Messmer). This seems the 
preferable interpretation. For, though a 
man is said to be justified by faith, or to be 
justified by works, according to the point of 
view of St. Paul or St. James, it is doubtful 
whether there is any point of view from 
which it can be said that faith and works come 
bine to justify, because this would imply that 
both justify in the same sense of the word. 

Though the argument is here generalised, 
yet the definite article in the Greek refers us 
to Abraham’s faith, as well as to his works, 
i. e. those which have been mentioned before. 
This faith is taken for granted, as prior to 
the works, and contrasted with ‘the “dead” 
or “idle” faith. But for the faith, the works 
had not been done:—but for its working, 
the faith had not received the stamp of per= 
fection. 


made perfect 7] Not as a material structure 
is completed by adding something: but as 3 
living organisation arrives at the normal fule 
ness of its maturity; cp. Eph. iv. 13. 


23. And the scripture was fuljilled.| Gen. 
xv. 6, belongs to the period before the 
birth of Ishmael. But (as in prophecies, e.g. 
Matt. ii. 17) the words are taken to have 
been most truly fulfilled, not when first 
spoken, during the progress of Abraham’s 
trials, but when his faith, advancing from 
high to higher, obtained its final triumph in 
the sacrifice of Isaac. So in Rom. iv. 3, 9, 
Io, St. Paul cites the words in their chrono- 
logical order; but adds, in reference to the 
generation of Isaac, “and therefore it was 
imputed to him for righteousness” (éd. 22). 
By each proof of faith the promise acquired 
not only confirmation, but proportionate 
growth and meaning; so that its “ fulfilment ” 
followed that trial by which the faith itself 


faith became what without it they would not was made perfect. Compare the word “fal 
have been. This interpretation is favoured fil” in Matt. v. 17. 
New Test.—Vou, IV. I 


Gal. g 


4 


130 


24 Yesee then how that by works 
a man is justified, and not by faith only. 

25 Likewise also was not Rahab 
the harlot justified by works, when 
she had received the messengers, and 
had sent them out another way? 

26 For as the body without the 
"spirit is dead, so faith without works 
is dead also. 


JAMES. III. 


[v. 24—2 


CHAPTER III. 


1 We are not rashly or arrogantly to reprove 
others: § but rather to Peay petal ns s 
little member, but a powerful instrument 
much good, and great harm. 13 They w 
be truly wise be mild, and peaceable, without 
enuying, and strife, 


Y brethren, be not many 
masters, knowing that we 





it was imputed unto him.| So quoted (from 
LXX) by St. Paul, /. c. In the original, 
“He counted it to him.” This “imputation” 
of righteousness, then, lies at the root of all 
that St. James says of justification. Whether 
or not there is any conscious reference to 
St. Paul’s teaching, the distinction between 
imputed and actual righteousness (Rom. iv. 
2-8) cannot fairly be left out of sight in in- 
terpreting St. James. See also iii. 2, on the 
imperfection of our works, and v. 15 on the 
efficacy of faith. Thus, from first to last, 
faith enables to all working ;—in working, 
faith holds its own ;—and when work proves 
to be imperfect, as all work must, it is 
through faith alone that this is remedied. 


was called the Friend of God.] Isai. xli. 8; 
cp. 2 Chron. xx. 7. Philo Judzus quotes 
“friend,” from Gen. xviii. 17, where the 
LXX have “ servant: ” which, though an in- 
terpolation, illustrates Christ’s words on the 
distinction between servant and friend, John 
xv. 15. Cp. “God took Abraham for His 
friend,” ‘ Koran,’ c. 4; whence the Arabs call 
Abraham Khalil Allah, or simply Al-Khalzil 
(“the friend”), and Hebron is said to be 
called Al-Khalil to this day:—’A8padp, 6 
ios mpocayopevbcis, Clem. Rom. i. ro. 

Therefore “was called” is not = “ was,” 
but means “ received the title.” 

24. by faith only.] Not as if faith did part, 
and works were needed to do the rest; but 
“only” as isolated, apart from works (see on 
verses 20, 22), granting (for argument’s sake, 
at least) the possibility of such a faith, as in- 
stanced in the case of devils (verse 19). This 
is a conclusion drawn from the case of Abra- 
ham, and therefore the same limitations must 
De recognised in the co::.lusion which were 
assumed in the premisses. Note that nothing 
is here said of the “wurks of the law” 
(Rom. iii. 20, ix. 32; Gal. 4. 16, &c.). The 
works are the works “of Abraham,” which 
those who are indeed his children will do 
(John viii. 39). 

But what does “to be justited” mean in 
the language of St. James? See the remarks 
in the Excursus, ‘St. James and St. Paul, 
§ 7, s¢99. 

26. Rabab the barlt.] See Josh. ii., and 


vi. 22-25. From St. Matthew (i. 5) we learn 
that she became the wife of Salmon and 
mother of Boaz. We need not shrink from 
the plain meaning of “harlot.” In those 
times and countries any woman who took 
in lodgers promiscuously must have borne a 
degraded character. The ‘‘ works” spoken 
of are solely those by which her faith 
was shewn in the one incident of her life 
mentioned here and in Heb. xi. 31. It has 
been noticed that all the females mentioned 
by St. Matthew in our Lord’s genealogy 
have a stigma attached to them—Tamar 
the incestuous, Rahab the harlot, Ruth the 
Moabitess, Bathsheba the adulteress. So 
Christ touched the leper, and took no taint, 
but made him clean. Rahab was justified, 
not by the general tenor of her life, but by 
that one work of faith which saved her from 
the judgment of Jericho. See on verses 21, 
24, and Excursus, ‘St. J. and St. P.,’ § 2. 


sent them out.| Literally, “cast them out,” 
perhaps expressing their hurried departure; 
as in Acts xvi. 37. Yet it may be used withe 
out such special emphasis; cp. John x. 4. 


another way?] Probably, not merely a 
different, but (as in 1 Cor. xiv. 21; Jude 7 
cp. Gal. i. 6, 7) a strange, unusual way, viz 
by a cord through a window; see Josh. ii 
15, and cp. Acts ix. 25; 2 Cor. xi. 33. 


26. For as, d’c.] The general conclusion 
of verses 17, 20, is resumed, and the unreality 
of a merely correct intellectual belief, withe 
out love to God or man, is reasserted. The 
comparison of faith to the body, and works 
to the spirit, seems strange. But if faith 
be dead without works, these are fairly 
termed its spirit or life. Cp. “the form of 
knowledge and of the truth in the law,” 
Rom. ii. 20; “having a form of godliness, 
but denying the power thereof,” 2 Tim. iti 
5; see also Rom.i.18. On the other hand, 
compare “dead works,” Heb. ix. 14. 


Cuap. III].—1. be not many masters. 
Rather, become not, seek not to be 
many of you, pevktr the warning oo 
against the eagerness of many to gain 
position, without consideration of their fite 


10r, 


[aaa 


v. 2—4.] 


shall receive the greater 'condemna- 
tion. 

2 For in many things we offend 
all. If any man offend not in word, 
the same zs a pecfect man, and able 
also to bridle the whole body. 

3 Behold, we put bits in the horses’ 


Ness; and against the danger of assuming it 
without fitness. 


masters.) Or teachers; = the Hebrew 
Rabbi (v. Johni. 38,xx.16). Weare reminded 
of Matt. xxiii. 8, “ Be ye not called Rabbi; for 
one is your master, even Christ.” Probably 
rivalries in the Church-teaching are touched, 
cp. verses 14, 16; also 1 Tim. i. 6, 7, and (of 
women) li. 12; also Heb. v. 4,5. The same 
subject is noticed in the letter (probably 
written by St. James), Acts xv. 24. But he 
refers also to a tendency to talk instead of 
acting, and to the responsibility incurred by 
those who undertake to teach others their 
duty. A harsh way of lecturing one’s neigh- 
bours is the natural vent of a cold intellectual 
belief; cp. Rom. ii. 1. See the use made 
by Christ’s hearers, in St. Luke xiii. 1, of 
what He had said in xii. 58, seqq. 


knowing that.| Half argumentative, “in- 
asmuch as ye know;” half hortatory, “ for 
ye ought to know.” 


the greater condemnation.| Being punished 
with many stripes, if we fail, in proportion to 
our self-assertion; while, in fact, all of us 
often fail in one thing or another. “ Migh 
men shall be mightily tormented,” Wisd. vi. 
6. Cp. Matt. xxiii. 14, of those who added 
the sin of hypocrisy to that of extortion and 
Tapine ; cp. also Matt. vii. 1. 


2. in many things (or “ oftentimes,” as 
Matt. ix. 14) we offend all.| A grave con- 
fession here, where the duty of “ works” is 
so broadly enforced:—all of us offend, and 
that often; not in one thing, but in many; 
not some, but all; cp. 1 John i. 8. But, 
mercifully, “to offend” is not necessarily 
“to fall,” but may be merely “to stumble” 
(mraicw); see Rom. xi. 11; nay, “a just man 
falleth seven times, and riseth up again” 
(Prov. xxiv. 16; cp. Ps. xxxvii. 24). 


offend not in word.| This goes beyond 
failure in the teacher’s office, which would 
scarcely be called “offence.” St. James re- 
turns to the subject of much, rash, or vain 
talking, which, in the true spirit of the He- 
brew moralists, he deems so serious. “ All 
of us offend oft—in word, even if not in 
Many who keep their hands pure are 
careless of their tongues. The man who 
fules this member can rule all the others.” 


JAMES. IIL 


mouths, that they may obey us; and 
we turn about their whole body. 

4 Behold also the hips, whica 
though they be so great, and are driven 
of fierce winds, yet are they turned 
about with a very small helm, whither- 
soever the governor listeth. 





So much more than we commonly suppose is 
needed for the “ perfection” which Christ 
demands of us (Matt. v. 48, cp. xii. 31-37)! 
Was not Moses shut out of Canaan for 
“speaking unadvisedly with his lips”? (Ps. 
cvi. 33; Num. xx. Io, segg., xxvii. 13, seg.) 
Nay, to suppress sins of the tongue is not 
merely a counsel of perfection. Often they 
come first, and lead to sins of action; see 
Matt. /. c. and xv. 11, 18-20. Moreover, of 
that sin which shall never be forgiven, we 
know this at least, that it is a sin of the 
tongue rather than of the hands (Matt. 
Xli. 31, seg.). This new thought is expanded 
in the following verses. 
to bridle.] See next verse, and cp. i. 26. 


the whole body.| The aggregate of those 
“members” which are in the natural man 
instruments of sin, but are meant to be the 
instruments of righteousness (Rom. vi. 13)3 
called “the body of sin,” (45. 6), but still 
very different from “the flesh,” which is not 
merely to be “ bridled” and controlled, but 
warred against and mortified. 


3.] A minute but important various 
reading (ei d¢ for ide or tdov) should be 
adopted from A B 8, 13, 31, K L, Vulg,, 
Memph.; and the passage should be transe 
lated, “But if we put our horses bridles 
into their mouths....then we turn 
their whole body about.” Cp. Ps. xxxii. 9. 


4. Behold also the ships.| Another figure, 
co-ordinate with the last, in illustration of 
verse 2. Ini. 6, “the wave of the sea driven 
by the wind,” typifies the man of two minds, 
the waverer or doubter. Here the ships 
“driven before fierce winds” represent the 
soul as carried away by vehement passions. 
Perhaps the words should be rendered, “ eves 
when they are driven . . .” 


whithersoever the governor listeth.| In the 
classical sense of the word (gudernator, 
kuBepyymms). Literally, “where the impulse 
of him that steereth, listeth ;” the “impulse” 
being either the movement by which the 
helm is turned, or the pilot’s guiding will. 
The word “‘listeth” favours the !atter inter 
pretation. Lucretius (iv. 902), “quanto vis 
impete euntem” is quoted on the other side, 
and should be compared. But he is speaking 
of the whole ship, not of the rudder. 


138 


the whole body, and setteth on fire 
the course of nature; and it is set 
on fire of hell. 

7 For every 'kind of beasts, and of 19 & 
birds, and of serpents, and of things As 
in the sea, is tamed, and hath been 1Gr. 
tamed of 'mankind : pow 


5 Even so the tongue is a little 
member, and boasteth great things. 
Behold, how great 'a matter a little 
fire kindleth ! 

6 And the tongue is a fire, a 
world of iniquity: so is the tongue 


among our members, that it defileth 





These instances exhibit the power of one 
small member in controlling a great body. 
But the small member is itself seldom con- 
trolled; and if it remains unruly, they sug- 
gest its power for evil. Thus the great- 
ness and rarity of the achievement is first 
brought out; then the amount of mischief 
which is the alternative. Finally comes the 
application, “Such is the member which you 
leave uncontrolled! ” 


5. boasteth great things.| Characteris- 
tically of the “little member’s” arrogance 
(cp. Ps. xii. 3 Dan. vii. 20:—the word 
(ueyadavyeiv) is used in Ecclus. xlviii. 18, of 
Sennacherib). But it is no empty vaunt. 
Often it does guide the whole body, as the 
bridle the horse, the helm the ship; even as 
a little spark can kindle a conflagration. 


how great a matter, @'c.| Rather (7Atkov 
for dAiyov A’, B, 8, C* P, Vulg.), how small 
a fire kindleth how great a forest !— 
UAn=1, a wood; 2, matter (not a matter), 
as a philosophical term, which cannot be the 
meaning here. A forest-fire is an incident 
which is often referred to by the ancients; 
not only the poets, e.g, li. 2. 455 segg.; 
Pind. P. 3. 64; Lucret. i. 888-891; Virg. 
‘Georg.’ ii. 303; but even Thucydides, 
when describing the fire kindled by the be- 
siegers of Platee (ii. 77):—“ A fire arose, 
greater than was ever seen before of man’s 
kindling: though perhaps such a thing has 
been known when some mountain forest 
(An) has of itself burst into fire and flame 
by friction of its branches as the wind stirred 
them. Cp. Ps. lxxxiii. 14: “As the fire 
burneth a wood ; and as the flame setteth the 
mountains on fire;” Isai. ix. 18, ‘‘ Wicked- 
ness burneth as the fire: it shall devour the 
briars and thorns, and shall kindle in the 
thickets of the forest.” Others explain 
“wood” as ‘‘a heap of fire wood” — “ how 
huge a pyre ”—less picturesquely, and pro- 
bably less accurately, though supported by 
Ecclus xxviii. ro in a somewhat similar 
passage. 

6. a world of iniquity.) This clause is 
difficult, ind variously explained, though the 
general meaning of the verse is not doubtful. 
The old Syriac version gives it, “The tongue 
is a fire; the world of iniquity [is a wood],” 
supplying a complete correspondence be- 


tween this clause and those which precede 
and follow. Cp. Luke xxiii. 31, “If they do 
these things in a green tree, what shall be 
done in the dry ?”—But probably the simplest 
interpretation is the best,—that the tongue, 
small as it is, contains a whole world of mis- 
chief. The LXX have in Prov. xvii. 6, “ the 
whole world of wealth is for the faithful, 
for the faithless not a penny ;” and the same 
version uses this word (xécpos), where we 
have “the host of heaven,’ Gen. ii. 1, proe 
bably meaning the aggregate body of it. 
Translate, the tongue, that world of 
iniquity, is fire. 


so is the tongue, @o’c.]| So must be removed 
from the text, on the authority of all the best 
MSS. The tongue hath its place among 
our members as that whioh defileth (lit. 
“spotteth”), &c. Cp. Jude 23; 2 Pet. ii. 
13; Eph. v. 27. 


setteth on fire the course of nature.| Liter- 
ally, the wheel of beng (or becoming); a phrase 
hard toaccount for. But our version, though 
vague, is not incorrect ; for “ wheel” = circle, 
cycle; and the word translated “nature” 
(yéveots, natura) comes very near to “crea 
tion” (kricts) in its collective sense ; see above 
oni. 23. In Judith xii. 18, it is simply “ life.” 
So it comes to be, “‘the course of human life, 
as the wheel comes round and round in suc= 
cessive generations.” Cp. also the “ wheel at 
the cistern,” Eccl. xii. 6. 


and it 1s set on fire of bell.) No 
=“ whose end is to be burned,” but, “ itse. 
kindled at the gehenna of fire (Matt 
Vv. 22, xvili. 9; Mark ix. 47), and with tha 
fire kindling all human life.” 


7. A fourfold division, though not scier 
tific, consisting of two pairs; beasts ¢probab'= 
quadrupeds, though used in Acts xxviii. 5, ~ 
a serpent) and birds, reptiles and fishes 
We are reminded of Gen. 1. 20, 21, 24, 25. 


serpents.) Reptiles. “Every kind =>? 
anit nies that walk, that fly, tha: 
creep, that swim—is tamable, and, in fact, 
hath been tamed by mankind.” A rhetorica: 
expression, amplyjustified by the success of ex 
periments in each of these four groups of 
the animal kingdom. Every éind is tamed of 
mankind: lit. every nature... of man’s xature 
(pois). Man’s nature and powers 


@. 8—12,) 


8 But the tongue can no man 
tame; i¢ is an unruly evil, full of 
deadly poison. 

g Therewith bless we God, even 
the Father ; and therewith curse we 
men, which are made after the simili- 
tude of God. 

10 Out of the same mouth pro- 


JAMES. ITI. 


ceedeth blessing and cursing. My 
brethren, these things ought not so 
to be. 

11 Doth a fountain send forth at 
the same 'place sweet water and 
bitter ? 

12 Can the fig tree, my brethren, 
bear olive berries? either a vine, figs? 





with each nature of the other creatures, and 
master them all in detail; there being in him 
that before which their nature quails. The 
charter of his mastery is Gen. i. 28; and is 
still valid, though modified by the curse, 
Gen. iii. 17-18. “ Imago Dei domat feram ” 
(Augustin.). Cp. Ps. viii. 6-8. 

There is a remarkable coincidence, both of 
thought and expression, in a lyric passage of 
Sophocles, ‘ Antig.’ 332, seqq. 


8. can no man tame.] Some make this 
an interrogation; which, though forcible, is 
less suitable to the argument. Again, it is 
asked, Is this one’s own tongue, or (in re- 
ference to the teacher’s office) the tongue 
of another? St. James makes no distinction. 
Simply, man cannot tame it, though he 
can tame all else! Yet the context implies 
that he is thinking of se/fcontrol. 


unruly.| ‘“‘ Ungovernable,” axatacyerov, 
corresponds with the foregoing verses: but 
the reading of A, B, &, P, Vulg., Memph., 
axatacrarov, “ disorderly, inconsistent, cha- 
otic ” (see i. 8, iii. 16), suits better the self- 
contradictory, unaccountable character of the 
mischief—blessing and cursing, blowing hot 
and cold—described in verses 9-12. 


poison.| Distinctively, venom; convey- 
ing, as is often in Holy Writ, a reference 
to the Old Serpent and the first temptation. 
Cp. Eccl. x. 11, “ Surely the serpent will bite 
without enchantment; and a babbler is no 
better ;” also Ps. lviii. 3, seqg., cxl. 3. 


9. bless we God] The Jews used to 
introduce such ejaculations into ordinary, 
even trivolous, conversation. Devotional 
phrases become a testimony against those 
who combine them with the “cursing” of 
men. 

God, even the Father.| A, B,%, C, &c., 
read the Lord and Father. (In LXX, 
the Lord, Kipios, = Hebr. Jehovah.) 


eurse we men.| See John vii. 49. For the 
incompatibility of love to God with the 
want of love to man, cp. 1 John iv. 20. 
The allusion to Gen. 1. 26, seqq., proves the 
mess of the sin; cp. ib. ix. 6. See also 

js. Ixii. 4; Isai. xxix. 13 (Matt. xv. 8, segq.). 


10.] The former half of this verse sums 


up the foregoing statements. The latter 
begins the exhortation which goes on in 
verses 11, 12. Cp. Ecclus. xxvili. 12. 


ought not so to be. The word (xp7m) is still 
stronger, implying that they are contrary to 
law and nature. 


11. Doth a fountain.|] “The fountain,” in- 
dividualised as a familiar object of reference. 


at the same place.| Or opening (used of 
chinks, clefts, or holes in the earth, Exod, 
XXxill. 22;) Obad. 3, LXX; Heb. x1..38); 
the “fountain” of St. James being the sub- 
terranean source or reservoir which supplies 
the water. The one corresponds to the 
heart, the other to the mouth, of man; 
see Matt. xii. 35, xv. 18. A moral impose 
sibility is illustrated by physical impossie 
bilities, such as the Jews in Palestine would 
appreciate readily and keenly. They had 
read of the bitter waters of Marah (Exod. 
xv. 23), and of the healing of the spring at 
Jericho (2 Kings ii. 19, segg.), and were well 
acquainted with the “Salt Sea” (Gen. xv. 3; 
Josh. iii. 16, &c.) and the characteristics of 
its basin. And the names of En-dor, En- 
gedi, En-rogel, En-hakkéré, Aen-on, &c., 
poetically describing the fountain as the eye 
which gives life and animation to the land- 
scape, bespeak the preciousness of living 
waters in a land where to be dry is to be 
desert (the evil spirit walks through “ dry 
places,” Matt. xii. 43). See the description 
of the country in Deut. viii. 7, and cp. Judg. 
i. 15; Ezek, xlvii. Where springs were 
wanting, see the value of wells, Beer-sheba, 
&c., Gen. xxi. 22-32, xxvi. 18-33; and the 
song of the well-diggers, Num. xxi. 16-18. 
Note, too, “ Jacob’s well” at Sychar, John iv. 
6, 5eqq. 

12. the fig-tree . .. olive... vine.] 
The three trees of blessing in Jotham’s 
parable, Judg. ix. 7-15. Here is no contrast 
of good and bad, as in Isai. v. 2, 4, or Matt. 
vii. 16; but only the truth that as the tree, 
so the fruit, “after his kind.” This teaching, 
like our Lord’s, reflects the features of the 
Holy Land; see especially Deut. viii. 8; 
1 Kings iv. 25, and all the references to 
the Mount of Olives. Similar illustrations 
occur in several Heathen writers ¢ter the 


133 


Or, Sols 


234 


so can no fountain both yield salt 
water and fresh. 

13 Who is a wise man and en- 
dued with knowledge among you ? let 
him shew out of a good conversation 
his works with meekness of wisdom. 





Christian era; v. especially Plutarch ‘ Mor.’ 
ii. 472 F. 

As the question requires the answer, “No,” 
the sentence (in the received text) proceeds 
as if the words had been, “The fig-tree can- 
not ... so can no fountain,” &c. But 

robably this is only a paraphrase of the 
fetter and better attested reading (of A, 
B, 8, C, &c.), and the whole should be, 
“ Can a fig-tree bear olive-berries, or a vine 
figs? Neither can that which is salt 
yield sweet water.” This made Elijah’s 
miracle at Jericho, 2 Kings ii. 20, 21, the more 
remarkable. 

We might have expected, “so the same 
mouth,” &c. But St. James first illustrates 
his subject by the metaphor of the fountain, 
and then, as if this was the statement to be 
illustrated, adds the further figure of the trees. 

On this section (vv. 1-12), see Bp. Jebb’s 
6 Christian Literature,’ xiv. 


13. Who is ...2 let him.]) Ie, “Who- 
ever is ..., let him.” Compare the con- 
struction in Ecclus. vi. 34. 


Who is, @c.] An abrupt transition. But 
the subject is still the need to control the 
tongue, and the desire of “many” to be 
“masters” or teachers (verse 1), which im- 
plied both a pretension to the possession of 
wisdom, and an inclination to expend it in 
words. St. James sees in such word-wisdom 
a mere instrument of vanity and contention. 
St. Paul also disclaims and denounces it 
(1 Cor. i. 17, segg., ii. 1-13) as Auman, in 
Opposition to the wisdom which is the gift 
of the Spirit. But here it is portrayed as a 
work of the devil, a vent of the evil in the 
heart, and a hindrance to godly life. St. Paul 
contrasts teaching with teaching; St. James, 
wrangling with love. See oni. 5. 

wise ... and endued with knowledge.) 
Probably, “intelligent and practically wise,” as 
Matt. x1. 25; 1 Cor. i. 19, “ wise and pru- 
dent ;” “ wise and understanding,” Deut. 1. 13 
(cp. LXX there). But no sharp distinction 
is to be drawn. Whatever mental gifts a 
man may claim to have, they are to be used 
in works, not words; in meekness, not con- 
tentiously ; with such consistent perseverance 
as to shew a good conversation (rather life; 
see Gal. i. 13; Heb. xiii. 7, for this word, 
which is also common in St. Peter’s Epistles). 


meekness of wisdom.] This carries us back 


JAMES. III. 


lv. 133—15, 


14 But if ye have bitter envying 
and strife in your hearts, glory not, 
and lie not against the truth. 

15 This wisdom descendeth not 


from above, but is earthly, ‘sensual, Loy 


devilish. 





to “slow to wrath,” coupled with “slow to 
speak,” i. 19; and forward to the further dee 
scription in verse 17. 


14. envying and strife.| Rather, jealousy 
and party-spirit, or faction. Zjos may 
be either good or bad zeal; but the bad sense 
prevails in the N. T., even without such in- 
terpreting words as occur here; cp. Acts 
v. 17. (In Heb. x. 27, it is used of God’s 
jealous indignation as revealed in fire.) ’Epie 
cia is not “strife,” but is the sordid rivairy 
of political factions, jobbing partisanship, 
intrigue. So here and in verse 16; cp. Phil 
1. 165) 0 GOL ie ta 


the truth.| Not mere “veracity,” against 
which all lies are; but the G of Him 
who is Himself the Truth (cp. 1.18). “If 
your wisdom bears such fruits as these, your 
glorying is the lie of Satan and Antichrist.” 
Gal. vi. 14, “God forbid that I should glory, 
save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.” 
Cp. the word in Rom. xi. 18. Above, ii. 13, 
there is a different shade of meaning. The 
“bitterness in the heart” here recalls the 
bitter water of the fountain in verse 11. 


15. This wisdom descendeth not, dc.) 
Rather is not one (or that) which de- 
scendeth. Two kinds of wisdom are 
nised; as, above, two kinds of faith; one 
good, the other bad; see verse 17. Cp. also 
i. 17, ‘ Every good gift,’ &c. 

from above.| Or, “from on high,” sug- 
gesting the inspiration of the Holy Ghost 
(contrasted with “ devilish”), which those 
who lack wisdom are to seek of God (i. 5). 


earthly, sensual, devilish.| A descending 
climax: (1) “ Earthly,” opposed to heavenly, 
“descending from above ;” and by this con- 
trast acquiring the added notion of low and 
grovelling (cp. Phil. iii. 19); though the 
word in itself is not necessarily of evil meane 
ing (cp. “If I have told you earthly things,” 
&c., John iii. 12), but merely local. (2) “ Sen- 
sual,” uyikds, elsewhere also rendered 
“ natural,” of man’s state under the dominion 
of his own unregenerate nature, with all his 
natural faculties, with a soul, but wanting 
the Spirit, alien from God. So 1 Cor. ii. 14, 
“the natural man receiveth not the things of 
the Spirit of God,” &c.; id. xv. 44, seg., “a 
natural body,” opposed to “a spiritual oa 
Jude 19, “sensual, not having the Spirit.” 


: 


v. 16—18.] 


16 For where envying and strife 


ts- is, there is ‘confusion and every evil 
Sager work. 
sss. 


17 But the wisdom that is from 
above is first pure, then peaceable, 
gentle, and easy to be intreated, 


(3) “ Devilish,” or “demoniac ;” the last stage, 
in which the man, no longer left to himself, 
is possessed by a Spirit,—but not of God! 
This is the dominion of the “spiritual hosts 
of wickedness, the world-powers of dark- 
ness” (Eph. vi. 12), which have a wisdom of 
their own, very real in its kind (Gen. iii. 1; 
2 Cor. xi. 3; cp. Matt. x. 16); not merely 
sinful, but diabolical in its malignity, seduc- 
ing others to sin. See above, verse 6, “set on 
fire of hell.” 


16. envying and strife.| See on verse 
14. 

confusion.| dxatactacia, sometimes used 
of internal disorder and anarchy (1 Cor. xiv. 
333; 2 Cor. xii. 20); sometimes of the actual 
outbreaks of uproar and tumult to which 
these lead (Luke xxi. 9; 2 Cor. vi. 5). Here 
both are comprehended; cp. Prov. xxvi. 28 
(in the LXX), “an un-shut mouth creates 
disorders.” (See note on verse 8.) 

every evil work.| Or ‘thing.’ See the dis- 
mal catalogue in 2 Cor. xii. 20; Gal. v. 19, 
seqg. Perhaps connected with the “many 
masters” of verse 1, as representing so many 
divided parties of disciples: cp. 1 Cor. i. 12, 
$eqq., iil. 4. 

17. from above.| V. on verse 15. 


Jirst pure, then ...] Not a mere enu- 
meration of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, &c. Purity is 
first; and all the other qualities second, as 
results of this essential attribute. This is the 
wisdom of the dove, the intuition of holy 
innocence, unconsciously repelling evil with- 
out the process of reasoning, or the defile- 
ment of experimental knowledge; as in Eden 
before the Fall. Then the other qualities :— 
“ peaceable,” according to the blessing of the 
peacemakers (Matt. v. 9), full of the inward 
peace of God, and working accordingly: see 
next verse, and 1 Cor. xiv. 33 :—“ gentle,” fair 
and considerate beyond the demands of strict 
justice, making allowance for others, not tena- 
cious ofits ownrights; cp. “the meekness and 
gentleness of Christ,” 2 Cor. x. 1; and see 
1 Tim. iii. 3; Tit. iii. 25; of considerate 
masters, 1 Pet. ii. 18: to this quality in Felix 
Tertullus appeals, Acts xxiv. 4:—“ easy to be 
entreated,” or “ persuaded,” not obstinate in 
one view of things, but candidly receiving the 
@uggestions of others (not found elsewhere in 
W. T.: the substantive occurs in 4 Macc. 


JAMES. Ill. 


full of mercy and good fruits, ‘with 10" 


out partiality, and without hypo- wrange 
ing. 


crisy. 
18 And the fruit of righteousness 


is sown in peace of them that make 
peace. 


xii. 6) :-—“ full of mercy and good fruits,” i.e. 
the works which are the fulfilment of the 
royal law (ii. 8), not in isolated deeds but in 
fulness, good things being continually bi ought 
forth from the good treasure of the heart :— 
“austhout partiality” (or, as the margin, 
“ wrangling”); there are several other inter= 
pretations; e.g. “not judging of others,” 
“not doubting or captiously hesitating.” We 
are not much helped by classical usage: the 
word does not occur again in N. T. or LXX: 
the context is not decisive: and all the pro- 
posed interpretations may be deduced with 
more or less probability from the several 
meanings of the verb dtaxpivery, -vecOa, “to 
distinguish, make a difference,” “to differ.” 
Our choice lies between “ without wrangling” 
and “without doubting:” and without 
yangling best accords with the general 
idea. 


without khypocrisy.| Frequently used as 
epithet of “love” and “ faith” (Rom. xii. 9; 
1 Pet. i 22; 1 Tim. i. 5, &c.), unfeigned, 
real;—perhaps, also, without the self-con- 
sciousness which gives even to one who is 
sincere the air of acting a part. 

It may be here repeated, that in St. James, 
“works” are very nearly = “love; and 
“‘ wisdom ” is “ practical holiness.” “ Behold, 
the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom ; and to 
depart from evil is understanding,” Job. 
xxvii. 28. It may be useful to compare 
the portrait of wisdom here, with that of 
love in 1 Cor. xiii. 1-8. 


18. The emphatic words are dy them that 
make peace: these alone sow the seed from 
which the fruit of righteousness is gathered. 
The work of the peacemakers (Matt. v. 9; 
cp. Col. i. 20, where itis the work of Christ’s 
love) is its own reward: and thus, if we 
translate “for them that make peace,” it 
comes to the same thing; for as they sow, 
they reap: peace is the beginning, middle and 
end: it is in their hearts; it is their work 
and their righteousness (Heb. xii. 11); it is 
their great reward;—sown in this world; 
reaped, even in this world, though not in 
worldly fashion (John xiv. 27); but above 
all, and perfectly, in the world to come. 


of righteousness.| I. e., “ which is righteouse 
ness,” not “ which righteousness bears;” for 
this is itself the fruit, not the tree: see last 
note, and Heb. Ze. 


135 


136 JAMES. IV. [v. r—@ 


CHAPTER IV. they not hence, even of your .usts ,,0% 


brawiings. 


1 We are to strive against covetousness, 4 in- 
temperance, 5 pride, 11 detraction, and 
vasa judgment of others: 13 and not to be 
confident in the good success of worldly busi- 
ness, but mindful ever of the uncertainty 
of this life, to commit ourselves and all our 
affairs to God’s providence. 


ROM whence come wars and 
fightings among you? come 





Cuap. IV.—1. A painful transition from 
the ideal to the actual, all the more striking 
from its abruptness; especially if we read 
(as Ln., Tdf., Trg., with A B & C, &c.) 
whence wars, and whence fightings 
among you? Hitherto the language has 
been general ( “but if,” ili. 14 ; “for where,” 
16): but now it is “among you;” and the 
outward works being recognised, the hidden 
source is sought for: cp. ili, 12. Whether 
these were strifes of (so-called) religious 
parties, or individual rivalries for selfish ends 
as the following words may suggest (liti- 
gation about meum and tuum is less likely), 
they were works of the flesh (see in Gal. v. 
19-21, how much these comprehend) coming 
of Justs, literally, pleasures, sins of pleasure 
rather than wf avarice or any other form of 
greed; so in verse 3, “that ye may consume 
it on your pleasures;” cp. also Tit. ili. 3; 
and Xen. Mem. 1. ii 23, €v TO copare 
oupredputreupevat TH Wuxy ai oovai rei= 
Govew autny pn cwdpoveiv. See also Clem. 
Rom. i. 46. 


that war in your members?] Different sins 
possessing the several members as their in- 
struments; as the eye, the hand, offends, Matt, 
V. 29, 5eqqg.; cp. Rom. vi. 6, 12, 13: in Col. ili. 5, 
unclean lusts are “ your members which are 
upon the earth.” So, “fleshly lusts which 
war against the soul,” 1 Pet. ii. 11; whence 
some supply “against the soul” here,—the 
struggle being between these members and 
the true self; see Rom. yii. 23. But such 
supplemental ideas only limit the meaning. 
Wherever these lusts exist uncontrolled, 
there is confusion. Whether in combination 
to enslave the man, or in mutual conflict, or 
in pursuit of some special end, their normal 
state is war. “The way of peace they have 


2,3. These accusations have seemed so 
incredible, as brought against the disciyles 
by an Apostle, that forced explanations have 
been adopted to evade them. But they are 
plain and consistent: cp. 1 Pet. iv. 15, “ Let 
none of you suffer as a murderer or as a 
thief,” &c. Nor can we change 4i// into envy 


that war in your members? 

2 Ye lust, and have not: ye 
kill, and desire to have, and cannot 
obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye 
have not, because ye ask not, 

3 Ye ask, and receive not, because 
ye ask amiss, that ye may consume /t 
upon your "lusts. 


{Or 
4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, ““""™ 





(ovevere into Péoveire) as has been thought 
plausible. True, “ye kill and are jealous” 
is a lame expression: but it may help us ‘to 
that which probably is the real meaning, 
“Yo play the murderers and zealots.” 
See Additional Note (A) at end of Chapter. 

This verse is sometimes. divided into three 
parts,—1. ye lust ......; aoyelollene 
3. ye fight . . . .; followed by the gene 
explanation, “because ye ask not.” Some- 
times only into two,—“ ye fight and war, yet 
ye have not” being a recapitulation in the 
very words of verse 1, with the addition of 
the reason. But “yet” is omitted by Ln, 
Tdf., Trg., after A, B, S: so it is better to 
render, “ye fight and war. Ye have 
not, because ye ask not; ye ask and 
receive not,” &c. 
not specified; but seems to be something 
which may be rightfully prayed for, Matt. 
vii. 7; John xv. 7. The first fault is that 
they ask not of God; and so one can only 
gain (if at all) by another’s loss: hence 
the wars and fightings, when one has, and 
another cannot obtain. The second fault 
is theirs, who do ask of God, but ask “ amiss” 
(not “in ill fashion,” but “ with evil intent”), 
that they may consume (use up, waste, as 
Mar. v. 26; cp. 2 Cor. xii. 15) itin their 
pleasures (see on verse 1), in sensual and 
worldly indulgence. Such asking makes that 
which might be not evil in itself, evil to them : 
it seeks to make God the instrament of their 
desires, instead of subjecting these to Him. 
Prayer, without the spirit of prayer, has not 
the promise of prayer, and is not heard. 
Perhaps this is well. “The too indulgent 
gods,” says Juvenal (Sat. x. 7), “have ere 
now overthrown whole households by ane 
swering their prayers.” But these men dwell 
with unsatistied greed on the “have not;” 
whereas real prayer removes our selfishness 
by our conscious relation to God: and faith 
knows that it is answered, even when othere 
can see no fulfilment. 


4. adulterers and adulteresses.. i ths is 
the true reading, and the words are taken 
literally, the thought advances from “ lusts 


The thing “asked” is © 


i i 


v. 58] JAMES. IV. 137 


know ye not that the friendship of Wherefore he saith, “God resisteth ? Prv » 
the world is enmity with God? who- the proud, but giveth grace unto the : Pee s.s 


0 Or, en- 
viowsly 7 





soever therefore will be a friend of humble. 


the world is the enemy of God. 
5 Do ye think that the scripture 
saith in vain, The spirit that dwelleth 


in us lusteth 'to envy? 
6 But he giveth more grace. 





7 Submit yourselves therefore to 
God. Resist the devil, and ke will 
flee from you. 

8 Draw nigh to God, and he will 


draw nigh to you. Cleanse your 





and pleasures” to overt acts of fleshly sin. 
But the “friendship of the world, enmity 
with God,” shews that the fleshly sin, even if 
literally imputed, does but symbolise apo- 
stasy from God, according to the usage of the 
O. T. prophets, in speaking of those who go 
after strange gods; e. g. Jerem. iii., Hosea 
ii., iii., iv., &c. So St. Paul speaks of the 
Corinthian Church as a virgin whom he had 
espoused to Christ (2 Cor. xi. 2); and “the 
marriage of the Lamb” crowns the Revela- 
tion of St. John (xix 7, xxi. 9). If those 
who are espoused to the Lord combine other 
loves with His, this is precisely the spiritual 
adultery which the prophets denounce. But 
the spiritual and carnal sins went hand in 
hand (as in the days of Moab and Midian, 
Num. xxv.) in the lewd rites of Heathendom. 
The one was a devil’s sacrament of the 
other. 

But the best authorities (A, B, 8, &c., 
followed by Ln., Tdf., Trg.) have only the 
words “ye adulteresses,” which is more diffi- 
cult. It is not likely that the female disciples 
are singled out for rebuke. In the O. T. 
figure, God is always the bridegroom or 
husband, to whom all His people are wedded 
(Jerem. and Hosea above cited; cp. Isai. Ixii. 
4, 5); and so, perhaps, all (male and female 
alike) are designated in their unfaithfulness 
as adulterous spouses of the Lord. This 
would weaken the reference to lusts of the 
flesh in verse 3; but point more sharply the 
warning against the world’s love as (in God’s 
spouse) adulterous. Perhaps Rom. vil. 4 
may be taken as favouring this interpretation. 
It is, however, worthy of remark that elsewhere 
the Spouse of God or Christ is not an indi- 
vidual, but always a Church or Community, 

onified as a female. And Hofmann 
suggests that the feminine word may have been 
used in contempt of the “ effeminate.” 


Sriendship of the world.| Cp. 1 John ii. 15, 
16,—the world, as antagonistic to God, lying 
under the powers of darkness and their prince 
(Eph. ii. 2, vi. 12; John xiv. 30). We must 
make our choice; “ Ye cannot serve God and 
Mammon” (Matt. vi. 24). The very “ will” 
(“would be a friend”) to gain the world’s 

ur incurs of itself the enmity of 

But verses 4-6 require a longer examinae 


_Ln. Tdf. Trg. after A, B, §&). 


tion, which will be found at the end of the 
chapter (Add. note B). The following para- 
phrase contains the result :—“ Ye adulterous 
spouses of the Lord, know ye not that to 
love the world is to be the enemy of God? 
Or think ye that all which Scripture saith 
of this relation of God to man is unmeaning? 
Passionately, ay, with passion that is even 
terrible, He yearneth for the entire posses 
sion of the Spirit which He Himself gave 
to dwell in us (xar@xicev is to be read, as 
But in 
proportion to His burning jealousy is the 
abundance of the grace that He giveth. It 
is the measure of His intense yearning for 
us. Nothing short of His love could pass 
into aught so terrible! ” 


6. Wherefore he saith.| Rather, “it saith,” 
i.e. “the Scripture,” as in verse 5. Quoted 
from Prov. iii. 34 (LX X), except that “God” 
is here substituted for “the Lord,” as in the 
parallel passage (where there are several 
verbal coincidences), 1 Pet. v. 5. See also 
Rom. xii. 16. The “proud” are the 
enemies of God (verse 4), viewed as rebels; 
followers of the rebel Angel (verse 7) whom 
we are to resist, and who is baffled by those 
who humble themseives. 


7. The coincidences with 1 Pet. v. 5-7 
continue; there is also a reference to Christ’s 
Temptation (especially Matt. iv. to, 11);— 
all three passages testifying to the personality 
of the Tempter (see too Luke xxii. 31, seq.), 
who appears (as elsewhere) as the prince of 
this world; whose thralls the friends of the 
ie necessarily become (John xii. 31, xiv. 
30). 

therefore.| Because this submission ime 
plies the humility to which God gives grace 
(verse 6). For then Christ, who conquered 
the Tempter, will fight for us; and in Him 
we shall be conquerors, because (1) we are 
“found in Him,” and no one can pluck us 
out of His hand and the Father’s (John x. 8, 
seq.) ; (2) He does not allow any temptation 
to be overpowering (1 Cor. x. 13); (3) His 
Strength is made pe: in our weakness 
(2 Cor. xii. 9). 


8. Draw nigh to God, de’c.| Not only with 
“mouth” or “lips,” which is m effect to 


128 


hands, ye sinners; and purify your 
hearts, ye double minded. 

9 Be afflicted, and mourn, and 
weep: let your laughter be turned to 
mourning, and your joy to heaviness. 

10 Humble yourselves in the sight 
of the Lord, and he shall lift you up. 


JAMES. IV 


[v. 9—a5. 


11 Speak not evil one of another, 
brethren. He that speaketh evil of 
his brother, and judgeth his brother, 
speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth 
the law: but if thou judge the oer, 
thou art not a doer of the law, but a 
judge. 





remain far from Him (Matt. xv. 8 ; Isai. xxix. 
13); but with “heart” and “ hands,”—the 
inward disposition, the outward life and 
ctice,—in sincerity and truth. And then 
e will be found. He “is not far from 
every one of us” (Acts xvii. 27): but He 
will have us seek Him; see 2 Chron. xv. 
a; Isai. lvii. 15; Ps. cxlv. 18. It is this 
which will make the devil flee—“ Draw nigh 
-..and He will draw nigh,” answer to 
“Resist . . . and he will flee,” verse 8. 


Cleanse your hands, ye sinners.| Of the 
grosser forms of actual sin, and the ordinary 
and outward cleansing, e. g. from physical 
impurities or from leprosy. In 1 Tim. ii. 8, 
“holy hands” are among the conditions of 
acceptable prayer. 


purify your hearts, ye double minded.| ‘The 
more subtle evil demands a higher purifica- 
tion; the word dyvifew expressing either 
special preparation for a religious service 
(John xi. 55; Acts xxi. 24, 26, xxiv. 18), or, 
as here, inward sanctification (1 Pet. i. 22; 
1 Jo. iii. 3). The “sinner” is one that is 
separated from Christ (Heb. vii. 26); the 
“double minded” (see on i. 8) is he who 
would fain serve God and the world (verse 
4); see 1 Kings xviii. 21; Ecclus. ii. 12 ; and 
cp. Psalm xxiv. 4. Perhaps the former is he 
who asks not, and the latter he who asks 
amiss (verses 2, 3). But both epithets may 
apply to the same persons, as viewed on 
different sides of their character ;—see Calvin. 


9. Be afficted.] More literally,be wretched, 
s. ¢. feel the real wretchedness of your con- 
dition; cp. Rev. iii. 17, of the Church of 
Laodicea. If this reality is felt, repentance 
will shew itself in the outward manifestations 
of “mourning” and “ weeping,”—in dress, 
look, gesture, voice, tears: see Lu. vi. 25. 
We must remember the demonstrative 
vharacter of Jewish (as generally of Oriental) 
joy (2 Sam. vi. 14, &c.) and sorrow (Lev. 
XVi. 29, 31, Num. xxv. 6, &c.). Here 
they are exhorted to avert the coming judg- 
ment by anticipating it. In ch. v. 1, seqq., 
comes the denunciation of the judgment 
itself, on those who have “ lived in pleasure.” 


beaviness.| Downcastness, as that of the 
ican, who “would not lift up so much 
as his eves to heaven” (Lu. xviii. 13). See 


1 Kings xxi. 27, seqq., for the partial effi 
of even Ahab’s self abeciaes “As pre 
must strike root deep downward, that it may 
grow upward, a man’s spirit must be rooted 
in humility, or he is only lifted up to his own 
hurt.” (Augustin., quoted by Calvin.) 


10. Humble yourselves.) Still with refer- 
ence to verses 6, 7; see us. ii. 17, iii. 183 
Matt. xxiii. 12 with the parallels; and espe- 
cially Micah vii. 8, seg. In 1 Pet. v. 5, it is 
“humble yourselves under the mighty hand 
of God:” but here “in the sight of the 
Lord” expresses the self-abasement which the 
sense of His presence works; as expressed 
in Job xlii. 5, 6. 


lift you up.] Referring first to the hidden 
glory of the present dispensation; then to the 
future revelation of the consummate glory. 


1l. An abrupt change, resuming the subject 
of “the tongue ;” its licence, in contrast- with 
the quiet discharge of duty,—its misuse (in 
presumptuous judgments of others), in 
peg with strict self-judgment and watch- 

ness. 


brethren.) I. e.“my brethren!” as so often 
in this Epistle; not “since ye are brethren.” 
Yet the appeal suggests the same argument 
in a more touching way; cp. Act. vii. 26. 


Speak... evil.| Isinterpreted by what fol- 
lows, not of slander, but of harsh judgment, 
censoriousness. lt is almost = to condemn ; but 
without authority to condemn. 


of bis brother.| Rather, of a brother 
“ one that is a brother ;"—and judgeth should 
be “or judgeth,” as A, B, 8, 13, and the old 
versions. 

the law.] Not merely the specific pre- 
cept, “ Judge not” (Matt. vii. 1); but iden- 
tical with “the royal law” (ii. 8), which 
embraces all,—“thou shalt love thy neigh- 
bour as thyself.” Such a violation of the 
spirit of the “ great commandment,” is in fact 
a censure of the law itself which is summed 
up in these words. See Rom. ii. 1,13, where 
he that judges another is spoken of, and the 
“doer of the law” is o to the 
“hearer,” as here to the critic. To ju 
or criticise the Law, one must be outside 
and above it; not within its sphere and under 
its jurisdiction. Otherwise it cannot og 


® Prov. 37. 
3 


Or, For 


v. 12—17.] 


12 There is one lawgiver, who is 
able to save and to destroy: who art 
thou that judgest another? 

13 “Go to now, ye that say, To 
day or to morrow we will go into 
such a city, and continue there a 
year, and buy and sell, and get gain: 

14 Whereas ye know not what 
shall be on the morrow. For what 
is your life? ‘It is even a vapour, 


judged comprehensively, disinterestedly, and 
(consequently) fairly. It is by “doing” it 
that a man comes to understand it (John vii. 
37): and the doer is not likely to criticise. 


12. To judge the law belongs to the same 
authority as to make the law. The best 
authorities (A, B, 8, &c.) add “and judge” 
after “lawgiver:” and these words are im- 
portant;—“the lawgiver and judge is 
One; even He who is able to save and to 
destroy ;’—He who made the Law and gives 
it validity; He who can save when man con- 
demns (Rom. xiv. 4); who can destroy the 
men who take so much upon them. See 
especially Matt. x. 28. 


to save and to destroy.| In the complete 
and final sense; see Matt. /. c. 


who art thou ....| Brings man’s 
nothingness into sharp contrast with the 
Majesty of Ged the lawgiver and judge; and 
exposes the self-delusion of those who thus 
encroach on His prerogative. 


another ?| Probably we should read, thy 
neighbour (A, B, N, &c.); the sense being 
the same; cp. for the first, Rom. ii. 1, 21; 
for the second, supra, ii. 8. In ii. 10, 11, the 
unity of the Lawgiver was the proof of the 
unity of the whole Law. Here God, in His 
unity, is contrasted with all those to whom 
the Law is given. 


13. From presumptuous judgments of 
others it is a slight step to presumptuous 
confidence in one’s own future; v. Lu. xii. 
15-20; Prov. xxvii. 1; and see note on 
Eccles. x. 14. 


Go to.) This phrase (see Gen. xi. 3, 4, 7, 
A.V.) has a scoffing tone; which, however, is 
not found in the Greek word either here or 
in LXX, Gen. /. c., but is derived from the 
context. Strictly, an imperative verb ought 
to follow (as in ch. v. 1); and some think 
that there is a long parenthesis, after which 
in ch. v. 1, “Go to” is repeated. But the 
classes rebuked in the two paragraphs are 
distinct. The present sentence is really 
finished, in another form, in verse 16, “all 
such rejoicing is evil.” 


JAMES. IV. 


that appeareth for a little time, and 
then vanisheth away. 

15 For that ye ought to say, If the 
Lord will, we shall live, and do this, 
or that. 

16 But now ye rejoice in your 
boastings : all such rejoicing is evil. 

17 Therefore to him that knoweth 
to do good, and doeth #¢ not, to him 
it is sin. 


To-day or to-morrow.] Or, “to-day and 
to-morrow ;” to-day ta set out, to-morrow 
to arrive. Note the cnain of the scheme, 
every link of which is treated as safe ; where- 
as any one may break, and ruin the whole; 
—to-day—to-morrow—a year; all leading 
up to the object, “ we will get gain.” 


into such a city.| Into this city here; 
as if pointing it out while speaking. The 
character here sketched is rather Jewish than 
Christian ; that is, St. James describes persons 
according to their nationality rather than 
their religion (see on iv. 2). We see the 
commercial genius of the nation, already 
developed by their dispersion; a people with- 
out a home, following their traffic from place 
to place. Josephus (‘ Antt.’ xx. 11, 1) de- 
scribes them as fleeing from Palestine in all 
directions to escape the avarice and cruelty 
of Gessius Florus. Compare the notices of 
Aquila (a Jew of Pontus) and Priscilla, first 
at Rome, then at Corinth (Acts xviii. 1, 2); 
then at Ephesus (é5. 26; 1 Cor. xvi. 19); 
again at Rome (Rom. xvi. 3); lastly, again 
at Ephesus (2 Tim. iv. 19). 


14,15. Verse 14 is parenthetic, and verse 
15 continues verse 13, “Go to, ye that say 
-... instead of your saying” (as ye 
ought), “If,” &c. The A. V. is rather 
ambiguous. 


It is.] We should probably read, Ye are 
(with A, B, &c.). 

a vapour.| Cp. Job vii. 7; Wisdom ii. 2. 
In Ps. cxliv. 4, a Greek version has “like 
a vapour” instead of “vanity.” See too 
Hosea vi. 4, xiii. 3. The condition “If the 
Lord will, we shall live,” must precede even 
the first link in the chain of verse 13. Others 
have, “If the Lord will, and we live and do 
this or that,” . . . the conclusion being left 
to be supplied by the readers. “ Our calen- 
dars give the longest day and the shortest, 
the fasts and the festivals: but no Calendar 
gives the /ast day ” (Stier). 


16. ye rejoice in your boastings.| Th verb 
itself implies glorying or boasting (v. Prov. 
xxvii. 1, LXX); and this may be welle 


139 


140 


poet (in the Lord, in the Cross, 1 Cor. 
31; Gal. vi. 14), or ill-grounded (in men, 
1 Cor. iii. 21). But the noun expresses pre- 
sumptuous boasting—“ All such glorying 
(not, all glorying) is evil.” 

boastings.| (Plural) the aggregate of those 
instances of arrogances which form the cha- 
racter; as in ii. 1 (literally), “ with respects 
of persons.” 


17.] With this maxim cp. Christ’s words 
in Luke xii. 47; John ix. 41, xv. 22, seqq.; 
and especially xiii. 17. St. James delights in 
abrupt apophthegms, especially at the end of 
a paragraph. But here he does not merely 
say, “ Now I have warned you; so, if you 
go wrong, your sin will be the greater.” 
However abrupt the style, we reasonably 


JAMES, IV. 


ex! to trace some connexion with the 
context. Probably, the reference is to the 
boastful rejoicing just mentioned. The Jews 
relied on their knowledge (Rom. ii. 17-20) 
and their condemnation was, that they said 
they saw; therefore their sin remained 
(John, ut supra, cp. vii. 49). Their “ hearing ” 
was not “doing,” and therefore “their reli- 
gion was vain” (supra, i. 26, seg.). Some 
have suspected a direct reference to Rom. 
xiv. 23, ‘“ Whatsoever is not of faith is 
sin.” We can scarcely assume so much: 
but the correspondence is very remarkable; 
and St. James supplements St. Paul. “It 
is sin to doubt whether a thing be right, 
and yet to do it. It is also sin to know 
that a thing is right, and yet to leave it une 
done.” 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Chap. IV. 
(A.) Verse 2. 


First, we must remember how often Christ 
directs His discourses, sometimes to one 
class, sometimes to another, among that 
mixed multitude which contained alike the 
ardent disciple and the half-hearted listener, 
even the secret enemy; all being within the 
pale of possible conversion so long as, from 
any motive, they were attracted to the 
Teacher. Next, we must consider the posi- 
tion of St. James and those to whom he 
wrote, as still Jews, though believers; still 
looking on their unconverted brethren as 
members of the same communion, though 
they had not yet accepted God’s entire reve- 
lation. Both these classes were necessarily 
present to his mind while he wrote; as 
he was, in fact, connected with both at 
Jerusalem. See note on ch. v. 1, and Intro- 
duction, ii. 

We can comprehend, therefore, the state 
of things here indicated, without directly 
imputing it to the Christians themselves. 
Perhaps, indeed, we are too apt to picture 
to ourselves the Apostolic times as a golden 
age of a spotless Church. The Epistles 
to the Corinthians and Galatians are-enough 
to destroy this illusion. But St. James’s 
description is far beyond anything that can 
be imputed to the Christians of his time. 
It is, however, no exaggerated portrait of that 
state of Jerusalem which made the Temple 
(literally) a den of robbers. The well- 
known politico-religious party of the Zealots 
was probably at first a sincere brotherhood 
of enthusiasts, not unworthy of the Mac- 
cabees, whose era they hoped to revive. 
Their zeal, we may believe, was for God, 
though they misread the leadings of His 
providence, and did not recognise His king- 
dom as it came. Such a one Judas of Galilee 
(of Gamala, the Gaulonite) may nave been, 


whose insurrection in the time of the Census 
(Acts v. 37; Joseph. ‘ Antt.’ xviii. 1, 1 and 6) 
marks the popular consciousness of the 
utter departure of the sceptre from Judah, 
Such, certainly, was Simon the Zealot—Ca- 
naanite, or Cananzan, is a name formed from 
the corresponding Hebrew sannd (Exod. xx. 5) 
—so called, doubtless, from his former associae 
tions. Such was Saul of Tarsus (though 
he was of the school of Gamaliel, grand- 
son of that Hillel who gave his name to the 
moderate party), a zealot for God and the 
traditions of the fathers (Acts xxii. 2; Gal. 
i. 14;—see Introduction to tne Acts, vol. 
ii. 337). And St. James himself says (Acts 
xxi. 20) of the “many myriads” of believers 
at Jerusalem that they were all “zealots of 
the law.” But while many became Chrise 
tians, the Zealots, as a body, became assoe 
ciated, and popularly identified, with the 
dagger-men (sicarii, Acts xxi. 38), or mure 
derers, in the Jewish war. Josephus uses 
the names as convertible in describing the 
bands of Eleazar (a descendant of Judas of 
Galilee), John of Giscala, and Simon, son of 
Gioras (‘B. J.’ ii. 17, 9; vii. 8, 1 and 2, &c.). 
But it must be remembered that they 
were Josephus’ bitter enemies. This base 
tard “zeal,” or “zealotry,” developed itself 
in two directions during the times of anarchy. 
In some, it became bloody fanaticism; to 
others it was a mere cloak for rapine, murder, 
and all brutality. The doings of the Zealots 
are the crowning horrors of the siege of 
Jerusalem. The mischief had not yet reached 
its climax; for before that came, St. James 
“the Just” himself became their victim. But 
this is probably the allusion in his words: 
and if these may be fairly rendered ye play 
the murderers (sicarii) and sealotm 
there will be no lack of force in them. 


JAMES. IV. 


(B.) Verses 5, 6. 


The interpretations of this passage are be- 

md numbering. Referring, therefore, once 

r all, to the condensed summary in 
Theile, ‘Comm. in Ep. Jac.,’ pp. 213-229, 
let us enquire what points may be considered 
as accepted. These will guide us to the 
general result. 

1. The word or (omitted in A.V.) carries 
us back to verse 4, “ Know ye not that. . ., 
or do ye think:” so that “the Scripture” 
(whether quoted, or only referred to) is 
something equivalent to the foregoing clause ; 
the alternatives being that the world’s friend- 
ship is God’s enmity, or that the Scripture 
speaks in vain. A note of interrogation 
should therefore follow Aéye. It is indeed 
objected that A¢eye must then be translated 
“ speaks,” not “says” (as neuter, not tran- 
sitive); and that this is contrary to usage. 
But (a) in Heb. ix. 5, wept Ov ovK éore viv 
Aeyew Kata pepos, it is simply “to speak.” 
Besides, (4) the verb has an intermediate use, 
especially where it refers to something going 
before, meaning “to say this, to say so.” 
So in the parenthetic clause “I speak (or 
say this) as a man,” Rom. iii. 5, vi. 19; and 
cp. 1 Cor. x. 15, xv. 34; 2 Cor. vii. 3, vill. 
8, xi. 21 (in Gal. iii. 15, the reference seems 
to be to what follows). And though the 
words usually introduce a quotation, they 
May refer to something already stated. 
Moreover, an appeal to the authority of 
Scripture, to confirma foregoing general state- 
ment, does not imply a verbal quotation of 
any one passage, but may be taken as a sum- 
mary of the general teaching of Scripture 
(e. g. in Rom. ii. 24; cp. 1 Kings ii. 3; Matt. 
xxvi. 24; Mark ix. 13); whereas, when the 
words “it is written,” or the like, stand 
first, they must be followed by an actual 
quotation. 

2. Now the words which here follow 7 

pad? Aéye cannot be found in form or even 
in substance, either in the O. T., or (as has 
been attempted) in the N. T. Perhaps 
Deut. xxxii. 21, segg., and Isai. lxiii. 7-11, 
come nearest. But all attempts at identifica- 
tion fail. And the suggestion that the writer 
Means to quote Prov. iii. 34, but after the 
words “the Scripture saith” interpolates a 
paraphrase of his quotation, which then fol- 
lows with “wherefore He saith,” in verse 6, 
needs no refutation. 

3. Again, the ordinary rules of construc- 
tion require that émmoOei (verse 5) and 
didwox xdpw (verse 6) should have the same 
Nominative case. If 7 ypapy eye... 
peitova dé Si8wo xaptv are assumed as cor- 
relatives, the result is a mere false antithesis. 
And if xargxoe (the true reading, as A, B, 
®) is balanced with p. 3¢ di8acs xdpuw, this 


is equally false; the real antithesis being 
between pos POdvov émmobei and Sidoct 
Xap. Again, didmor xdprv, occurring twice 
in verse 6, must have the same meaning both 
times; whence it follows, that @eds (sug= 
gested by Geov €yOpa, beovd ¢xOpds in verse 4) 
is the nominative to all three verbs, émimoGei 

On dida@cu eee didacr. 

4. If then @eds be the nominative to 
emuroGei, the verb must be usec in a good 
sense, as it is everywhere else in N. T., 
Rom. i. 11; 2 Cor. v. 2, ix. 14; Phil. i. 8, 
li. 26; 1 Th. iii. 6; 2 Tim.i. 4; 1 Pet. ii. 2; 
and so émmofia, Rom. xv. 23; émumdOntos, 
Phil. iv. i; émid@no1s (note its connexion 
with such words as dyavdxryots, dBos, 
Gros, exdiknois) 2 Cor. vii. 7, 11. It is 
therefore not “ to lust” (as it seems to be in 
Ecclus. xxv. 21, and perhaps in Ps. Ixii. (Ixi.) 
11, LXX), but “to long affectionately, pase 
sionately for” a person or thing. 

Proceeding from these data we must 
understand ro mvedua as an accusative after 
emimoGei, meaning not the Divine Person, 
but the Spirit which God has given us. If 
kato@Knoev were read, it would be the Holy 
Ghost dwelling in us, and might be the 
nominative; but this would produce cone 
fusion between mvevdua and eds, as subjects 
of the verbs, and would require jyas to be 
awkwardly supplied after émuodei. 

Omitting for the present the words mpdés 
POdvov, we find the dominant idea through- 
out to be contained in the word “adulter= 
esses” in verse 4. And the allusion in 7; 
ypady eye is to the virtual identity be- 
tween the friendship of the world and the 
enmity of God, as exhibited throughout the 
whole of the O. T. history, and enforced in 
the continual assertion of God’s claim to the 
exclusive love and devotion of those whom 
He takes to be His own (“ Thou shalt have 
no other gods before Me ;”—“‘ Hear, O Israel, 
the LorD our God is one LorbD; and thou 
shalt love the Lorp thy Gop with all thine 
heart,” &c.. Exod. xx. 3; Deut. vi. 4, &c., 
adopted and ratified by CHRIST in His dise 
courses); and especially in those frequent 
passages where the prophets use the figures. 
of human love, wedlock, and adultery. Note 
on the one hand the combination of impuri 
with idolatry in the false worship to whi 
the Israelites were tempted ; and on the other 
the significant punishment of the adulterer 
under the law of Moses. God was wer.ded 
to His people. Therefore, His was a jealous 
love; and the love of the world was infidelity 
to Him. 

Thus understood, “the Spirit” for which 
God craves so peremptorily, is not that which. 
He breathed into man on the day of creation, 


143 


142 


but that which he makes ours when the 
Holy Ghost imparts to us the gift of Him- 
self, to dwell in us, moulding and informing 
our spirits, and making our bodies His 
temples by His presence ;—yet so, that it is 
still possible for us to lose Him, by grieving 
Him and doing Him despite (Eph. iv. 30; 
Heb. x. 29). Compare Rom. viii. 23-27, for 
the strivings of the Holy Spirit for and in 
those who “have the first-fruits of the Spirit,” 
—He who dwells within them struggling to 
retain His place, while the contest goes on 
between the deep love of GoD to man, and 
that necessity (so to speak) of His perfect 
holiness which must destroy the defiler (or 
destroyer) of His temple (1 Cor. ili. 17). 

But what are we to say of the phrase pds 
@Odvov? It cannot be translated “ against 
envy.” Most modern commentators render 
it, “eyen unto jealousy.” This is simple; 
and few would question it, if the ideas 
of Pdovos and 7jAos were philosophically 
identical. Usually, however, they are con- 
trasted ; see Aristot. Rhet. iil. 11: (pOovepov 
to Geiov, the heathen maxim in Herod. i. 32, 
&c., is altogether different, ascribing to the 
Deity a grudge against man’s excessive pros- 

rity). And yet the words “ Gop craveth 
for the Spirit, which He hath made to dwell 
in us, even to the point of—@édvos,” are 
such as to make any other interpretation still 
more difficult; so that we must submit to 
interpret @@ovos, not indeed as = gjdos, 
but as that into which (jos passes, when 
the provocation reaches the extreme point. 
For there is a relation between jealousy and 
envy; though jealousy presupposes love, 

‘whereas envy implies hate. Both are com- 
bined in Plato, Symp. 213 D (cp.also Phaedr. 
243 C); and though one shrinks from quo- 
ting such passages in connexion with St. 
James’s thought,—for they describe the in- 
sanity of unruly passion venting itself in 
spiteful tricks—yet the words (ndoruray 
wai dOovayv, “jealous and envious,” are so 
coupled as to shew that the contrast of their 
Meanings is sometimes lost sight of. 

Thus the fundamental idea is, as before, 
the wedded bond between God and His 
pone. dissoluble only by such profligate 

ithlessness as in human nature would 
turn love to hate, but here combines 
in one, love and hate, passionate yearning 
and envy (€mioOei mpds pOdvov); as if no- 
thing short of such a startling paradox could 
shadow forth the combination of the Divine 
attributes—the love that is jealous, the 
jealousy that slays: see Deut. vi. 15; and 
cp. ib. xxxil, 11 (LXX), where émurodeiv 
eccurs, followed (in verses 15-22) by the 


JAMES. IV. 


apostasy of Israel and the fury of God’s ven- 
geance. That affection, which in its puri 
is Love, becomes, when suspicion is Sed 
jealousy; and when the apostasy of the 
spouse is certain and irremediable, is changed 
into something still more terrible, of which 
the deadly workings are described in sundry 
portions of Holy Writ (e.g. Deut. ll. cc.; 
Ezek. xxiii, &c.); and which seems to be 
here exprssed, for want of a more accurate 
word, by “envy ;’—being the passion into 
which jealousy changes, when certainty super- 
sedes suspicion; “for the Lord thy God is a 
consuming fire, even a jealous God” (Deut. 
iv. 24). This is indeed a figure of speech 
most strange and startling in its application 
to God and His Holy Spirit! Yet our 
choice among all the renderings which 
have been proposed, seems to lie onl 
between this and one other, not very dif- 
erent from the A. V., but treating, as 
above, 7 ypady Aéeyer aS a question:— 
“ The spirit which God gave to dwell in us 
carries its longings even to envy (see verses 
I, 2, “wars, fightings, .... from your 
lusts”): but He, who gave that spirit, gives 
all the more abundant grace to control it; 
wherefore,” &c. This gets rid of the diffi- 
culty in the translation of @éovos: but it 
creates several others, some of which have 
already been considered in detail. It con- 
nects the thought ex:lusively with verses 1-3, 
so that the mention of the friendship of the 
world in verse 4 loses its importance, and 
all reference to the bond of spiritual wedlock 
and its violation disappears. Consequently 
it requires the adoption of the inferior read 
ing, “ye adulterers and adulteresses;” and 
these words must then be used in their literal, 
not their spiritual sense. The omission of 
the nominative before pei{ova d€ didwcr xépw 
becomes on this view intolerable. he 
balance of God’s resistance to the overween- 
ing and His graciousness to the humble is 
injured: for he is represented solely in His 
attribute of mercy, even while sinners are 
still impenitent; whereas St. James depicts 
the terrors of the Lorp as enhanced, to 
those that brave them, by the mercies which 
have been rejected; he yhadows forth the 
great war against the Evil One and the 
world which is in bondage to him: and he 
shews that we must take one side or the 
other, because we cannot be the friends of 
God and of the world. But if we choose 
the world’s love, we are more than mere 
enemies of God. Because we haw: enjoyed 
His love, we are rebe's, apostates. at, ac ule 
terous spouses. 








ee ee 


v. I—3] 


CHAPTER V. 


8 Wicked rich men are to fear God's vengeance, 
9 We ought to be patient in afflictions, after 
the example of the prophets, and Fob: 12 to 
forbear swearing, 13 to pray in adversity, 
to sing in prosperity: 16 to acknowledge 
mutually our several faults, to pray one for 
another, 19 and to reduce a straying brother 
to the truth. 


CuHap. V. 1. Go tonow.] See on iv. 13, 
where the rebuke was directed against those 
who hasted to be rich, and made sure of 
living to gain their object. Here St. James 
turns abruptly to those who are rich, 
only thinking of themselves, careless of 
charity, humanity, or even justice. The 
common feature of the two classes is their 
presumption in boasting of the morrow. 

In ii. 2-7, the entrance of a rich man into 
a Christian assembly leads to the thought of 
the treatment of the poor believer by the 
rich; but it is not certain that the rich man 
is represented as a professing Christian (see 
note). And many think that the burst of 
indignation here is not directed against those 
to whom St. James is writing (the customary 
* Brethren” does not occur from iv. 13 to 
v. 6 inclusive), but is to be understood 
like the denunciations of the enemies of God’s 
people (which it so much resembles) in the 
Books of the Prophets; the point of applica- 
tion lying in the concluding exhortation to 
patience (verse 7), in the confidence that the 
time of the oppressor is short. See the same 
suggestion in 2 Thess. i. 5, segg. But the 
subject is wider. The disciples of St. James 
in becoming Christians had not ceased to be 
Jews. They were members not only of the 
nation, but of the Church which was co- 
extensive with it. They had received an 
additional revelation, but not a call to sever 
themselves (so long as they were not violently 
gevered) from the commonwealth of Israel. 
The Church at Jerusalem was the Society 
of those Israelites who were true to their 
God, listening to His revelations, believing 
on Him whose coming had been so long 
looked for. They were, in this sense, the 
true Israel, the element of vitality in a mass 
which it was still possible that they might 
leaven. (See Bouman, pp. 37-39.) Note the 
words spoken by St. James to St. Paul in 
Acts xxi. 20-24, and his submission to them, 
#6. 26; and the broad distinction made be- 
tween the Jews and the Gentiles which had 
believed (#. 20-25). This denunciation of 
woe (for such it is, rather than a call to 
repentance) is addressed to persons who were 
still formally within the pale of God’s Church 
along with “the election,” “the true Israel,” 
though they were cutting themselves off from 


JAMES. V. 


O to now, ye rich men, weep 
and howl for your miseries 
that shall come upon you. 

2 Your riches are corrupted, and 

your garments are motheaten. 
3 Your gold and silver is cankered ; 
and the rust of them shall be a wit- 
ness against you, and shall eat your 


it (v. Rom. x. xi.). The night was fast 
closing in upon them, but their day of grace 
was not wholly past. (See Introduction, ii.) 


Even to eyes devoid of prophetic specula- 
tion, the coming miseries must have been 
casting their shadows darkly forward at this 
time, in the preparations for the siege of Jeru- 
salem. The key to this paragraph is Christ’s 
discourse in Matt. xxiv.; and “the last 
days,” “the coming of the Lord,” must be 
interpreted according to the general analogy 
of Apostolic thought on this subject, the 
times and the seasons remaining unrevealed 
(4b. 36). The tribulations are those which 
usher in the kingdom of Christ in glory; 
comfortless to such as look not for Him, 
but birth-pangs of joy (adivay, ib. 8; cp. John 
Xvi. 21) to those who do; affecting the whole 
Dispersion—indeed all the Believers through- 
out the world—as well as the Jews of Je- 
rusalem; because in the expectation of the 
Apostolic Christians her destruction was con- 
nected not only typically, but actually, with 
the Judgment Day. 


that shall come upon you.| That are coming 
upon you (cp. Luke xxi. 26, 35), either 
“soon,” or “suddenly ;” probably, both. 


2. Your riches are corrupted.| The general 
term comes first; particulars are specified 
afterwards. These riches are not to be 
thought of as stores of merchandise (which 
would rather belong to iv. 13-15). The 
wealth of the ancients was of a miscellaneous 
sort, consisting not merely of the precious 
metals, but of more perishable things. Cp. 
what Horace (Epist. i. 6. 40) says of Lus 
cullus. It is still the Oriental fashion to 
heap up garments, shawls, carpets, and all 
manner of stuffs, as the furniture of a princely 
house. See Matt. xxii. 11, 12, where it is 
implied that wedding-garments were pro- 
vided for the king’s guests. Such wealth ag 
this was liable to corruption and decay, and 
especially to the ravages of the moth. Similar 
allusions are found in Matt. vi. 19, seg.j 
Job xiii. 28; Isai. 1. 9, li. 8. 


3.] Gold and silver are not, strictly speake 
ing, liable to “canker” or “rust.” But they 
are liable to be so tarnished as to justify the 
use of the words; cp. the Epistle of Jere- 


144 


flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped 
treasure together for the last days. 

4 Behold, the hire of the labourers 
who have reaped down your fields, 
which is of you kept back by fraud, 
crieth: and the cries of them which 
have reaped are entered into the ears 


of the Lord of sabaoth. 


miah, 24. Chaucer (Prologue to the ‘ Per- 
soune’s Tale’) has— 


“And this figure he added yet therto, 
That if gold ruste, what shuld iren do?” 


a witness.| Cp. Matt. x. 18, xxiii. 31. 


as it were fire.| By some, these words are 
thrown into the next sentence—“ treasured 
up, as it were, fire” (cp. Prov. xvi. 27 in 
LXX); but not so well. Cp. “our God 
is a consuming fire,” Heb. xii. 29, from 
Deut. iv. 24. The glowing metal itself (per- 
haps in the form of fetters, unconsciously 
hugged by the greedy) is thought of as 
clinging, consuming the living flesh. After 
this comes a fresh thought. Men lay up 
treasure for the future; but these did it “in 
(not for) the last days.” This is spoken as 
if from the very last day of all. When the end 
came, it found them heaping up treasures 
which they could never use. See Matt. xxiv. 
38, Luke xvii. 26, 28, of the days of Noah 
and Lot; and the parable of the rich fool in 
Luke xii. 16, segq. 


4. the hire of the labourers.| The Mosaic 
law was very jealous for the rights of those 
who had nothing but their labour: see Levit. 
xix. 13; Deut. xxiv. 14, seg. But the rebukes 
in Jerem. xxii. 13; Mal. ili. 5 (cp. Job xxiv. 6, 
seqg.; ‘Tobit iv. 14; Ecclus. xxxili. 30 seq.) 
shew the neglect of the duty. The ill-gotten 
gear crieth (like the blood of Abel, the sin of 
Sodom and Gomorrah, Gen. iv. 10, xvili. 20, 
xix. 13); cp. Habak. ii. 11; Luke xix. 4o. 
And the ears of the Lord are open to the 
cry, as in the Egyptian bondage (Exod. ii. 
23). Those who have no earthly protector 
have Him; the Lord of Sabaoth, the Lord of 
Hosts is His name. The Hebrew Sabaoth, 
preserved also in Rom. ix. 29, from the LX X, 
unites the ideas of might and glory: the an- 
gelic hosts being connected with the reve- 
lation of Sinai (Deut. xxxiii. 2; Ps. lxviii. 17), 
and with the Last Judgment (Dan. vii. 10; 
Matt. xxv. 31; 2 Thess. i.7; Jude 14). Cp. 
LXX, Isai. v. 9. 

jields.| The word implies large tracts of 
land, /atifundia, as in Johniv. 35 ; Luke xii. 16. 


6. Ye have Kued ... . ye bave nourished. | 
Read, ye lived ...ye nourished, and 


JAMES. V. 


[v. 4—ye 


5 Ye have lived in pleasure on 
the earth, and been wanton; ye have 
nourished your hearts, as in a day of 
slaughter. 

6 Ye have condemned and killed 
the just; and he doth not resist 
you. 


7 "Be patient therefore, breth- 07 Je 


soin next verse, ye condemned. The tenses 
are emphatic. St. James as if in 
retrospect from the Judgment Day: “ Ye did 
thus and thus: but it is all over now!” 
“Ye lived in luxury and wantonness (1 Tim, 
v. 6); ye nourished, pampered your hearts ” 
(Acts xiv. 17). If “as in a day of slaughter” 
be read, the “slaughter” must refer to the 
preparations for feasting; cp. Isai. xxii. 12, 
13; Jer. xii 3. But, omitting “as” (so A, B, 
N*, 13, Vulg., Memph.), their own slaughter 
is probably indicated. There is here an 
echo of Christ’s teaching in Luke xii. 16-21, 
xvi. 19-31; see too Ecclus. xiii. 


6. Ye condemned (not save condemned 
and), ye killed the Just (or Righteous) One.] 
Suggested by Christ’s words, Matt. xxiii. 35 
(cp. Sixacoy . . ToD OStxaiov.... 
vevoare there), of the sin of the Jews, from 
age to age, in killing the prophets of God; 
till in the fulness of time, when God sent His 
own Son, they slew Him also (i. xxi. 33, 
seqg.; Luke xiii. 33, seg.) The idea had 
been so distinctly developed in Wisd. ii. 
10-20, that that passage must have been ac= 
cepted as a Messianic prophecy, if it had not 
been recognised as a summary of prophecies 
already extant, the religious instincts of the 
people forecasting the shape in which these 
should be fulfilled. When thus led up to 
the Person towards whom all prophecy 
converged, we cannot accept the series of 
historical details without seeing here that 
event, the great Antitype of all, which shews 
us the significance of the rest—the one blood- 
shedding, to which all the others point; in 
short, the death of the only Victim to whom. 
the title of “the Just, the Righteous One” 
belongs (Acts iii. 14, vii. 52, xxil, 14; cp. 
1 John ii. 1). Cp. Bp. Jebb’s ‘Sacred 
Literature,’ xiii. pp. 258-267. 


he doth not resist you.| (Omit “and.”) 
Compare Isai. lili. 7, and see Matt. v. 39, 
XXVi. 63, XXvii. 12-14; 1 Pet. il. 21, segg. 

It is miserably inadequate to give “‘ wearied 
and harassed to death” as the equivalent of 
“ condemned murdered ;” and can 
only be accounted for by the persuasion that 
St. James was here denouncing a sin which 
the Christians had committed. But see note 
supra,v.1. True, the Jews of the Dispersion 


v. 8—10.] 


tient, x, ren, unto the coming of the Lord. 
































& long Behold, 


the husbandman_ waiteth 
for the precious fruit of the earth, 
and hath long patience for it, until 
he receive the early and latter 
rain. 

8 Be ye also patient; stablish your 


had had no part in this particular act; 
but in this the national sin had culminated, 
and from this the thought goes on to the 
various other sins, which differed rather 
in degree than in kind. The crucifixion 
of Christ was a sin representative of a class. 

A very few years later, St. James himself 
followed his Lord, being murdered at Jeru- 
salem by those very Jews who had given him 
the surname of “the Just,” or “the Righteous,” 
and called him “the Bulwark of the people.” 
See Introduction. i. 2. 


7. Be patient.| Or, “long-suffering,” as 
elsewhere translated, whether in expectation 
mn eb. vi. 15) or in endurance: here in both. 

sed of God, as bearing with sinners and 
delaying vengeance, in Rom. ii. 4, &c. 

Herder remarks the pathos with which, 
at the very climax, when instant vengeance 
was to be looked for, the curtain falls with 
“ Patience, brethren, patience!” But the 
words “therefore” here, and “be ye alse 
patient,” in verse 8, imply a connexion, not 
a transition. They recall the attitude of the 
Christ before His murderers; see the pro- 
phecy and the history (Isai. ‘ii. 7; Matt. 
XXxvil. 12-14; cp. Rom. xii. 19, seg.; 1 Pet. 
li. 19, seqq., ill. 17, seqg.) But all this has its 
limit. “ Patience, until the coming of the 
Lord: He will redress the balance, if, mean- 
while, you imitate His meekness and pa- 
tience!” See 2 Thess. i. 6, 7, where St. Paul 
joins comfort to the sufferers with terrors 
to the enemy. The “coming” is Christ’s, 
ana the whole passage refers to Him; there- 
fore He is the Lord here spoken of, though St. 
James uses that title both of the Father and 
the Son. His Second Advent is indicated 
vaguely ; perhaps dimly conceived of; for we 
know that the “times” were hidden even 
from those to whom so much was revealed ; 
cp. Matt. xxiv. 27,36; but it must have been 
recognised, in type and germ at least, in the 
approaching day of Jerusalem. 


the husbandman.| See the parable, Matt. 
xiii. 39. The point of comparison here is 
that faith in the future which makes all 
present trials bearable. So St. Paul treats 
husbandry as a work of faith, even faith 
(virtually) in the Resurrection of the dead, 
1 Cor. ix. ro, xv. 36, segg.; cp. also Ecclus. 
Wi. 10. 

New Test.—Vor. IV. 


JAMES. V. 


hearts: for the coming of the Lord 
draweth nigh. 


145 


g 'Grudge not one against an- 10r 
sahen brethren, lest ye be condemned : Griews 


behold, the judge standeth before the 
door. 
10 Take, my brethren, the pro- 


until he receive.| Rather, “ until it receive.” 

early and latter rain.| Often mentioned 
in the O. T., e.g. Deut. xi. 143 Jer. v. 24; 
Hos. vi. 3; and especially Joel ii. 23: “the 
former rain, and the latter rain in the first 
month”; ; the “early rain ” falling in the early 
part of the civil year, about October, soon 
after seed-time; ‘‘ the latter” at the begin- 
ning of the ecclesiastical year, about March. 
The rormer made the seed sprout, the latter 
filled the ears before the ripening. It is to 
be remembered that “the first fruits” were 
offered in the Temple service on the morrow 
of the Paschal Sabbath, i.e. on the day of 
Christ’s Resurrection (Levit. xxiii. 10, 11; 
cp. 1 Cor. xv. 20). 


8. also.] Ie. as Christ was; as “there- 
fore,” in verse 7. 


stablish your hearts.| Brace, nerve them to 
endure all that cornes between; cp. 1 Thess. 
iii. 13. The prospect of the Lord’s coming 
makes this easy, for it is at hand (as the 
word is rightly translated in Matt. iii. 2; 
Mark i. 15). 


9. lest ye be condemned.| Or, judged (as 
all the best authorities); see Matt. vii. 1, 
which suggests the idea of passing sentence 
on our brethren, as included in grudge (marg. 
groan, or grieve). But probably, the thought 
is, “If ye grieve under ill-usage, yet let it not 
be as invoking vengeance on those who use 
you ill.” Long-suffering has the promise 
of the reward; the want of it becomes un- 
charitableness, and therefore is “in danger of 
the judgment.” The Judge @.e. the Lord 
at His coming), who is already at the door 
(Matt. xxiv. 33; Mark xiii. 29, and especially 
Rev. iii. 20), ready to avenge His own elect, 
will judge you, if your faith and charity fail; v. 
Matt. v. 39; Rom. xii. 19, on the one side; 
and Luke xviii. 7, 8; 2 Thess. i. 6; 1 Peter 
iv. 19, on the other. 

10. who have spoken.| Who spake. 

in the name of the Lord.| The idea of 
“ prophet ” is of one who speaks in the name 
of God: not out of his own heart, but as he 
is moved by the Holy Ghost (2 Peter i. 21), 
This exhortation carries us back to Matt. Ve 
11, 12, “ Blessed are ye (uaxdpuot, as paxapie= 
fe here) _ when men shall per 


K 


phets, who have spoken in the name 
of the Lord, for an example of suffer- 
ing affliction, and of patience. 

11 Behold, we count them happy 
which endure. Ye have heard of 
the patience of Job, and have seen 
the end of the Lord; that the 
Lord is very pitiful, and of tender 
mercy. 


JAMES. V, 


{v. 1r—rg 


12 But above all things, my breth- 
ren, swear not, neither by heaven, 
neither by the earth, neither by any 
other oath: but let your yea be yea; 
and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into 
condemnation. 

13 Is any among you afflicted? 
let him pray. Is any merry? let 
him sing psalms. 





gecute you... for so persecuted they 
the prophets which were before you.” See 
this amplified, Heb. xi. 1—xii. 11, especially 
xi. 32-38. From all this, as well as the 
reference to Job in verse 11, it is plain that 
the “ prophets” are those of the Old Dispen- 
sation, not of the Apostolic age. 


of suffering affliction, and of patience.| Not 
one idea (as of suffering with patience), but 
two; “of the sufferings which you are to 
expect, because they are the badge of your 
profession (2 Tim. iii. 12); and of the spirit 
in which they must be borne ;” the first being 
the more prominent in Matt. /. c., the second 
here. “May you not be content, if you 
are dealt with as they were? Must you 
not rejoice, if your reward is like theirs?” 
See 2 Cor. iv. 17. 


ll. them... which endure.| This would 
comprise not only the prophets above-men- 
tioned, but all who follow their faith and share 
their trials. But the better-attested reading 
(A, B, 8, Vulg., Syr.) is, “who endured.” 
From Matt. x. 22, we supply “to the end.” 
In these instances the reward was not in this 
world, but it was a matter of faith that in 
God’s mercy the sufferings would not always 
remain unrecompensed; cp. 2 Thess. L 5, 
seqg. But the example of Job was recorded 
and “heard of” (Job xlii. 7, segg.; Ezek. xiv. 
14; see Tobit ii. 12-15, in the Vulgate). 


have seen the end of the Lord.| These 
words, which in themselves might refer tc 
the example of our Lord in His Passion, 
must from the context mean the conclusion 
with which God crowned the trials of Job. 
The words “that the Lord is,” &c., are 
added by way of explanation. 


very pitiful.| Literally, “abounding in 
bowels of compassion.” 

It has been asked why St. James limits 
himself to O. IT. examples, and does not refer 
to our Lord’s Passion. Answer—(r) he has 
already done so in verses 6, 7; (2) he is 
writing with his mind full of the Sermon on 
the Mount, v. 10 being suggested by Matt. v. 
1o-12, and v. 12 being a paraphrase of id 


$3-37- 


12.] The parallelism between this and 
Matt. v. 33-37 (omitting the reasons given 
by Christ for each precept) is as follows:— 


St. MATTHEW. St. James. 
Swear not at all, neither by Swear not, neither by 
eaven...: nor by the heaven, neither by the 
earth . earth, 


neither by Jerusalem. ..; 
neither shalt thou swear 
by thy head...: 
but let your communication but let your yea be yea, 
be yea, yea: and nay, nay: and your nay, nay: 
for whatsoever is more than lest ye fall into condem- 
these cometh of evil. nation, 


; neither by any other oath - 


That which St. James makes prominent in 
the last clause is implicitly contained in St. 
Matthew: “Say Yea, yea; Nay, nay; and 
nothing more.” Again, “ Let your yea stand 
simply and surely for yea; and your zay for 
nay. Say no more than you mean: 

it clear that you mean precisely what you 
say.” The conclusion in each case corre= 
sponds with its antecedent—(1) “nothing 
more: for that is evil;” (2) “nething differ- 
ent, lest ye be condemned.” Note that the 
vain use of God’s name is not noticed in 
either passage, though Christ (/. c.) shews 
how all swearing whatsoever contains a vir- 
tual appeal to Him. Hence it would seem 
that both these warnings refer, not to the 
confirmation of the truth by a solemn appeal 
to God on due occasion, but to a habit of 
using oaths lightly in business or conversa 
tion, especially (if we take the position of this 
verse into account) under irritating circume 
stances. In St. Matthew, an exhortation 
against revenge of injuries follows, and here 
patience is inculcated in verses 7-11; verse 
12 may connect these with the “ afflictions,” 
&c., of verse 13, “ Bear evil patiently: let no 
irritation, however natural, under wrong or 
suffering shew itself in swearing (again note 
the importance attached to sins of the 
tongue!). Affliction must vent itself in prayer, 
as cheerfulness in praise.” See the passage 
from Bp. Sanderson on ‘Oaths’ vil. 11; 
(Works iv. p. 356, seg), quoted by Bp. Words- 
worth here. In 2 Cor. i. 17-20, there are 
some remarkable verbal coincidences with 
this gs But while the thought in St. 
James St. Matthew is nearly the same, 


¥. 14—15.] 


14 Is any sick among you? let 
him call for the elders of the church ; 
and let them pray over him, anoint- 
ing him with oil in the name of the 
Lord : 


St. Paul is dwelling on the combination of 
yea AND nay—faith and doubt, assurance and 
uncertainty; “yea” being that which is, the 
objective truth (cp. -dmen, as a name of 
Christ, in Rey. ili. 14), while “nay” is its 
negative and contradictory. So Shakspeare, 
‘King Lear,’ iv, 6, “To say dy and No, to 
every thing I said! dy and No too was no 
good divinity!” 


13. afficted?} The word elsewhere in 
N. T. is used of outward suffering (cp.. 
2 Tim. ii. 3, 9, iv. 5); here (in contrast with 
“merry ”) of the inward sense of suffering. 
The remedy is Prayer: not necessarily to 
obtain the removal of the trial, but at any 
rate for the increase of faith, to raise the 
spirits, so that we be comforted (confortari) 
and of good cheer. Mirth (in the modern 
sense of the word) is not meant; but a 
temper cheerful, faithful, and hopeful, to 
sustain us while work is still to be done. 
See Acts xxvii. 22, 25, 36, for the courage 
imparted by St. Paul to his shipmates. The 
“afflicted ” and the “merry” may be the 
same persons, first praying to God to re- 
move their burden, and, when He has heard 
their prayers, singing to Him with thanks- 
giving. “Psalms and hymns and spiritual 
songs” are joined with thanksgivings as the 
outpourings of Christian joy in Eph. v. 19, 
the Psalter of David having for ever stamped 
the word with its religious meaning among 
Jews and Christians. So, “I will pray... 
I will sing” . . . 1 Cor. xiv. 15, seqq. 

Are these clauses interrogative, “Is any 
one,” &c.? or hypothetical, “Put the case, 
one is,” &c.? The difference is very slight, 
but the latter form seems rather the more 
vivid, and connects itself more clearly with 
the foregoing verses. There is the same 
doubt in 1 Cor. vii. 18. 


14. Is any sick...?| Seelast note. Some 
limit this to such sicknesses as have been 
sent to punish the sins mentioned in verse 
15 (see note there, and cp. 1 Cor. xi. 30). 
We recognise, indeed, the mysterious con- 
nexion of all suffering with sin in a world 
which has been put out of joint by the Fall 
But this very truth disproves the limitation. 
Besides, in verse 15, it is, “if he have com- 
mitted sins,” which cannot refer to all the 
cases here mentioned. 


the elders of the church.) Doubtless within 
this body of “ presbyters” were found (though 


JAMES V. 


15 And the prayer of faith shall 
save the sick, and the Lord shall 
raise him up; and if he have com- 
eee sins, they shall be forgiven 
im. 


not exclusively) all the miraculous gifts of 
the Spirit, and especially that of healing, 
But the words point not to certain gifted in- 
dividuals, as such, but to a solemn visit of 
tne Body, as the representatives—in ecclesi- 
siastical language, the “ Persons” —of the 
Church of which they are the ministers. So 
they are joined with the Apostles in Acts xv. 
6; 22, 235 ep. 7 Peter ve 1. 


let them pray over him.| We seem to 
see them bending over the bedridden man 
(cp. Luke iv. 39 with Matt. viii. 14) while 
they pray for him; cp. too Acts xix. 13. It 
has been thought that the imposition of 
hands along with prayer is implied. Not im- 
probable in itself; but not contained in the 
words. 


anointing him with oil.| So Mark vi. 13: 
“They (the Twelve) anointed with oil many 
that were sick, and healed them.” Isai. i. 6, 
and Luke x. 34, are referred to for the heal 
ing properties of oil and its use. But the 
use of oil as an outward sign in these 
cases belongs to its more extensive use as 
a religious symbol, e.g. in the unction of 
King, Priest, Prophet, as well as of the 
vessels of the sanctuary; see Exod. xxx, 
23-33; Ps. cxxxill. 2, &c. Hence the name 
MESSIAH, CHRIST, THE ANOINTED ONE 
(Ps. ii. 2, &c.). And this anointing symbol- 
ised the unction of the Holy Spirit, 1 Sam. 
X. I, 9, XVi. 12, seg.; cp. Isai. xi. 1 (Luke 
WaELS) ACIS exam 385 Cm Gon ule ar. segue 
1 John ii. 20, 27. Weare within the sphere 
of the Holy Spirit’s manifestation of Himself 
in visible miracles. yet all in orderly grada- 
tion. Christ spoke the word, and a miracle 
was wrought. His Apostles spoke, as a rule, 
in His name, with the same result. These 
elders do not speak as having authority, but 
“pray;” and “the prayer of faith” is the 
means of healing. Christ Himself sometimes 
used outward symbols, e.g. John ix. 6, It 
Some suggest “medicated oils;’ but come 
mon sense shews us that something is 
described here utterly different from the ordi- 
nary blessing of God on medical appliances. 


in the name of the Lord.| Not to be 
joined with “ pray,” but wit: “anointing ;” 
the name of Christ being the power which 
made the outward bol a means of grace; 
see the confession of the Apostles in Acts iii 
16, iv. 10-12. 


15. the prayer of faith.| Note how the 


147 


148 


JAMES. V. 


16 Confess your faults one to an- 
other, and pray one for another, that 
ye may be healed. The effectual 
fervent prayer of a righteous man 
availeth much. 


[v. 16—17. 

17 Elias was a man subject to like 
passions as we are, and he prayed 
‘earnestly that it might not rain: 


space of three years and six months. 





condition of faith is connected with Christ’s 
miracles of healing, just as with the forgive- 
ness of sins; because all evil, spiritual and 
hysical, flows from one source and is healed 
one Saviour. The want of faith was an 
Sbctacte to healing (Mark vi. 5, seg.), as it is 
to salvation. In Matt. ix. 2, He seems to 
accept the faith of those who brought the 
paralytic to Him; but we may take for 
granted the patient’s own faith. And here, 
though the prayer is that of the elders, the 
sick man has shewn his faith in calling for 
them (verse 14). See the promise in Matt. 
xxi. 22; Mark xi. 22, seqq. 


save.] Used, as in some of the above re- 
ferences, of bodily healing, the “ forgiveness” 
coming later. 


the Lord.| Christ, as in verse 14. 


raise bim up.| From the bed of sickness, 
2s in Acts ix. 34, &c. 


and if he have committed sins.] Possibly, 
referring to a sickness sent as the punish- 
ment of sin. “If he has brought his sickness 
on himself by sinning;” see John v. 14; 
1 Cor. xi. 30. If the sickness be only bodily, 
it shall be healed; if spiritual also, his sins 
shall be forgiven; both alike through faith. 


they shall be forgiven him.] Literally, “It 
shall . . . .” .e. the commission of them. 

Very few words are necessary on the sub- 
ject of the authority supposed to be derived 
from this verse for the so-called sacrament 
of Extreme Unction in the Romish Church. 
To quote the title, “Extreme Unction” 
(sacramentum exeuntium) is enough. For 
the unction of St. James is primarily and 
distinctively for the 4ealing of the sick. 

16.] Verse 15 treated of the functions of 
the Church’s ministers. But though its col- 
lective life and spiritual energy take form 
and action in the persons of these elders, 
every member has his vocation and ministry ; 
the same duty extends, the like blessing is 
promised to all; through the sympathy of 
all the members each one works for good, 
and receives it (1 Cor. xii. 12-27, especially 
26). The words one to another carry us 
from the elders to the whole body: all can 
give, and all can receive, this benefit. 


Confess your fauits.| Cp. Rom. x. 9, seg. 
As that confession avouched the reality of 
belief, so this the reality of penitence. More- 
over, it is right that others, who may have 


been cognisant of the sin, should be equally 
aware of the repentance; and that the peni- 
tent should have the help of all their prayers; 
—objects not attained by confession under 
the seal of secrecy. 


bealed.| Bodily ailments are seldom men- 
tioned in the N. T. without reference to 
spiritual things; compare the use of the verb 
“to save,” and see 1 Peter ii. 24, “ By whose 
stripes ye were healed.” Here both the 
“sickness” and the “sin” are included: the 
Spiritual and the Material, the soul and 
the body, being alike recognised and honoured 
in Holy Writ. 

A cheering apophthegm winds up the exe 
hortation, “‘ Great isthe force of a righteous 
man’s prayer, when urgent;”—not merely 
“in its working .” tor the place which the 
word holds at the end-of the sentence in 
the original is emphatic. Not as if the 
prayers of the righteous are ever likely to 
be slack; but this is a special zeal, a special 
emotion and fervour of heart, an agony 
of prayer, such as takes Heaven by storm 
(Matt. xi. 12, &c.) Observe this in Christ’s 
prayer at Gethsemane, Luke xxii. 44; 
Heb. v. 7; and cp. Col. iv. 12, “ Labour- 
ing fervently (Gr. “ agonizing”) for you in 
prayers.” See also Col. i. 29; 1 Cor. xii. 6, 
Io, 11, of God “ working mightily” in us, 
and of the operations of the Holy Ghost in 
gifts of miracles. 


17. subject to like passions.] Of like naj 
ture, feelings, or affections, perhaps 
“temptations ;” so that, notwithstanding the 
awe with which he impresses us, there is no 
gulf between us and him, that we should not 
do what he did. The caution is necessary, 
because Elijah was so far apart from other 
men in the whole course of his ministry, 
especially in his journey to Horeb and sojourn 

ere, his ascension, his appearance at the 
Transfiguration, and his generally expected 
return to earth (Mal. iv. 5; Matt. xvii. 10, 
seqg.). Cp. Ecclus. xlviii. 1-12. The word 
(6uotora6ns) is used in Acts xiv. 15, where 
the Apostles assure the Lycaonians that 
are men like themselves; also in Wisd. vi. 
3, of our kindred earth. 


that it might not rain. \n1 Kings xvi. 1, 
Elijah announces the coming drought, but 
his prayer is not mentioned. The gift of 
rain is afterwards naturally connected with 
the prayer recorded in xviii. 36, segg., and 


1 Or, tua 
and it rained not on the earth by the ; 





v 18—20.] 


18 And he prayed again, and the 
heaven gave rain, and the earth 
brought forth her fruit. 

19 Brethren, if any of you do err 
from the truth, and one convert him ; 


JAMES. V. 


20 Let him know, that he which 
converteth the sinner from the error 
of his way shall save a soul from 
death, and shall hide a multitude of 
sins. 





amolied ib. 42. The promise in xviii. 1 was 
au encouragement to pray for its early ful- 
filment. In 2 (4) Esdras vii. 39, his prayer 
is actually mentioned. The specification of 
three years and six months is remarkable. 
Lightfoot says that in 1 Kings xvii. 1, “ these 
ears ” is plural, not dual; and he thence in- 

rs that they were three at the least. J. 
Xviil. 1, has “in the third ee but from 
what starting point? Probably from the first 
actual signs of serious drought, which would 
not occur for some time after the end of the 
ordinary rainy season—perhaps “at the end 
of days,” when the brook dried up (xvii. 7, 
Marg.). This period of 32 years was cer- 
tianly familiar to the Jews; for Christ men- 
tions it in connexion with Elijah’s going 
to Sarepta (Luke iv. 25). Extant Jewish 
writings specify the same period. But there 
is also something mystical in it as a period 
of suffering—“a time, times, and a half;” 
“forty and two months;” a _ thousand 
two hundred and threescore days; the half 
ef a prophetic week; see Dan. x. 7; Rev. 
xi. 2, 3, xii. 6, xiii. 5; in Rev. xi. 6, the two 
witnesses, who have power to shut heaven, 
prophesy for the same period. 


18. the heaven .... the earth.| ‘The re- 
versal of the denunciation in Levit. xxvi. 19 ; 
Deut. xxviii. 23. Palestineisdescribedin Deut. 
xi. 11, as “a land of hills and valleys, that 
drinketh water of the rain of heaven.” We 
can scarcely appreciate the extent to which 
in that country water is plenty and drought 
is famine. But our Indian empire may teach 
us. See note on iii. 11. 


19.] Another practical precept to con- 
clude with: abrupt, as regards the verses 
immediately preceding, but embodying that 
thought of the duty of brotherhood which 
runs like a golden thread through the tissue 
of the Epistle. It has been treated nega- 
tively, “Do the brethren no ill; repay 
No injuries” (v. 9, segg.); then positively, 
“Minister to them, and pray with them for 
bodily and spiritual healing ” (v. 14, seqq.); 
and now, lastly, “Seek them out; reclaim for 
Christ His lost sheep.” This is the climax 
of love; more than brotherly, Christlike! 
In connexion with the exhortation to 
prayer, this may be looked on as praying 
with the hands, working as God’s ministers 
towards the fulfilment of that which has 
been uttered by the lips. 





err from the truth.| Cp. Gal. vi. 1. This 
must not be limited to the case of relapses 
either to Judaism or to the world and its cor- 
ruptions. It isquite general. The “truth” 
may be doctrinal, or practical, or (most pro- 
bably) both: St. James deals little with doc- 
trine, except from a practical point of view. 
See the words, “error of his way,” “sinner,” 
in verse 20, and cp. John iii. 21; 1 John i 
6; 1 Cor. xiii. 6. But the reference is not 
to details, but to practical consequences 
of the abandonment of the principles of 
Christian doctrine by those whom “ He begat 
with the Word of Truth” (i. 18). 


20. Let him know.) In sense, this is ime 
personal = “ be it known,” z. e. “ know, all of 
vou” (B. has, know ye). 


which converteth, dsc.| Resuming the 
phrase in verse 19; see note there. But this 
verse rises from the particular instance to a 
declaration of the blessedness of all acts of 
the like character. Perhaps the words “a 
(not the) sinner” are intentionally substituted 
for “err from the truth,” as at once more 
weighty and more general. 


save a soul from death.| A greater work, 
a higher charity, than “to save (or heal) the 
sick ;” for this is the death of a soul (Matt. 
x. 28); and the words carry us forward to 
the Judgment-Day. 


hide .... sins.| According to a come 
mon Hebrew expression (see Ps. xxxii. 1, 2, 
quoted in Rom. iv. 7; also Ps. Ixxxv. 2; 
Prov. x. 12), connected etymologically and 
symbolically with the cover of the ark, the 
mercy-seat (kdphar, kapporeth); v. Exod. 
xxv. 17-22. To hide them is to procure 
their forgiveness, in so far as God is pleased 
to give one of us influence over anothers 
eternal lot. It can hardly mean “shall cloak 
his own sins,” or even “shall have his own 
sins forgiven.” The benefit is not repre- 
sented as being directly repaid in kind to the 
agent. It is true that this recompense is 
offered in Matt. vi. 14. But to those whose 
exceeding great reward God Himself vouch= 
safes to be, He reveals a higher and purer 
blessing—that, like their Saviour, they “ shall 
see of the travail of their soul” (Isai. liii. 11). 
Their joy shall be in this fruit of their lae © 
bour, and they shall share, in their degree, 
the blessed work of Christ in hiding, blote 
ting out sins, and saving souls from death 


149 


150 


JAMES. V. 


Compare 1 Peter iv. 8, jac hap soto: the 
context leaves it more doubtful whose are 
the sins that shall be covered. 


And thus St. James concludes, as if saying 


that if but one soul were won to Christ by 
his Epistle he would be well repaid, and that 
he would have everv Christian feel this, even 
as he himself felt it : 





EXCURSUS.—ST. JAMES AND ST. PAUL 


Much has been written on “ the conflict” 
existing between St. James and St. Paul, espe- 
cially with reference to James ii. 14-26. And 
various attempts have been made to reconcile 
them. 

Yet it is probable that no such conflict 
really exists; because there is no such re- 
lation between their arguments as might 
produce it. The two lines neither cross 
nor touch one another. But it is not sur- 
prising that the idea should have been 
entertained. The appearance of opposition is 
very remarkable. Not to mention passages 
like Rom. iii. 20, 28, Gal. 1i. 16, where “ the 
works of the Law ” are spoken of, and which, 
therefore, are less strictly applicable (for 
St. James does not mention these), St. Paul 
discusses (Rom. iv. 2~5, &c.) the instance of 
Abraham, prior by four centuries to the 
Law of Moses; and he denies the justifying 
power of works in Abraham’s case. On 
the other side we have what St. J. says 
of the efficacy of “works,” and of the in- 
efficacy of “faith” without them (ii. 14, 17, 
20, 26). And, as if to sharpen the antagon- 
ism, the instances of Abraham and Rahab 
Gre in Rom. iv. and Heb. xi.) are brought 

orward by St. J. in confirmation of his 
teaching. 

2. The section of the Epistle to the He- 
brews (xi. 8-19, 31) may, however, be set 
aside; not from any question of the authority 
of the Epistle, which, even by those who deny 
that St. P. actually wrote or dictated it, is 
generally admitted to have been the product 
of his immediate school, and to contain his 
teaching ; but because, (1) throughout Ep. 
Hebr. ch. xi., the thing asserted of the 
Heroes of the Old Covenant is, not that they 
had faith, but that dy faith they wrought this 
or that; according to the summary in w. 33, 
“who through faith subdued kingdoms, 
wrought righteousness,” &c.; (2) there is 
noth’ng in the references to Abraham and 
Rahab in the two epistles so striking as to 
warrant the inference that the one passage is 
meant to contradict, or indeed in any way to 
refer to, the other. The bead-roll of saints 
in Hebr. xi. is so extensive, that it would 
have been difficult to select a name suitable 
to St. J.’s argument, which was not contained 
in it. Abraham, the father of the faithful, 


could not be omitted.’ Rahab is only one, 
and not a prominent example, among the 
many; nor is anything said of her in Hebr, 
xi. 31, which is denied in Jam. ii. 25. More 
over, on a different ground there is a special 
reason why St. J. should mention Abraham 
and Rahab together, standing as they do at 
opposite poles—male and female—Jew and 
Gentile,—he the friend of God, she the sin- 
ner, the harlot. We must admit that an 
argument which is applicable to these ex- 
Fane ate must cover all that lies between 
em. 


3. It remains to consider the supposed op- 
position between the Epistles to the Romans 
(especially ch. iv.) and the Galatians, and that 
of St. James. Yet there is a previous question, 
which it is not easy to answer positively. 
Was St. J. acquainted with St. P.’s writings, 
or was he not?® They are indeed referred 
to in St. Peter’s second Epistle (iii. 15, 16), but, 
probably, at a later date than can be assigned 
to that of St. J. It has even been suggested 
that the spread of so-called “ Pauline” doctrine 
among the churches over which St. J. pre= 
sided, was the actual occasion of his writing. 
And this is chronologically possible, if he 
wrote his Epistle shortly before his death, 
A.D. 62 or 63. For the Epistle to the 
Romans is usually assigned to the early 
part of A.D. 58. At all events it belongs to 
the period specified in Acts xx 3. But the 
following chapter of that book ,xxi. 17-26), 
describes the relations between the two 
Apostles in a way which does not justify the 
suspicion of any doctrinal collision between 
them, although their characteristic differences 
are not disguised. On that, as on a former 
occasion (Gal. ii. 9; Acts xv. 13, segg.), St. P. 
satisfied St. J. In proportion, however, as we 


1 Especially as ‘‘ the faith of Abraham” seems 
to have been a commonplace familiar thesis 
for discussion in the schools of Jewish philo- 
sophy at the time of the Christian era. See 
the discussion in Bp, Lightfoot on Ep. Gal, 
pp. 151-7, who refers to 1 Mace. ii. 52, &c. 

2 See J. C. K. v. Hofmann, ‘ Schrift-beweis,’ 
i. p. 556, segg.; Jd. ‘D, heil. Schrift untersucht,’ 
Vil. 3, p. 83- 

3 Yes, according to Wiesinger, ‘ Einleitung,’ 
p- 36, segg.; Mo, say Huther, ‘ Einleitung,’ § § 3 
Reuss, ‘ Théologie chrétienne,’ ii, 257. 


JAMES. V. 


are induced by other reasons to assign a late 
date to our Epistle, we may admit it as a 
probability that the errors of some who dis- 
torted St. P.’s teaching, may have had a share 
in calling forth St. J.’s rebukes. But there is 
no satisfactory, or even plausible, evidence 
of the imputed antagonism, unless the cha- 
racter and phraseology of the statements in 
the Epistle itself are construed as containing 
a deliberate attack on portions of St. P.’s 
writings and teaching. 

Now St. P.’s argument rests chiefly on the 
statement of the Old Testament, that Abra- 
ham’s belief was counted unto him for right- 
eousness, as being applicable only to one who 
had received this as a gift by favour, not as a 
reward for work. But this is the very start- 
ing-point of St. J. (ii. 23); who, however, 
adds that this saying was “ fulfilled ” (¢.c. appa- 
rently, was revealed in its true significance, 
and received its complete historical ratifica- 
tion) at a later date, when the works which 
his faith wrought, proved how true the im- 
putation had been.’ “ Thus,” he says, in 
summing up, “a man is justified by works, 
not by faith isolated and by itself”;? ch. ii. 
18 and 20. 

4. Everything depends on the right inter- 
pretation of the two words,—“ faith,” and 
“justified.” Is it quite certain that they are 
used by the two writers in precisely the same 
sense ? 

First, of faith. 

It must be remembered that St. J. attempts 
no analysis and gives no definition of this 
word. He does not enter into theological 
speculations. He continually betrays an utter 
distaste for all controversies, viewing them 
as mere impediments to the practice of simple 
Christian duty. “ Non magna loquimur, sed 
vivimus,” might well have been his saying. 
His Epistle has been, not without some 
plausibility, described by Reuss as a protest 
against all controversy, almost against all 
theology except that of a holy life. His 
object is simply and severely practical. 

But in the passages which are the founda- 
tion of his argument, and in which he seems 
to use the word “ faith ” in the same sense as 
St. P., he assumes it as the condition pre- 
cedent to all else; eg. i. 3, “the trying of 
your faith”; i. 6, “let him ask in faith, no- 
thing wavering”; ii. 1, “have the faith of our 
Lord Jesus Christ,” &c.; ii. 5, “the poor in 
this world, rich in faith,” &c. All this adds 
point to the words “ though a man say that he 
hath faith,” in ii. 14. Again, he asserts the 


1 See v. Hofmann, ‘ Schrift-beweis,’ wt supra ; 
and cp. Augustin. Enarr. in Psalm xxxi. 3. 

* On the words ‘‘ wrought with his works,” 
see the note on ii. 22. 

* Cp. i. 19, 26; ii. 143 iii. I-10. 


regeneration by the free will and grace of 
God, through the Word of Truth, as an 
accomplished fact, i. 18; and exhorts Chris- 
tians, as a consequence of this, to “receive 
with meekness the engrafted word, which is 
able to save their souls” (i. 21). 


5. But he has to do with men who assign 
a very different meaning to the word “ faith.” 
He looks, not backward to the time when 
they were brought to believe in Christ, but 
around him, on the actual character and con- 
duct of the converts, and forward to the 
consummation to which all is tending; and 
he sees many who profess to hold this foun- 
dation, but who nevertheless assert that, as 
they have “ faith,” it is enough, so that they are 
under no necessity of “ working.” Consciously 
or unconsciously, such men must have held a 
definition of faith widely different from that 
which St. P. indicates in speaking of “ faith 
which worketh by love” (Gal. v. 6). With 
such persons St. J. will not stay to argue 
whether they really have faith or not. He 
accepts their phraseology, and meets them on 
their own ground. But he tells them that 
such a faith as theirs is, which works not and 
loves not, will avail nothing ; that it is dead; 
that it is nothing more than is held by the 
devils in hell (di. 8-17, 19). 


6. Respecting the exact character of the 
error thus combated by St. J., there have 
been two very different opinions. By many 
it is thought to consist in what is commonly 
called antinomianism, a fanatical conceit of 
personal faith as availing to ensure salvation, 
without effecting anything to purge the soul 
from sin and uncleanness. 

This is, plainly, the falsehood which seeks 
to shelter itself under the mantle of St. P., 
being the depravation (only too natural) of 
his teaching by the carnal mind. And against 
this he himself makes a vigorous protest in 
Rom. iii. 8; vi. 1, 2, and elsewhere. 

But others? are rather disposed to identify 
the error with the dead orthodoxy of Jewish 
Pharisaism, which rested contentedly in a 
cold intellectual assent to articles of faith, and 
in the precision with which it could contro- 
versially maintain correct doctrine, though 
without any religious feeling in the heart, or 
any apparent consciousness of moral obligae 
tion. Such persons were they who in Christ’s 
day, sitting in the seat of Moses, “said, and 
did not”; who, when the multitude was in- 
clined to believe on Him, called them cursed 
because they knew not the Law (Matt. xxiii. 
2, 3; John vii. 49). They rested upon a for 
mula (see Rom. il. 17, seqg.): with them 


1 See especially Neander, ‘Planting and 
Training of the Church,’ bk, iv. ch. 1 (I p. 357» 
seq., Bohn’s English edit.). - 


158 


152 


the acceptance of a creed was everything; the 
belief in a Person was nothing. And of such 
as these St. P. had also spoken, “ Though 
I have all faith, so that I could remove moun- 
tains, and have not charity (love), | am 
nothing” (1 Cor. xiii. 2; cp. Rom. x. to, 
“ with the heart man believeth unto righteous- 
ness ”’). 

J -is latter mischief is, of the two, the more 
like:y to have gained ground among such 
persons as might have passed from Judaism 
to Christianity without putting off their 
Jewish sectarianism. And therefore it is 
the more likely to have prevailed among those 
with whom St. J. had to deal. As time went 
on, when the gap between the Jew and the 
Christian had become wider, the antinomian 
error might become the more dangerous. 
There is no reason to question the co- 
existence of both in the cities where “Jews 
of the Dispersion” sojourned among the 
Gentiles. But the special evil against which 
St. J. feels himself called upon to do battle 
is, in all probability, the spirit of irreligious 
pharisaism shewing itself among Jewish con= 
verts. 

On those who are possessed by such a 
spirit St. J. turns ; and, without disputing the 
claim which they made to be accounted as 
“having faith,” he says, “Your faith—that 
faith which you profess—a faith without the 
works of love—will not justify you, or any 
one; for it is not alive, but dead !” 

It may be noticed that the subject of 
“works without faith,” is never discussed 
at all. 


7. Secondly, of justification. 

What is it, in the phraseology of the two 
writers, to be justified (SixatovoOa)? In 
St. P. we may say that it is the restoration 
of man to his place in God’s sight as 
righteous; the new relation in which (objec- 
tively) God places man to Himself for 
Christ’s sake, and through the Redemption 
in His blood,—(subjectively) received and 
appropriated by the hand of faith. St. P. 
seems to place it at the beginning of God’s 
work in us, and distinctively makes it an 
inward operation. Only twice (Rom. il. 13; 
1 Cor. iv. 4) does he himself use it other- 
wise; and once (Rom. iii. 4) he quotes it 
from the LXX (Ps. li. 4), “that thou might- 
est be justified in thy sayings, and mightest 
overcome when thou art judged.” But this 
latter is the all but universal usage of the 
word in the LXX version of the Old Testa- 
ment ;! either, as in a court of law, to judge, 
be adjudged righteous, or in a figurative sense 


1 So in all the thirty-nine instances quoted by 
Trommius (Concordantiz in LX X), except Isai, 
atv. 25 :—in L 8, which would otherwise be 
doatful, the words tis 6 xpuwduerds pos ; follow. 


JAMES. V. 


immediately derived from tais; see Exod. 
xxiii. 7; Isai. v. 23; Ps. cxliii. 2; which last 
passage, when compared with Gal, ii. 16, 
shews at once the difference and the con- 
nexion of the two usages. The word is 
in LXX not gracious, but judicial. So in 
N. T., “to justify oneself,” Luke x. 29, xvi 
15; and compare especially the words of 
Christ in Matt. xii. 37, “ By thy words thou 
shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt 
be condemned.” 


8. In this sense the word is used by St. J. : 
and indeed the last quoted passage might be 
taken as the key-note of his argument and 
teaching. With him it signifies the mainte- 
nance, to the end, of that relation of man to 
God, into which he has been first admitted 
through faith. It contains everywhere the 
notion of judgment, as in the Psalm quoted in 
Rom. iii. 4; see Jam. ii. 12, 13. And this is 
enough to prove that the “ saving” mentioned 
in ii. 14, refers to the consummation on the last 
day. But the necessity of maintaining good 
works, and the judgment according to works, 
are equally taught by St. P. to those to whom 
he gives the titles of “saved” (Eph. ii. 5, 8), 
“ sanctified ” (1 Cor. i. 2; vi. 11), “ justified ” 
(Tit. iii. 7, &c.); see Rom. viii. 4, 13 ; xiii. 8— 
to; 1 Cor. vi. 7-11; Gal. v. 6. Thus he 
calls on those who “live in the Spirit,” to 
“ walk in the Spirit ” (Gal. v. 25). 


9. In fact, St. J.’s subject is not so mnch 
“ justification” (according to scientific theo- 
logical terminology), as it is “judgment by 
works” ; including, however, in that expres- 
sion the continuous judgment which is always 
accompanying the course of human action,— 
the current record of that Book out of which 
mankind will be judged in the Day to which 
all is leading up, and in which the sentence 
will be pronounced. This article of the faith is 
equally maintained by St. P. irrother forms of 
expression; while in the discourse of Christ 
which has been already quoted (Matt. xii. 
37), the actual words “thou shalt be justi- 
fied,” stand opposed to “thou shalt be con- 
demned,” in plain reference to the Day of 
Judgment. 

Those professing Christians, then, who 
claim to be absolved from the cultivation of 
holiness and charity on the plea of their 
acceptance of a creed, are met in this Epistle 
on the plain ground of human experience. 
St. James does not profess to be a meta 
physical theologian. He judges men by the 
only test which is available to him—by their 
works and life. He looks at the Christian 
life as it exhibits itself; and it is in working 
that faith exhibits itself. And this is accord- 

® See Huther, Exc. on ch. ii. 


oe ‘Bibl Theology,’ § 57; P 34% 


JAMES. V. 


ing to the example of his Lord in Matt. vii. 
15-23, and many other places. 


to. But St. Paul is also—nay, is emphati- 
cally—a philosophical theologian. Heanalyses 
the work of salvation. Beginning at its source 
in the Divine counsels, he traces its operations 
in the inner man, to its consummation when 
it issues in “ the perfect man in Christ.” St. P. 
investigates the process. St. J. tests the re- 
sults. And the personal history of the two 
men throws light on this difference. The 
conversion of St. P. was a convulsion of his 
inward nature. Who can tell the death- 
pangs and birth-pangs, the searchings of heart, 
the revelations of God in Christ, during those 
three days at Damascus, in which “he was 
without sight, and did neither eat nor drink?” 
But St. J., an Israelite of another character, 
had gradually imbibed the spirit of the new 
Teacher, till the Old Dispensation was to 
him purified and glorified, so that it became 
New without break of continuity.1_ Hence 
it was to him still “a law;” but now “a royal 
law,” “a law of liberty,”—no longer external, 
but within,—the law of the nature of the 
regenerate Spirit. 

11, And the views of both these Apostles, 
however different they may appear, are por- 
tions of the truth of God’s word. Compare 
that which Christ says about the tree and 
its fruit (Matt. vii. 17, 18). If we ask 
how we are to know that the tree is good, 
the answer is, “ By their fruits ye shall know 
them.” But if the question is, Which is the 
source of goodness to the other? the answer 


_ must be that the goodness of the fruit is con- 


tained in the prior goodness of the tree. The 
first is St. J.’s statement ; the second is St. P.’s. 
Both are true; both are important: both 
are founded on the teaching of Christ. 


12. There is, however, something more to 
be said. Even when these two Apostles are 


1 Schmid, st sugra ; p. 349, E. T. 


practically teaching the same thing, their 
language will not be found to be the same. 
And this points to real differences in their 
mental characteristics, which are in them- 
selves interesting and instructive, while they 
serve in some degree to shew how the Spirit 
chooses and moulds His own instruments to 
develope and reveal His truth, one and multi- 
form. The view which St. J. takes is human, 
outward, a posteriori ; he deals with trials, with 
proofs, with results. Nor does St. P. neglect 
all this. But he is led rather to take the 
Divine point of view. Hesees the answers 
to his questions as God sees them, prior to 
experience. He reads the human heart, as 
changed by the grace of God, before its good 
treasure has been brought forth in speech or 
act. He beholds Abraham justified, because 
he sees him to be from the first, not only 
potentially, but truly, that which he after- 
wards manifestly and historically became 
when he offered up Isaac. This offering 
shewed how truly “it had been counted to 
him” for righteousness before. 

Both statements are true. That of St. J. is 
much needed as a safeguard against three 
very real dangers,—unfruitful formalism, un 
practical pride of knowledge, and practical 
antinomianism.’ But it must be confessed 
that St. P. reveals a truth which is deeper, 
more fruitful, and more Divine.? He shews, 
what St. J. does not so fully shew,* the unity 
and homogeneousness of the Christian life. 
He brings us face to face with God, as loving 
children with a loving Father. Law and duty 
melt into love. “Honour thy Father,” is 
superseded by “ My son, give me thine heart.” 
Nay, in Christ we are one with Him. And 
this carries us far beyond the limitations and 
imperfections of actual experience. 


1 Lechler, ‘ Apostolisches Zeitalter,’ 1. L @ 8 
(p. 259 s¢g.). : ’ ' 

1 Reuss, ‘ Théologie chrétienne,’ ii, 26a, 

® Vet see ii, 10, 11. 


153 


. ( 
aad w | 
es pt 
it JP i 
: 
‘ . no) 
’ eri | 
* 
F i 
y . 
en 
* 







A 

the 7 T 
7 eae) 70 Teme 
0 ee ere ae mY | 


+i ’ vats 





apo. ee, ae 
Sik "Aue rae 
wrt aera ret 4 
1 leeiites eee 


bi? 7 ‘Yinsea 





: 
















: y 
tae A, Ines 

“ANT OR ih 

roe ~ 4 ni = Prats ay | Perey 

7 ca ’ path ee wii ie 
ain ae OMe Ree 

Sad toot a? Tae 

ba yer ly eaters 


J . ‘ 
: vctt bb Weel FF eh ae 
‘ ~ icy St! Vai fee 
4 Paes - 
nieces “> pe TAY tL ORE 
i i 404 


— 


ike ried See 


rt sige v 
7 : earuj elt > inet ree bas 
. nik ieee 
e 


oe oun yoetel cnet 
o2n ayi> ie series, ATs 


i ott 8 beg « 
» it toe Fhe 4 ot Sek ae 


os er a ee Os 


Kegebe. Ln. Re 


INTRODUCTION. 
a3. Introductory Remarks. § 5. Characteristics of this Epistle. 
$2. The Objects of the Epistle. § 6. Evidences of its authenticity, external and 
§ 3. Class of readers to whom the Epistle internal, 
was addressed. § 7. Bearing on the state of the <Apostolie 
§ 4. Time and place of its Composition. Church. 


§ 1. IntTRopucToRY REMARKS. 


i this Epistle we have one of the 
most important and deeply interesting 
monuments of the Apostolic age. Ac- 
cepted without a trace of doubt or hesi- 
tation by all early Christian writers, begin- 
ning with the immediate successors and 
contemporaries of the Apostles, quoted 
largely and repeatedly by those Fathers 
to whom we are indebted for the fullest 
and most authoritative testimony to the 
canonical Scriptures’, the first Epistle 
of St Peter has always retained its high 
position in the estimation of the Church; 
nor was there any question as to its 
authenticity until within the last few 
years, when rationalism, guided by the 
sure instinct of antipathy, has assailed it 
in common with all documents which 
attest the faith and unity of the primitive 
Church. 

Questions however of considerable im- 
portance towards the right understanding 
of the Epistle have been raised and are 
still contested by writers of various 
schools; they will receive due attention 
in this Introduction and in the following 
Commentary. 

The first two questions concern the 
immediate or principal objects of the 
Writer, and the class of readers to whom 
the Epistle was addressed. These points 
being determined, we shall be in a posi- 
tion to estimate its bearings upon the 
doctrine and constitution of the Apo- 


1 For proofs of these statements see § 6. 


stolic Church, and upon the relations 
between the great leaders to whom the 
establishment and guidance of that 
Church were specially intrusted by its 
Divine Head. 


§ 2. THE OBJECTS OF THE EPISTLE. 


As it appears to the present writer, two 
objects closely connected, and indeed 
inseparable in their development, were 
present with equal distinctness to the 
mind of St Peter. 

It is scarcely questioned that the im- 
mediate occasion of this Epistle was the 
approach, or outburst’, of persecutions in 
Asia Minor. This stands in front of the 
Epistle; but the extreme importance of 
bearing it in mind has never been so fully 
drawn out as by Ewald’, who in his short 
but interesting introduction fixes atten- 
tion upon the fact, that in this Epistle we 
have the only Apostolic model of exhor- 
tations and consolations addressed to 
Christians under circumstances, which 
formed at once the trial and the test of 
their faith. In other Epistles allusions are 
frequently made to sufferings and diff- 
culties, in this the readers are presented 
to our minds as undergoing, or on the 


1 This question is discussed in § 7. 

2 “Sieben Sendschreiben des N. B.;’ see espe- 
cially p. 5. ‘*The great and permanent merit of 
our Epistle is to have first distinctly set forth the 
right view as to the position of Christians in 
reference to the whole power of heathendom, 
and to its persecutions of the Church,” 


156 


eve of undergoing, fiery persecutions. 
This is the first image impressed upon us 
in contemplating their external condition, 
though with admirable skill, or we should 
rather say in the true spirit of a Chris- 
tian Apostle, St Peter gives precedence to 
their internal and permanent condition. 
We see Christians regenerate to a lively 
hope, assured of an inheritance of glory, 
but subject as a matter of necessity to 
trials which, though severe and searching 
as of fire, are temporary, which are in- 
dispensable to the full development of 
their spiritual life, and are therefore to 
be borne not merely without repining 
but with exultation, as an earnest and 
pledge of glory. The first and most 
direct object of the writer is to inspire 
Christians with an absolute confidence 
in the Divine favour and support. 

This point elicits the thought which 
specially occupied the mind of St 
Peter. All the confidence of Christian 
hope depended upon the certainty of 
the truths which converts had already 
received. Were they still to be inqui- 
rers, painfully comparing the teaching of 
rival or antagonistic leaders, looking out 
for more distinct revelations of God’s will 
and purposes: or were they torepose upon 
the truth, in its principle and in its prac- 
tical applications, which they had already 
received? To this consideration St Peter 
addresses himself at once; no shadow is 
permitted to rest upon the relations be- 
tween the doctrine of the older Apostles, 
and that which the people, in all the dis- 
tricts contemplated by the Writer, had re- 
ceived from their own first teachers. The 
entire system as it stands before us in 
the Epistles of St Paul, as it stood before 
the minds of those who first listened to 
St Paul—many of whom must have per- 
sonally known Silvanus, by whose hands 
this Epistle reached them—is presented 
by St Peter, not indeed in terms which 
indicate the existence of any previous 
controversy, but in every form of direct 
affirmation, constant allusion, frequent 
quotation of the best known writings of 
the Apostle of the Gentiles, which might 
impress upon the readers’ minds the cer- 
tainty of absolute unity of doctrine and 
perfect harmony of action. This charac- 
teristic is indeed so prominently marked, 
the allusions to or citations from the Paul- 
‘ne Epistles, the intention of confirming 


INTRODUCTION TO 


the readers in a faith already received, to 
which nothing could be added, from 
which nothing could be taken away, are 
so manifest, as to constitute a conclusive 
evidence of spurious origin in the minds 
of those who invented or still maintain the 
calumniousfiction of antagonism between 
the two chief representatives of Apostolic 
Christianity : and we may admit without 
hesitation that if their widely spread asser- 
tions could be established by conclusive 
reasoning, this great Epistle would fall in 
the general overthrow of nearly all’ that 
the Church has retained of the sacred de- 
posit intrusted to her by our Lord. Here 
it may suffice to bring forward distinctly 
the fact that we have the admission, or 
we may rather say the well-founded asse- 
veration, of the strongest opponents of 
the faith, that this Epistle asserts, implies, 
and most distinctly proves that the doc- 
trinal system of its Writer was in perfect 
harmony with that of St Paul. 

This however is a point of so much 
importance that we would at once re- 
quest the reader to examine the following 
passages (chh, i. 1, 2, 3, 12, 14, 17, 21, 25, 
i...16, ii. 6, 16, 18, iV. 5, 
and to consider the notes appended to 
them in this Commentary. He will 
find that St Peter is most careful to take 
the leading points which had raised 
controversies or occasioned doubts, and 
to intimate the perfect agreement be- 
tween himself and St Paul. Thus 
the election of the Gentiles as well as 
Hebrews is attributed to the foreknow- 
ledge of God, and that in terms evident- 
ly intended to remind the reader of St 
Paul’s own language and arguments* 
Faith is specially represented as the 
moving principle of Christians, the basis 
of their hope, and their preservative 
unto final salvation. The tone or, so 
to speak, the colouring of the Pauline 
Epistles, especially of that to the Ephe- 
sians, with which the people to whom 
this Epistle is specially addressed would 
naturally be most familiar, is preserved 
throughout. So too is that of the great 
Epistle to the Romans, in which we find 


1 The four Gospels, the Acts, ia short all the 
New Testament, except four epistles of St Paul 
and the Revelation of St John, each and all have 
been abandoned as unauthentic by the leaders 
of the Tiibingen school. 

2 See the Introd. to Ephesians, 


THE FIRSE EPISTLE 


the fullest statement of doctrines at pre- 
sent assumed by the critics of Tiibingen 
to be most directly antagonistic to the 
Petrine system, and certainly most speci- 
ally characteristic of St Paul’. The turns 
of language, as well as the mode in which 
the principles are presented, leave no 
room for reasonable doubt that when St 
Peter wrote he had both those Epistles 
before him or distinctly impressed upon 
his mind. This point is indeed forcibly 
urged, and it may be said demonstrated, 
by critics who on that ground impugn the 
authenticity of this Epistle*: and it is a 
point which can only be accounted for in 
a satisfactory manner by the supposition 
that it was St Peter’s express intention 
to cut off all occasion for misunderstand- 
ing, and to guard against intentional 
misrepresentation. Such a supposition 
is in accordance with all that Christian 
antiquity, setting aside heretical for- 
geries of the second century, has handed 
down to us in the Canonical Scriptures 
and in the writings of the weightiest 
and earliest Fathers, and we maintain it 
without hesitation. But our Apostle is 
not satisfied with allusions, references, 
and statements bearing upon this object; 
he takes occasion at two most cnitical 
points in the Epistle to attest the sound- 
ness of the doctrine which his readers 
had received from St Paul, to whom their 
conversion is incontestably to be attribu- 
ted. First at the close of his introductory 
exhortations, ch. i. 25, “but this is the 
Word which was delivered as evangelic 
truth to you*.” Secondly, not less forcibly, 
at the winding up of the whole Epistle, 
ch. v.12. Here the Apostle first asserts 
that he transmitted it through Silvanus, in 
whose faithfulness he takes occasion to 


1 See notes on i. 12, 14, 20, 21, ii. 1, 6—1I0, 
Ir, 13 and 19, iii. 9, 22, iv. I, f0, Vv. I, 5. 

2 The most complete inquiry into this state- 
ment is that by Seufert, in two articles of 
Hilgenfeld’s ‘Zeitschrift fiir wissenschaftliche 
Theologie,’ 1874, 1875. His object is to prove 
that the writer intentionally adopted Pauline 
doctrine, and therefore could not be St Peter; 
we accept his facts, substituting, however, agree- 
ment with the Epistle to the Romans for depen- 
dence upon it; as for Seufert’s conclusion, it 
rests upon the zpwrov wWeidos of antagonism 
between the twe great teachers of Christendom. 

3 Special attention should be given to this 
statement, the force of which is inadequately 
expressed by the literal version in our transla- 
tion: see note in loc. and on ch. i, 12. 


GENERAL OF PETER. 157 
express his own perfect confidence, whom 
his readers knew well as the comrade, 
and so to speak the fellow Evangelist and 
fellow Confessor of St Paul; a circum- 
stance which is of importance in its two- 
fold bearings, upon the personal relations 
of the Apostles and upon the position of 
the Churches which saw in the agent and 
deputy of St Peter a man whom they 
recognised as the trusted friend of St 
Paul. In this latter passage he emphati- 
cally states that the especial object of the 
Epistle was to affirm, in the strongest 
form of words, and attest that the faith 
which they had received was the true 
grace of God, an expression in itself so 
distinctly Pauline as to be regarded by 
some critics (e.g. De Wette) as a sure indi- 
cation of Pauline authorship; but, as we 
have a right to regard it, a certain proof 
of the spiritual influence of which that 
Apostle was the chosen exponent. To 
this St Peter adds—if we retain the com- 
mon reading—‘“‘7z which ye stand,” thus. 
adopting St Paul’s own words, 1 Cor. xv. 1, 
or—if we accept the preferable reading of 
the oldest MSS.—“in WHICH sTAND!” 
thus substituting for a simple declaration. 
of their secure position as adherents to- 
the Pauline doctrine of grace, an em- 
phatic exhortation to steadfastness in 
maintaining it. 

We shall presently have’ to discuss. 
other questions raised by those who re- 
gard the two great representatives of 
Christian truth as opponents, but we 
may here observe that, taking St Paul’s. 
own account of his personal intercourse 
with St Peter, we learn that the two. 
Apostles resided together at a crisis of 
the highest importance in their ministry 3. 
that the younger Apostle sought out St 
Peter with the express purpose of in- 
quiry; and that on the very occasion 
which caused a brief alienation St Paul 
appealed without hesitation to the fun- 
damental principles recognised by both ; 
while all other accounts concur in repre- 
senting the elder Apostle as justifying 
and maintaining the cause of St Paul 
when that Apostle was assailed by the 
Judaizing party. 


1 These points are fully discussed further on, 
§ 7. We may remark that Bleek took nearly 
the same view as that here advocated, whereas 
his late Editor, Mangold, adopts that of the 
Tiibingen school. See ‘Einl.’ p. 665. 


158 
§ 3. Cass or READERS TO WHOM THE 
EPISTLE WAS ADDRESSED. 


The foregoing arguments may indicate 
the conclusion at which we have arrived, 
and to which we adhere with entire 
confidence, viz. that the Apostle through- 
out the Epistle is addressing not any 
separate or distinct party, faction, or class 
in the Church, but the entire body of 
Christian converts in those districts where 
the Gospel was undoubtedly planted by 
the instrumentality of St Paul. That 
body of course included a considerable 
number of Jewish converts, and all its 
members were deeply penetrated by He- 
brew influences, were familiar with the Old 
Testament, and were well aware that the 
origin and root of Christianity was, as our 
Lord (John iv. 22) and all His Apostles 
state, to be sought in the revelation to 
the Patriarchs and to Moses. But not 
less certainly the great majority of the 
first converts, and of those who were 
added to the Church in the interval be- 
tween St Paul’s preaching and the issue 
of this Epistie, were Gentiles by birth, 
training, and previous religion. This 
being the case we should expect to find in 
the Epistle a pervading tone of ancient 
Hebrew thought, equally however intel- 
ligible to Jews and Gentiles under Apo- 
stolic teaching, but at the same time 
forms of address, exhortations, and in- 
junctions specially adapted to those who 
were most exposed to heathen influences, 
and were undergoing a rapid but not yet 
complete process of transition from old 
heathenish customs to Gospel purity and 
light. 

Now if we examine the forms of ad- 
dress we find that while the Hebrew tone 
is unmistakable (e.g. in the introductory 
clause, ch. i. 1, and in the description of 
believers, ch. ii. 9, taken from Exodus 
and Isaiah), yet by far the most numerous 
and specific expressions are applicable, 
not indeed exclusively to Gentiles, but 
to a body in which they constituted the 
predominant and characteristic portion’. 
They are exhorted to eschew the habits 
formed in a state of ignorance (i. 14), a 
term expressly applied to heathens, being 
redeemed from ancestral corruption, 
called out of darkness, once not a people 


1 See the notes on chh. i. 1, rg, 18, 20, 22, 
i. 9, 10, 12, iii. 3, 6, iv. 3. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


—an expression which certainly was never 
applied to faithful Israelites—and they 
are warned to be on their guard against 
heathen practices. Women are repre- 
sented as having become, ze. on their 
conversion, daughters of Sarah. Men are 
reminded of their old Gentile hab‘ts, iv. 
3, 4—-habits which were repulsive to the 
Jews scarcely less than to Christians. In 
short the general tone and special in- 
junctions equally justify the conclusion 
at which the majority of modern com- 
mentators have arrived, that, far from 
having Israelites exclusively before his 
mind, the large-minded baptizer of 
Cornelius gave his deepest and most 
earnest thoughts to a body in which 
there is neither Jew nor Gentile, in 
which Christ is all in all. 

This conclusion has indeed against it 
the opinions of manyancient writers, none 
however of really early date’, none who 
learned from Apostles or Apostolic men, 
but who generally belonged to a time 
when the true relations between the 
members of the primitive Church were 
somewhat obscured and often misappre- 
hended. Some modern writers*, deser- 
ving of all consideration, maintain that 
the Epistle written by the Apostle of the 
circumcision® must have been addressed 
exclusively to that party in the Church, 
But they do not and cannot point toa 
time or to probable circumstances in 
which Jewish communities could have 
been established in those districts which, 
as all Christian antiquity concurs, re- 
cognised St Paul as their first, and at 
that time (before St John resided at 
Ephesus) their only Apostolic Teacher; 
nor indeed is there the slightest ground 


1 The earliest is Didymus. 

2 Z£.g. Erasmus, Bengel, Hug, Pott, Mason. 
See Huther in Meyer’s ‘Exegetisches Hand- 
buch,’ who agrees with Steiger in the view here 
maintained. 

3 It should be borne in mind that the Apostle 
of the Gentiles invariably addressed himself in 
the first instance to the Jews, and that his ar- 
guments are often specially applicable to them. 
In fact both Apostles always contemplated the 
Church as an undivided whole, noticing differ- 
ences connected with race or party, only with 
the view of pointing out their incompatibility 
with Christian principles. We should also re 
member that both Apostles suffered from the 
envy and jealousy of adversaries common to 
both, who had first attacked St Peter, see Acts 
xi. 1, 2 


THE PIRST, EPISTLE 


for the assumption that in any Christian 
community, in any city or district, be- 
lievers who acknowledged their union 
with the Apostolic body were separated 
into distinct classes of worshippers. Even 
at Corinth, where factious movements 
gave occasion to indications of such 
tendency—sternly repressed by St Paul 
—no such distinct bodies were formed. 
The Epistle of Clement of Rome, written 
about a quarter of a century from the 
probable date of this Epistle, proves 
that whatever might be the internal ten- 
dency in the Corinthian church, no such 
distinction was dreamed of as that which 
is implied in this assumption. That 
Epistle, addressed to a Church in which 
the Gentile element was unquestionably 
predominant, is most deeply tinctured by 
Hebrew teaching, but it does not suggest 
or indeed permit the notion that Hebrews 
and Gentiles stood apart, worshipped 
apart, or could be addressed apart by 
an Apostolic teacher. Nothing can be 
more futile than the attempt to find traces 
of separate Hebrew bodies of worshippers 
tolerated within the Church. In Palestine 
the Hebrew element of course predomi- 
nated for a time; in other districts, especi- 
ally in Europe and Asia Minor, the Gen- 
tile element as certainly predominated. 
Tendencies existed which issued on 
the one side in the ultra-Gentile heresy 
of Marcion, on the other in the Ebionite 
faction, which has a fitting exponent 
in the worthless Clementine forgeries ; 
but no sooner did they come to a 
head than they broke out in open 
separation, not within, but from the 
Church; noticed, so far as they are 
noticed by any Apostle, only to be 
uniformly condemned. Assuredly no 
such countenance as that which would 
have been given to the most mischievous 
and inveterate enemies of Church unity, 
had such an Epistle as this been ad- 
dressed to them exclusively, ought to be 
attributed to the chief of the old Aposto- 
lic body—the friend and the consistent 
supporter of St Paul. 


§ 4 TIME AND PLACE oF THE CompPo- 
SITION OF THIS EPISTLE. 


__ 1. The time is approximately settled 
if we admit the fact, now scarcely open 
to serious controversy, which has been 


GENERAL OF PETER. 159 


discussed in the preceding sections, that 
the Apostle was acquainted with the 
Epistle to the Ephesians, which was cer- 
tainly written towards the close of St 
Paul’s two years’ residence at Rome, in 
bonds but not yet incarcerated. This 
leaves no option of a composition earlier 
than a.D. 63. A much later date is 
certainly precluded by the notices of the 
constitution of the Church’. 

With this agree other clear indications 
in the Epistle, especially those which 
refer to the condition of the Christians 
in Asia Minor. It is evident on the one 
hand that partial, but very frequent at- 
tacks had been made upon them; that 
accusations of disloyalty, neglect or vio- 
lation of legal enactments, had been 
urged ; that the name of Christian was 
held up to scorn (iv. 14) and apparently 
was regarded as in some cases a sufficient 
ground for condemnation even to death 
(iv. 15,16). Such was evidently the general 
condition of Christians from the time 
when the Gospel was first preached in 
those districts, and there is good reason 
to believe that the persecutions, regular 
or irregular, of which we find notices in 
the earlier Epistles, continually increased 
in intensity. The irritation of the Gen- 
tiles against those who themselves re- 
jected, and induced numbers to reject 
the national superstitions; the fury of 
the numerous citizens and merchants 
whose interests were bound up with 
the public worship of the old and 
popular idols; the persistent and skilful 
machinations of the unbelieving Jews, 
especially influential in the “ wrangling 
marts” and commercial sea-ports of the 
East, are brought before us in lively 
colours by the Epistles of St Paul: nor 
can it be doubted that those movements 
approached their culminating point about 
the time when Nero—not unskilful in 
discerning indications of popular excite- 
ment—first brought them to a focus in 
that fearful persecution of which the 
horrors are scarcely conceivable, to which 
.indeed full justice could scarcely be done 
save by a writer who combines a lively 
imagination and singular historical tact 
with utter irreverence and disregard of 
ordinary feelings of modesty and tender- 


1 See notes on ch. v. 1, and § 6, towards the 
end, 


160 


mess’. But it seems clear that no regular, 
systematic persecution conducted under 
imperial authority, had broken out at 
that time either in the city where this 
Epistle was written or in the districts to 
which it was addressed. The mutter- 
ings of the storm were heard, and there 
were frequent anticipations of impend- 
ing woes; but the great judgment had 
not yet begun from the house of God 
(iv. 17)°. This Epistle had certainly for 
one object consolation under present 
sufferings, but far more distinctly and 
impressively preparation for a coming 
woe*®. The Christian is the object of in- 
cessant calumny, of vigilant espial, but is 
not as yet in a position to be subject to the 
last penalty without any form of trial, 
simply on the ground of his adherence to 
a new faith. 

On these grounds we must assign the 
Epistle to the interval between the first 
year of St Paul’s imprisonment and the 
burning of Rome a.D. 64, July. 

2. Closely connected with the ques- 
tion as to the time of the composition is 
that of the place. 

Here we have first to examine the 
statement at the close of the Epistle, 
v.13. 

If we read it without reference to any 
early tradition, to any consideration of 
the history of the Apostle and of early 
Christendom, it would at first sight ap- 
pear that when he gives the salutation of 
the /ady or Church co-elect—doubtless 
with the Christians to whom the Epistle 
is addressed—in Babylon, the Apostle 


1 The ‘ Antechrist’ of Renan stands alone in 
its vivid and fearful portraiture of the agony of 
that terrible crisis: see especially pp. 164 to 181, 
to which Bishop Lightfoot refers with a well- 
merited note of disapproval. 

2 So Steiger, Wieseler, Huther, and others. 

3 It is scarcely conceivable that a critic so 
acute as Hilgenfeld should misunderstand or 
misinterpret intimations of such a character, as 
referring to the persecution under Trajan ; nor 
indeed does it seem admissible to refer them to 
any period after the burning of Rome, when 
Christianity was for the first time formally de- 
nounced as an illicit religion, and persecution 
from that time if not continuous, yet breaking 
out in frequent intervals, became the normal 
condition of the Church of Christ. See an ex- 
cellent article by M. Boissier in the ‘Revue 
archéologique,’ 1876, pp. 119 f. The notices 
in this Epistle refer to a different and early stage 
in the process. See notes on i. 6, ii. 12, iil. 
16, iv. 19, Vv. 6- 


INTRODUCTION TO 


distinctly intimates that well-known city 
as the place where he was then residing. 

This view accordingly has had nu- 
merous and very weighty supporters in 
modern times: critics of the highest 
eminence, and certainly little affected by 
party considerations, have adopted it 
without misgiving. 

It implies that towards the close of 
St Peter's public ministry there existed 
at Babylon a Christian community, faith- 
ful to the whole system of Christian 
doctrine, equally under the influence of 
Pauline and Petrine teaching; that Sil- 
vanus, St Paul’s old and tried friend, was 
living there, in close connection with St 
Peter; and that the Church was on 
terms of affectionate intercourse with 
those communities in Asia Minor which 
owed their existence to St Paul. 

But to this whole statement and to 
each of its details serious and indeed 
insuperable objections exist. 

In the first place we have to encounter 
the uniform, unvarying, testimony of early 
Christian writers. From whatever quarter 
their voices reach us, they affirm that 
Babylon here is a recognised appellation 
of Rome, the city which occupied the place 
of that ancient city as the central world- 
power, the head-quarters of Anti-Christian 
influences’. In fact no other view of the 
passage was entertained or suggested be- 
fore Calvin, who argued that the old tra- 
dition was connected with false notions 
as to the position of the Roman Church, 
and that in this as in all other cases the 
literal interpretation ought to stand, un- 
less it is shewn to be untenable. 

Now the main point to be determined 
is whether it is probable or even possible 
that, at the date assigned to this Epistle, 
a Christian community under the presi- 
dency of St Peter existed at Babylon. 

One thing is certain, and seems of © 
itself almost conclusive. The early 
records of Christianity, which give very 
full accounts of Christian Churches, and 
which especially give prominence to those 


1 Papias, Clem. Alex., Jerome, CEcumenius, 
Eusebius; all state this as a well-known fact, 
needing no defence. CEcumenius gives the true 
account of the matter. ‘‘ He calls Rome Ba 
lon, on account of the pre-eminence which of old 
had belonged to Babylon.” Renan observes 
that ‘‘ Rome devint comme Babylone une sorte 
de ville sacramentelle et symbolique.” ‘Ante= 
christ,’ p. 178. 


THE FIRST ‘EPISTLE 


founded by Apostles or under their guid- 
ance, are absolutely silent as regards the 
existence of a Church at Babylon. We 
have no notice of a succession of Bishops, 
no intimation of persecutions in that 
city; the Church must have been swept 
away without a trace of its existence—all 
points which, if they stood alone, would 
compel us to inquire if no other inter- 
pretation could be maintained. 

But we have historical evidence, ac- 
cepted by all critics as genuine, which 
proves conclusively that a community of 
Christians, more especially of Hebrew 
Christians, to whom St Peter is assumed 
to have confined his personal ministra- 
tions, did not and could not exist in that 
city or the adjoining district at the time 
in question. Up to the time of Caligula 
the Jews formed a large and very influen- 
tial community in Babylon. They were 
staunch religionists; bigoted adherents 
of all Hebrew traditions; they supplied 
Palestine with some of its most dis- 
tinguished teachers; Hillel, a descendant 
of David, came from that city before 
our Lord’s birth; and the school in 
that district continued to flourish in all 
branches of rabbinical doctrine. Christi- 
anity, had it been introduced there at 
any time, would have encountered fierce 
and persistent opposition, of which traces 
would certainly have been found in the 
traditions of the Babylonian Talmud. 

But about a.D. 40, towards the end of 
Caligula’s reign, the whole Jewish popu- 
lation in Babylon was exterminated by a 
series of calamities, of which a full ac- 
count is given by Josephus in the last 
chapter of the 18th Book of his Jewish 
Antiquities. 

We learn from that account that after 
the total destruction by the Parthians of 
the warlike colony of Hebrews at Nearda 
—a most remarkable and interesting epi- 
sode in the history of the province—the 
old and bitter enmity between the native 
Babylonians and the Jews residing among 
them burst out; the Babylonians set 
upon the Jews, who being unable to re- 
sist them by arms, or to endure their 
insults, migrated in great numbers to 
Seleucia ; and that six years later, in con- 
sequence of losses caused apparently by a 
fresh outbreak, those who had remained 
left the district of Babylon. At Seleucia 
50,000 of the fugitives were afterwards 


New Test—Vot. IV. 


GENERAL OF PETER. 165 


massacred. There can be no doubt that, 
as Josephus expressly states, the Jews 
abandoned the whole province; and 
though at a later time we find them 
in adjoining districts, there is no indica- 
tion of their presence within the precincts 
of Babylon’. 

It is in short utterly incredible that a 
Christian Church, consisting as critics 
assume chiefly, if not wholly, of Hebrew 
converts, should have been established 
in Babylon within less than a quarter of 
a century from that catastrophe. 

With regard to the probability of St 
Peter’s own presence and active work in 
that district, or, speaking generally, near 
or beyond the Eastern limits of the 
Roman empire, it must be observed that 
although we know nothing definite of 
the Apostle’s movements after the dis- 
pute between him and St Paul at Antioch, 
probably in the year a.D. 53, yet that 
intimations in St Paul’s Epistles*, and 


1 The extent and importance of this calamity 
are much underrated by Huther, in Meyer’s 
‘ Exegetisches Handbuch,’ who does not seem to 
have read the chapter in Josephus, certainly not 
with due care. For he says that only 50,000 
Jews are said to have left Babylon, whereas the 
historian says expressly that of those who fled to 
Seleucia 50,000 were massacred, and that Jews, 
who did not join in the first migration, six years 
afterwards deserted the city in consequence of 
great losses (POopa?). In the last section of the 
same chapter Josephus says that ‘‘the whcle 
race of Jews in this province (ray 7d rye “Iov- 
dalwy yévos) abandoned it, dreading the natives 
of Babylon and Seleucia.” Huther in fact shews 
by this mis-statement that he feels the incom- 
patibility of the facts with the assumption of the 
existence of a Hebrew Christian Church at 
Babylon in St Peter’s time. 

2 The most distinct allusions to St Peter’s 
presence or action in Corinth are found in St 
Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians. In the 
first chapter, v. 12, he states that certain persons 
at Corinth took the name of Cephas, as also his 
own name and that of Apollos, nay, even of 
Christ Himself, as a badge of party; of course, 
without any concurrence on his own part or on 
the part of Apollos or Cephas. In the third 
chapter, v. 22, St Paul names Cephas, together 
with himself and Apollos, as ministering to the 
Church in Corinth. We may add that the refer- 
ence to the wife of Cephas, ch. ix. 5, implies 
personal knowledge on the part of the Corinth- 
ians. In no passage of that Epistle does St 
Paul suggest, or permit the suggestion, that 
St Peter countenanced his opponents. It is 
also to be remarked that in the long and 
very grave series of charges that St Paul brings 
against certain members or parties in the Church 
of Corinth, none are connected with questions 
between Hebrew and Gentile Christians, but 


L 


162 


in the earliest Christian writers, point 
distinctly to his presence and activity in 
Europe; as for instance at Corinth, where 
the most ancient and trustworthy notices 
shew that he preached, as a joint founder’ 
with St Paul, and at Rome’, where, as it 
is generally admitted and is positively as- 
serted by the writer above all others com- 
petent to speak with authority, he was 
accompanied by St Mark*. St Mark 
would certainly not have been needed 
as an interpreter in a Hebrew Christian 
Church at Babylon; at Rome he may 
have been and probably was almost in- 
dispensable. We find also in the men- 
tion of Silvanus a further and most co- 
gent argument against the supposition 
that the writer was resident at Babylon. 
Nothing more probable than that Silvanus 
should be drawn to Rome by St Paul’s 
presence in that city; nothing more pro- 
bable than that in that city he should 
have been directed by St Peter, or 
induced spontaneously, to undertake a 
mission to the quarters where he had 
laboured of old in company with St 
Paul; and certainly nothing more suit- 
able to St Peter’s purpose, whether or 


with errors of doctrine and corruptions of prac- 
tice, which had their source in Gentile laxity of 
morals and pseudo-scientific speculations. Com- 
pare the notices of dissensions at Corinth in the 
Epistle of Clement of Rome, é.g. ch. 48. 

1 So Dionysius, Bp of Corinth, about a.D. 
170. It is inconceivable that the positive state- 
ment of this Bishop in reference to his own city, 
and to Rome, with regard to which his state- 
ment is confirmed by Irenzeus, should be slighted 
in deference to conjectures ‘‘aping the truth.” 
We have abundant testimony in the Epistie of 
Clement Rom., in the Epistle of Ignatius to the 
Romans c. I., and in Irenzus, that the memory 
of both Apostles was cherished with grateful 
affection at Rome and Corinth. In a most im- 
portant passage, ch. 44, Clem. R. attributes 
to our Apostles, z.e. St Peter and St Paul, the 
organization of the Christian ministry at Corinth. 
In this sense the word joint-founders may pro- 
perly be applied to both, as by Irenzeus and 
Dionysius. 

2 The presence and martyrdom of St Peter at 
Rome are attested by Dionysius Cor., Caius of 
Rome, the Canon of Muratori, Irenzus, Clem. 
Alex., Tertullian, and by all later Fathers. The 
facts, questioned or denied by some modern 
writers, chiefly of the extreme negative school, 
are maintained by Credner, Bleek, Wieseler, 
Meyer, Hilgenfeld, Renan, Mangold, and nearly 
all unbiassed critics. See Gebhardt’s note on 
Clem. Rom. v. 4, p. 81, Bishop Lightfoot on 
the same passage, and Schott, p. 348 f. 

3 The oldest witness is Papias, Eus. ‘H. E.’ 
UI. 15; thus too Irenzus I11. 1, and Clem. Alex. 


INTRODUCTION 


TO 


not he acted with the direct and open 
concurrence of St Paul, or guiaed only by 
his own Christian feelings, than to send 
this missive of encouragement, exhorta- 
tion, and earnest injunction to steadfast- 
ness in the faith as the readers had re- 
ceived it first, by the hands of Silvanus, 
under the sanction of both Apostles, and 
with St Peter’s personal attestation to 
his faithfulness. 

An argument in favour of the Babylo- 
nian hypothesis has been drawn from 
the order in which the provinces ad- 
dressed by St Peter are enumerated in 
the beginning of the Epistle. It is re- 
marked that they do not begin with the 
west and proceed eastward—as might 
be expected had the letter come from 
Rome—but that they begin with the 
east and end with Asia and Bithynia. 
But on close examination the argument 
tells in the opposite direction. ‘The first 
district mentioned is Pontus. Now Pon- 
tus was a district in constant communica- 
tion with Rome; a vessel proceeding from 
Rome would probably proceed there di- 
rectly if its course was determined by the 
lines of traffic; and whether we suppose 
that it was sent on public, or on Christian 
business, the sea-ports of Pontus would be 
equally convenient. On the other hand, 
had the messenger of St Peter started 
from Babylon it is impossible that Pon- 
tus should have been the first district 
whick he reached, or that which would 
naturally present itself first to the A- 
postle’s mind. 

The foregoing arguments seem to leave 
no alternative but to accept the old un- 
varying testimony of the Fathers, who 
must have known the sense in which the 
statement was understood throughout 
Asia Minor, that St Peter designates 
Rome by the name of Babylon. 

The objection however is strongly 
urged that it is highly improbable St 
Peter should have used a mystic term in 
an Epistle dealing not with apocalyptic 
visions but with simple matters of fact. 

But we should observe that the whole 
clause in which this appellation occurs 
must be understood in a symbolical 
sense. This salutation is given, not—as 
is elsewhere the case where Churches are 
distinctly specified as sending or receiving 
greetings—by the Church in Babylon, but 
by the co-elect, a feminine adjective, to 


THE FPIRSE (EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER. 163 


which the literal reader would naturally 
supply the word woman or /ady. In fact 
some expositors have adopted this in- 
terpretation and suppose that St Peter 
sends the salutation in the name of his 
wife, elect together with himself—an in- 
terpretation rejected by the common 
sense of Christians, and too unreason- 
able to need refutation; for who could 
imagine that he should name his wife 
on such an occasion, or speak of her as 
co-elect in Babylon? This expression 
must be accepted as a mystical designa- 
tion of the Christian community, dwelling 
in a city which the Apostle styles Baby- 
lon, the head-quarters of idolatrous wor- 
ship, the abode of antichristian and per- 
secuting powers; such as Babylon was in 
the times of the prophets, to whose voice 
St Peter was ever listening; such as 
Rome, and Rome alone, was in his own 
time. What could be more natural than 
that the Christians of Rome should send 
such a greeting to their co-elect brethren, 
just at a time when the “ vanward clouds 
of evil days” were gathering thickly and 
threatening to burst over both? 

But would the designation be under- 
stood by those to whom it was addressed? 
Of course if explanation were needed it 
would at once be given by the bearer of 
the Epistle; but we know for certain that 
the inhabitants of Asia Minor became 
familiarly acquainted with the expression 
before the close of the first century, 
and we must therefore admit as pro- 
bable that, when the Revelation of St John 
first reached them, it found them prepared 
to receive the name of Babylon as sym- 
bolically designating Rome. We may 
safely assume that the great majority of 
commentators are right in the interpre- 
tation of the name Babylon, which is 
given in the commentary on the Reve- 
lation in this volume. The Christians 
must have had constant occasion to refer 
to the imperial city as the central hold 
of idolatry and persecution; and they 
might naturally use language which would 
not expose them to Gentile indignation. 

St Peter indeed appears in this clause to 
have intentionally used very guarded ex- 
pressions. The term “‘co-elect,” as applied 
either to an individual or a Church, has 
no parallel in Scripture or in early Chris- 
tian writers. It would not be understood 
by any heathen who might hear or read 


it; nor give occasion to a charge of dis- 
loyalty to the Empire: a charge equally 
perilous to the Christians of Asia Minor 
and to those of Rome. It had moreover 
a peculiar suitableness in an Epistle ad- 
dressed to Christians who had been con- 
verted by St Paul. It would remind 
them that the Church in which St Peter 
was residing and in whose name he spoke, 
owed its origin probably, and certainly 
its full development, to St Paul their own 
Apostle. ‘‘Fellow elect” in all senses, 
fellows in the Divine purpose and fore- 
knowledge, elect together from heathen- 
ism and Judaism, and brought to the 
knowledge and realization of their elec- 
tion by the same instrumentality. This 
is in fact one more point supporting the 
view insisted upon throughout these 
pages, that St Peter was specially intent 
upon confirming the Churches in their 
acceptance and maintenance of Pauline 
doctrines. 

But it will be said, late critics are all 
but unanimous in upholding the literal 
sense. We are however dealing here not 
with authorities, but with reasons: were 
we indeed to listen to authorities we might 
argue fairly that the testimony of Fathers 
nearly contemporary with the writer, and 
certainly competent witnesses to the be- 
lief of those who received the Epistle, 
would be entitled to preference over 
views founded on conjecture or ques- 
tionable interpretations. We might fur- 
ther argue that the opponents of the old 
view were certainly influenced in the first 
place by strong party feelings. Calvin’, 
the first maintainer of the modern view, 
says that the old interpretation is “a 
stronghold of popery;” a statement 
which is at once controversially dangerous 
in reference to Romanists, who would 
justly claim the support of all Christian 
antiquity, not to speak of internal evi- 
dence, in their favour, and subversive of 
his own position ; for who would attach 
weight to an argument suggested by 
such a consideration? Luther, whose 
vigorous intellect guided him safely, felt 


1 Even Calvin admitted that St Peter may have 
died at Rome: see ‘Instit.’ Iv. ch. 6, § 15, 
‘«Propter scriptorum consensum non pugno quin 
illic mortuus esset.” On the feeling which af- 
fected the judgment of some modern critics see 
Hilgenfeld’s remarks quoted further on in note 1, 
p. 66. 


L2 


164 


that it would give a vantage-ground to 
his bitter opponents were he to forsake 
the old view, and he maintained it fear- 
lessly. In fact there is nothing in this 
closing salutation like an assumption of 
authority, much less of supremacy. St 
Peter does not speak in his own name, 
nor in the name of the Apostolic body, 
to which he never alludes as recognising 
his authority or even primacy, but simply 
conveys the salutations of the Christian 
body, of which every member is entitled 
to the highest of all designations—one 
of the Elect of God. We must also ob- 
serve that among the latest commenta- 
tors some of highest repute for critical 
discernment and absence of party feel- 
ing’ accept the old tradition as well 
founded both on external evidence and 
internal grounds. 


§5. CHARACTERISTICS OF THIS EPISTLE. 


We first remark the extreme simplicity 
of the general structure. It is divided 
broadly, at the 11th verse of the 2nd 
chapter, into two sections. The first 
presents us with a portraiture of the 
Christian in his high privileges, elect by 
the Divine will, in full possession of the 
means of salvation, animated by a new 
life in virtue of his regeneration, over- 
flowing with spiritual emotions, rcoted in 
faith, abounding in hope, full of unfeigned 
fervent love, especially developed in the 
relationships of the new family; we have 
the dogmatic truths of the pre-existence, 
the divinity, the majesty, of the Head 
of the Church set before us with a vivid- 
ness and completeness unsurpassed in 
the sacred writings, while the Church 
stands out as a temple of which every 
vtone is instinct with spiritual life, the 
home and realization of the ideal Israel, 
ever present to the mind of God’s heralds 
and interpreters, in which the old people 
became a true spiritual people, and those 
who had been for ages wholly alien were 
made full partakers of all blessings, 
brought out of the darkness of heathen- 
ism into marvellous light, shewing forth 
the praises and thanksgivings which attest 
their union with each other in Christ. 

In the following section, to the close of 
the Epistle, the Apostle dwells in detail 


1 E.g. Ewald, Thiersch, Mason, Wieseler, 
Schott, &c. See note 2, p. 56. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


upon the duties which spring from that new 
relationship, with special reference to the 
temptations to which at that time all 
classes of his converts were exposed. 
In the foremost and central place we find 
the inculcation of purity’ as the condition 
of victory, both in the desperate struggle 
between the flesh and the spirit (ii. 11), 
and in the great work assigned to Chris- 
tians of evangelizing the Gentile world 
(ii. 12, see note). Then come in order 
the duties of Christians as subjects and 
citizens (ii. 1317), recalling the exhorta- 
tions of St Paul, but dwelling with pe- 
culiar force upon the possible abuse of 
Christian liberty—a point urged else- 
where by the younger Apostle, but here 
introduced with singular aptness in refer- 
ence to civil and political subordination. 
Next come exhortations to Christians 
in a state of servitude, again reminding 
us, and doubtless recalling to the readers’ 
ininds, the exhortation of St Paul in the 
Epistle to the Ephesians, but having one 
most impressive peculiarity. In that 
Epistle St Paul dwells on the relation 
of all classes to Christ, and on the 
future reward; St Peter, in his special 
capacity as “‘witness of the sufferings of 
Christ’,” fixesattention upon Christ as the 
one example of all Christians, especially 
of those who are called upon to suffer in 
His name and for His sake, and who are 
thus made true followers of Him who by 
His death accomplished the redemption 
of man. Wives and husbands next re- 
ceive counsels and admonitions, those to- 
the former based on their adoption into 
the family of Sarah, to the latter with 
special reference to the new inheritance 
of which husbands and wives are equally 
partakers, and to the development of their 
new spiritual life in common prayer. 
Then follows a singularly complete 
and condensed summary of the duties of 
men called to inherit a common blessing’, 
and warnings against undue terror and 
despondency, remarkable not only for 
force and persuasiveness, but for their 
combination with a survey of the deepest 
mysteries of grace, with a presentation of 
the Saviour’s work on earth and in the 
unknown region of spirits, and of His 


1 See Dean Church, ‘The Gifts of Civilizs. 
tion,’ p. 134. 

2 See note on ch. v. 1. 

3 See note on iii. 8. 


PHE FIRST MEPISTEE 


present exaltation to dominion over all 
the powers of the universe’. The same 
strain of exhortation to all Christian good 
works, mingled and blended with refer- 
ences to present or impending afflic- 
tions, and to the mighty truths of Reve- 
lation, is preserved to the end of the 4th 
chapter. It is followed in the 5th by 
an admonition to the leaders of the 
Christian community, whose position is 
at once defined and limited, as sharing 
the duties and prerogatives of the minis- 
try with the Apostle himself (who claims 
but to be their fellow presbyter), and who 
are strongly warned against their special 
temptation to undue assumption of lord- 
ship. The whole is wound up with exhor- 
tations, and warnings, remarkable for in- 
tense concentration, and with an ascrip- 
tion which presents in the most condense 
and completest form the claims of the 
Father as the source, and of the Son as 
the channel of all spiritual strength and 
life. 

With a salutation corresponding in 
brevity and completeness to that which 
introduces the Epistle, St Peter closes 
what he humself describes as a drief sum- 
mary of Christian doctrine and admoni- 
tion, once more and emphatically en- 
joining perseverance in the true grace of 
God, of which his readers had already 
been made partakers; taking occasion 
to name two persons, Silvanus, well 
known to ali as the old fellow worker of 
St Paul, and St Mark, an attendant of 
that Apostle both at the commence- 
ment, and towards the close of his 
career, and then commending all to the 
peace which is in Christ. 

When we consider the purport and 
bearings of the Epistle, as thus briefly in- 
dicated, and look more closely into each 
portion of it, endeavouring to realize the 
character and intentions of the inspired 
writer, certain points, sometimes strangely 
overlooked, sirike us with exceeding dis- 
tinctness and force. 

We observe that not only does St Peter, 
like St Paul and indeed all inspired 
teachers, give equal prominence to the 
duties and the vrivileges of Christians, 
to dogma and to practice, but that he 
keeps them throughout in the closest 
imaginable connection. In this we find, 


¥ tii, 18—22. See further on in this §. 


GENERAL OF PETER. 165 
not a point of difference between the two 
Apostles, but a remarkably vivid illustra- 
tion of the principle common to both. 
Not one thought connected with the 
mystery of salvation is presented without 
an instant and emphatic reference to 
what a Christian ought to feel and what 
he ought to do. No place in the spiritual 
temple is so humble that he who holds it 
has not before him the loftiest sphere of 
spiritual action and thought. Injunc- 
tions which touch the heart most power- 
fully are impressed upon us as we con- 
template the eternal glory, the manifesta- 
tions of Christ’s love: Christ’s power and 
majesty flash out most vividly as we follow 
His workings in the heart of the slave. 

This characteristic of the Epistle re- 
quires close and repeated study to ap- 
preciate duly, but it forces itself upon 
the mind and works upon the feelings of 
all who read with open and devout hearts. 
If among Christian teachers St Peter 
ranks as one thoroughly and conspi- 
cuously practical, it is because he is 
thoroughly spiritual and evangelical. 
Christ suffering is at once the example 
and the salvation of believers, Christ in 
glory at once the object of devout con- 
templation and the exceeding great re- 
ward of His followers. Among commen- 
tators, who have brought this aspect of 
St Peter's teaching to bear upon the con- 
science and life of Christians, Archbishop 
Leighton stands foremost, a man who 
himself combined the resources of learn- 
ing with the truest and most vivid appre- 
ciation of the lowliest graces and loftiest 
gifts of God’s people. 

But one characteristic, not in fact dif- 
ferent, but yet distinct, from this har- 
monious intertwining of doctrine and 
practice, has yet to be considered. We 
refer to the very remarkable comprehen- 
siveness of St Peter’s representation of 
the work of Christ and the privileges of 
His Church, and the extreme complete- 
ness and conciseness of his statements, 
both as regards doctrine and practice. 
Thus for instance when he brings before 
us the mystery of salvation, he at once 
points out that it is the end of the faith 
which is fixed intently upon Christ and 
developed in perfect love and unspeak- 
able joy: but he does not rest there ; he 
directs our thoughts to the ages past ; 
there he sees, and makes us see, the 


166 


Spirit of Christ—thus regarded as eter- 
nally coexisting in the Godhead—dwell- 
ing as giver of life in the prophets, dis- 
tinct from their own spirit, informing 
and enlightening them, and making them 
feel themselves to be, what the Church 
has ever acknowledged them to be, the 
channeis and agents of a salvation, which 
they and the Angels contemplate with 
intense interest and unwearied admira- 
tion. This point, though according with 
all Apostolic teaching, is in its form and 
development peculiar to St Peter. See 
note on i. 10. 

For other instances of complete and 
condensed statement we may refer the 
reader to notes on chh. i. 4, il. 17, il. 
8,18, 22;c1V.03), 19, V-nzO; 

Here we would however call special 
attention to the bearing of this point 
upon the most obscure, but certainly 
most deeply interesting passage in the 
whole Epistle, iii. 1&3—22. The Apostle 
sets before us Christians undergoing every 
species of trial and persecution, and calls 
upon them to defend the truth fearlessly 
by reasoning, and above all by the mani- 
festation of genuine Christian principles 
andentire blamelessness of life (vv.13--17). 
He points at once, as before in addressing 
servants, to the example of Christ’s suffer- 
ing ; and then, having Christ thus present 
to his mind, he follows Him from the 
scene of that suffering into the inter- 
mediate state: he fills up the gap be- 
tween the death on the Cross and the 
Resurrection; and he gives us a glimpse, 
not an obscure glimpse, into the interval 
passed by the human spirit of our Lord 
in the unknown realms of the departed. 
He sees and hears Him preaching, and 
singles out, as special objects of that 
preaching, the multitudinous souls who 
in every stage of disobedience had been 
swept from the earth at the Deluge—thus, 
as ever, bringing the past and greatest 
judgments to bear upon present trials 
and future accomplishment. In this 
representation St Peter stands, so to 
speak, alone’: other passages of Holy 
Scripture point in the same direction, 
but to him it was given to indicate a part 
of Christ’s work, which was appreciated 
must thoroughly by the greatest teachers 

1 For a corresponding notice in a speech of 


St Peter, see Introduction t. the Acts, p. 340. 
Cf. Eph. iv. 9. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


of the early Church, and which has 
a special interest for minds now 
anxiously exercised by questionings 
touching the condition of disembodied 
spirits. But St Peter deals with it, ac- 
cording to his usual system of complete 
statement, as a link between the work 
done on earth and the following glories: 
the Resurrection, the Ascension, and the 
culmination of all that had been antici- 
pated by prophets, the Session on the 
right hand of God, the inauguration of 
the everlasting kingdom of Him to whom 
the highest created powers are ministers 
and slaves. It is the same St Peter 
who, in the Gospel of St Mark written 
certainly under his influence, and in his 
speeches recorded in the Acts, ever re- 
verts to the first announcements of 
Gospel truths, and points onward to the 
accomplishment of all in the conversion 
of the world and the manifestation of 
the kingdom of God. 


EVIDENCES OF AUTHENTICITY. 
A. EXTERNAL EVIDENCE. 


§ 6. 


In the case of a writing, which is ad- 
mitted by all critics to have been ranked 
among those whose authenticity was un- 
questioned in the early Church, it might 
suffice to refer to the brief but conclu- 
sive statements of Eusebius ‘H. E.’ m1. 
25. 3, and to a few passages from the 
most ancient Fathers upon which the 
statement rests, or by which it is con- 
firmed. 

But independently of the advantage 
of having a ready and, to unprejudiced 
minds, a conclusive answer to cavilling 
objections, a somewhat full inquiry into 
the writings of the Fathers, which bear 
upon this point, may serve to shew, not 
only the general reception of the Epistle 
in the first and second centuries, but the 
deep impression which it made upon 
those who best represent the mind of 
early Christendom. 

The notice in the second Epistle of 
St Peter, iii. 1, is admitted, even by those 
who impugn the authenticity of that 
Epistle, to be conclusive as to the fact 
that this one was known and generally 
accepted at the beginning of the 2nd 
century, the latest time which critics as- 
sign for the composition of the second 
Epistle. Accepting, in common with all 


THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER. 


the Churches of Christendom, that Epistle 
as genuine, on grounds which will be 
stated in the Introduction to it, we have 
the highest possible attestation, that of 
the Apostle himself. 

We learn from Eusebius’ that Papias 
of Hierapolis quoted this Epistle in 
writings no longer extant. Now Papias, 
as we learn from Irenzus, Vv. 33. 4, was 
“4 hearer of John, and a companion of 
Polycarp®.” The statement is conclusive 
as to the reception of the Epistle in that 
district of Asia Minor to which it was 
specially addressed. 

But passing on to those Fathers whose 
works are in our hands, and who are the 
best representatives of the early Church, 
we find a remarkable series of testimo- 
nies, whether we turn to the city, from 
which, as we have argued, the Epistle 
was sent, or to those communities to 
which it was addressed. It must always 
be remembered in consulting the earliest 
Fathers for information that it was not 
their custom to quote any books of the 
New Testament with scrupulous accuracy, 
or to name the writers. In addressing 
heathens such a process would have been 
utterly useless, in addressing Christians 
familiar with the Apostolic writings they 
would seem to have deemed it needless. 
What we do find in the case of those 
portions of Scripture, which are accepted 
‘as genuine by the most unscrupulous 
critics, are allusions, adaptations of strik- 
ing thoughts and utterances, words and 
sentences embedded, so to speak, in ex- 
hortations or addresses to the heart and 
conscience of Christians, indications of 
familiarity with the works so noticed 
both on the part of the writers and of 
those to whom they were writing. If we 
bear this in mind we shall find, as the 
result of careful inquiry, that, compared 
with any other portion of equal extent, 
we have a most unusual quantity of such 
allusions in reference to this Epistle, suf- 


1 This notice of Papias is of great importance. 
Eusebius, ‘H. E.’ 11. 15, says that, according to 
Papias, St Peter mentions Mark in his first Epis- 
tle, which he wrote in Rome itself, and that he 
calls Rome Babylon, metaphorically. See also 
Eus. ‘H. E.’ 111. 25. 

2 This statement, so far as regards St John, 
has been questioned, but abundant proof of its 
credibility is given by Bishop Lightfoot; see his 
two articles on Papias in the ‘Contemporary 
Review,’ 1875. 


167 


ficient, if not to convince those who start 
with a fixed opinion of its irreconcilable- 
ness with their own theories, yet to satisfy 
all other critics, however free and bold in 
their inquiries, of its acceptance by the 
early Church. 

Rome, for instance, is represented most 
perfectly by St Clement. Addressing 
the Corinthians he abounds, as might be 
expected, in allusions to the Pauline E- 
pistles. Yet if we apply the broad test 
of indices, compiled, as in the edition 
of Gebhardt and Harnack, without any 
view to controversy, we find in that 
Epistle no less than seventeen passages 
bearing more or less satisfactory indica- 
tions of familiarity with St Peter’s words 
and thoughts, a larger number in propor- 
tion than even the references to Romans 
(18), to 1 Cor. (23), 2 Cor. (5), Gal. (6), 
Eph. (12): larger even than to the Epi- 
stle to the Hebrews, with which, as is 
well known, the mind of St Clement 
was so thoroughly impregnated that 
critics of high authority have attributed 
to him its authorship. Nor is this ge- 
neral impression materially weakened 
when we examine the references in detail. 
Some of these passages are cited in the 
following commentary, see notes on chh. 
1. 16, 19, li. 21; they leave a distinct 
impression that the writer had St Peter’s 
Epistle present to his mind, and had 
reason to believe that it must have been 
known to his readers. There are two 
references to. 2 Pets iJ\113) 15, tin the 
newly-discovered portion of St Clement’s 
Epistle. See §§ trx. and Lxt. 

The only other writer of very early 
date who represents in any sense the 
Church of Rome is Hermas. In his 
well-known, but fanciful work, the ‘Shep- 
herd,’ very few clear quotations are found 
from any books of the New Testament. 
His vague and inaccurate style, both as 
regards thought and the expression of 
thought, would seem incompatible with 
what is called diplomatic exactitude. 
Still the traces of familiarity with this 
Epistle are numerous and tolerably clear. 
He adopts figures of speech common 
in St Peter, expresses doctrinal views in 
similar language, and though he cannot 
be relied upon as an independent autho- 
rity, he must be regarded as one whose 
notices harmonize with those which, as 
all admit, in the course of the next cen- 


168 INTRODUCTION TO 


tury prove the universal reception of this 
Epistle by the Churches of Christendom. 

We turn to the East; to those Fathers 
who represent the Churches of Asia 
Mino. most completely. There we have 
Positive and most important results. Of 
ul the early Fathers none stand higher 
‘n character and position, none are en- 
iitled to, or have received, more reverence 
than Polycarp', the faithful disciple of 
5t John, saint and martyr, Bishop of 
Smyrna at the close of the first cen- 
tury, a man who won the crown of life 
promised in the book of Revelation, 
ii. 10, to him who in the hour of trial 
should ‘tbe faithful unto death.” Now 
in the Epistle of that great Bishop ad- 
dressed to the Philippians there are quo- 
tations from our Epistle so distinct and 
so accurate, that no critic questions the 
fact. Their only resource is a reckless, 
and, we must add, futile attempt to dis- 
prove the authenticity of Polycarp’s E- 
pistle, in spite of all the strongest imagi- 
nable attestation to its unquestioned 
reception in early ages. The reader 
need but glance at the passages from that 
Epistle referred to in this Commentary 
or conspicuously marked in the margin 
of the editions of Bishop Jacobson, of 
Hefele, and of Gebhardt and Harnack, 
to be satisfied that St Polycarp, the dis- 
ciple of St John, the staunch follower 
-and admirer of St Paul, dwelt with spe- 
cial earnestness upon the teaching of St 
Peter in our Epistle’. 

We need not discuss the question 


1 On Polycarp see the exhaustive article by 
Bp. Lightfoot in the ‘Contemporary Review,’ 
May, 1875; he deals thoroughly with the in- 
ternal as well as external proofs of the authen- 
ticity of this Epistle. The date of Polycarp’s 
death has been lately established, in a manner 
satisfactory to all critics (e.g. Hilgenfeld, Lip- 
sius, and E. Renan), by inscriptions of which a 
full account has been given by M. Waddington. 
It must have taken place between A.D. 154 and 
A.D. 156. We know from Polycarp’s own state- 
ment that he had then been 86 years a Christian ; 
and he was probably not much less than roo years 
old. We have thus a practically contemporary 
testimony to the reception of our Epistle in Asia 
Minor. See the note in Vol. 11. p. 163 of ‘ Pa- 
tres Apostolici,’ Gebhardt and Harnack, and 
Bp. Lightfoot, Le 

? It is somewhat remarkable that Polycarp 
has a larger number of passages evidently taken 
from this Epistle than from any of the Pauline 
Epistles. This shews the peculiarly strong im- 
pression which it had made upon the minds of 
Christians in Asia Minor. 


whether Justin Martyr had read this 
Epistle. It is well known that in ad- 
dressing heathens and unconverted Jews 
that writer had no occasion for quoting 
Christian works, and that the evidence 
of his familiarity with the Gospels and 
the Pauline Epistles rests on deductions 
rather than on positive data. Yet traces 
there are—scarcely less distinct than 
those which in other cases have satisfied 
most critics—of familiarity with our 
Apostle’s teaching and language. With- 
out claiming him as a witness we hold 
that his testimony is far from adverse 
to the general reception of our Epistle 
in his time. 

In the second and early part of the 
third centuries we have a host of un- 
questioned and unquestionable attesta- 
tions. Foremost stands Irenzeus, a man 
representing both the East and the 
West. Born in Asia Minor, and educated 
under Polycarp, Presbyter and, after 
Pothinus of the same great Johannine 
school, Bishop of the Church of Lyons, 
well known at Rome where he repre- 
sented as ambassador the Churches of 
Gaul, Irenzus combines every claim 
upon our acceptance of his testimony ; 
and that testimony is positive and con- 
clusive. His quotations are clear and 
copious: in fact they are admitted as 
such by all critics. But in Irenzeus we 
have, in all questions of Scriptural canon- 
icity, the authoritative testimony of the 
whole Church. 

Were any adverse testimony’ from 
writers of the second century alleged, it 
might be worth while to adduce Clement 
of Alexandria, Tertullian and Ongen 
as witnesses; it certainly is worth ob- 
serving that each of these writers proves 
that he and his readers were not less 
familiar with our Epistle—which they 
quote repeatedly and either expressly, 


1 The only exception is the .{uratonan Canon, 
which omits the Epistles of St Peter in its list 
of canonical books. Routh, and the critics 
whom he quotes, account for the omission by 


‘the fragmentary and imperfect state of the docu- 


ment in the portion where the notice ought to 
have occurred. See ‘Rel. S.’ Tom. 1. p. 424. 
We have in fact, to use Bp. Lightfoot’s words, 
‘fan unskilful Latin translation from a lost 
Greek original,” and ‘‘the extant copy of this 
translation has been written by an extremely 
careless scribe, and is full of clerical errors. 

See ‘Cont. R.’ 1875, October, p. 836. 


SHE-FIRST EPISTLE 


or what is of equal, if not higher import- 
ance, in half-unconscious allusions—than 
with the Evangelists and the writings of 
St Paul. Origen indeed states positively, 
in speaking of doubts raised as to the 
authenticity of the Second Epistle, that 
the first was acknowledged by all as 
genuine: he quotes it frequently, and 
especially in reference to the most cha- 
racteristic points in the Apostle’s teach- 
ing, ¢.g. ch. iil, 18—arz. 

The testimony of the early Church 
is summed up by Eusebius, ‘H. E.’ m1. 
23.3. He places it among those writings 
about which no question was ever raised, 
no doubt ever entertained by any portion 
of the Catholic Church’. 


B. INTERNAL EVIDENCE. 


This depends upon a variety of points, 
to most of which attention will be di- 
rected throughout the following Com- 
mentary. Here it may suffice to notice, 
(1) The indications of personal character, 
brightness of hope, fervour of love, 
strong personal attachment to the Sa- 
viour, singular humility, shewn—as in 
the Gospel of St Mark written, as most 
critics admit, under his influence, if not 
personal superintendence —by a stu- 
dious omission of all reference to his 
unquestioned position as foremost among 
the Apostles, nay, even to the special 
marks of Divine approbation conferred 
upon him by our Lord*®. (2) The har- 
mony of his teaching, and mode of 
citing the ancient Scriptures, with what 
we have remarked in his speeches re- 
corded in the Acts, a point of great im- 
portance, on which see ‘Introduction 
to Acts,’ p. 339f. (3) The notices of the 
constitution of Churches which he ad- 
dressed ; it is evidently the same as that 
with which they were left by St Paul. 
Presbyters are recognised as the govern- 
ing body in each community. Subordi- 
nate officers, probably deacons, are men- 
tioned, but not so distinctly as to imply 
their general existence as a separate 
order; see notes on ch. v.1 f. If in any 
cities Bishops as distinct from Presbyters 
were already appointed, they are not so 
addressed or designated in this Epistle. 


1 The external testimony is fairly stated by 
Davidson, who holds it to be most satisfactory. 
‘Introduction to N. T.’ Vol. 111. 

2 See notes on ii. 4, and v. 2. 


GENERAL: OF PETER. 169 


But there is no reasonable ground for 
doubting that within a very few years 
from the date of this Epistle, if not in 
every Church, certainly in all the most 
important Churches of Asia Minor, the 
powers, first exercised by presbyters col- 
lectively or individually, devolved upon 
Bishops, most probably under the influ- 
ence and authority of St John’. In fact, 
to whatever cause it may be attributed, 
the Epistles of Polycarp and Ignatius, the 
contemporary evidence of Hegesippus, 
and the concurrent notices in all extant 
writings of the second century, prove 
the existence and recognised position 
of Bishops as depositaries of Apostolic 
authority. The notices in this Epistle 
belong beyond controversy to the pri- 
mitive and as yet undeveloped consti- 
tution of the Church. (4) Arguments 
from style, usage of words, correspond- 
ences with other contemporary portions 
of Scripture would require a special trea- 
tise to deal with them adequately. It 
may be hoped that the reader of this 
Commentary will find sufficient to satisfy 
him, and that the investigation, if pur- 
sued fairly and thoroughly, will issue in 
the confirmation of all preceding argu- 
ments, and others of a similar character 
which have long satisfied unbiassed 
critics. It will be felt to be certain that 
in this Epistle we have the teaching of 
that Apostle who is at once the special 
representative of the original Apostolic 
body, and, together with St Paul, con- 
spicuous among the chief founders and 
teachers of the Christian Church. 


§ 7. BEARING ON THE STATE OF THE 
APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 


This Epistle, if we admit the points 
here advanced and defended, gives us a 
lively illustration of the relative position 
of the Apostolic body represented by 
St Peter, and of the Apostle of the Gen 
tiles: that Apostle whose vast field of 


1 For this we have the very early and positive 
statements of Clem. Alex. ap. Eus. ‘H. E.’ Ill. 
23, and Tertullian, ‘adv. Marc.’ Iv. 5. See also 
‘Const. Apost.’ vil. c. xlvi. The passages are 
quoted in the commentary on the book of Reve- 
lation, note F on vw. 20, ch. i. We may infer 
from the Epistle of Clement of Rome that a 
similar course was pursued at Rome and Corinth 
by the Apostles who founded or organised their 
churches; see ‘Cl. R. ad Cor.’ c. 44. 


170 


labour, occupied independently of the 
original body, might be held to suggest, 
if not to justify, views which of late years 
have been vigorously maintained, and 
have exercised a deleterious influence 
upon the leaders of opinion in some 
quarters of the Church, 

What we have seen is a distinct re- 
cognition by St Peter of the soundness 
and completeness of the younger Apostle’s 
teaching, a recognition which at that time 
was most important, if not indispensable 
to the general reception of that Apostle’s 
claims. We may pethaps be justified in 
attributing to this recognition the fact that 
those Epistles, which are regarded bysome 
critics as antagonistic to Petrine doctrine, 
were accepted by all the Churches of 
Europe and Asia Minor, in short by all 
Churches represented by the early Fathers, 
e.g. Polycarpand Irenzus, to whom we owe 
the strongest attestations to the reception 
of the Canonical Scriptures. Nor is this 
recognition less important as completely 
cutting away the grounds on which 
modern speculation has attempted to 
overthrow the authority of the elder 
Apostles, representing them as imper- 
fectly imbued with the true Christian 
principles which St Paul consistently 
and powerfully upheld. The doctrines of 
salvation by faith and grace, and the 
supremacy of God’s will, in fact all 
Divine truths vindicated by St Paul, are 
declared so plainly by our Apostle that 
—as we have seen—some critics mainly 
for that reason have affirmed that this 
Epistle could nothave beenpenned by any 
one not belonging to the Pauline school. 
This Epistle presents us with the clearest 
possible proof of the fundamental accord- 
ance of principle and the thorough unity 
of spirit in those two Apostles, in whom 
the earliest and best representatives of 
Christian life recognised “the most 
righteous and most noble columns” 
of the Church’. 

It may be objected that some doc- 
trines specially characteristic of St Paul 
have no certain or distinct place in this 
Epistle; that of justification by faith 
alone being the most conspicuous in- 
stance. To this a satisfactory answer may 
be given. The Epistle is much shorter 
than either Romans or Galatians, in 


1 See Introduction to Acts and further on at 
the close of this §. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


which alone St Paul explicitly sets it 
forth, having special reasons for dw 
upon the doctrine in opposition to those 
who maintained the sufficiency of the 
law. It would not indeed have been 
possible within so small a compass to 
develope or even to state every a a 
cation of the central truth, to whic 
common with all essential doctrines, then 
of justification by faith must be referred’. 
Now that truth of truths, vital union 
with Christ, and hearty reception of the 
inseparable truths of atonement and re- 
demption, stands out with singular dis- 
tinctness in the highly wrought repre- 
sentation of the Church as a spiritual 
temple, and with as singular complete- 
ness in the summary statements of doc- 
trine which have been noted above as 
specially characteristic of this Apostle. 
Had there indeed been any repugnance 
to the form in which the great doctrine 
of justifying faith was preached by St 
Paul, assuredly St Peter would not have 
hesitated to indicate his apprehension 
that it was liable to be misunderstood 
and misapplied. He was not likely to 
be less outspoken than St James; nor, . 
had such been his feeling, would he have 
withheld the warning which he after- 
wards gave, probably elicited by Antino- 
mian teaching, in his second epistle *. 

In conclusion we would briefly call 
attention to these facts. The Epistle is 
admitted in its principles, its form and 
substantial bearings of doctrine, to be at 
once Petrine and Pauline; that at least 
is the outcome of most careful, and, it 
must be added, most jealous scrutiny. 
We would simply add that the unity of 
spirit thus manifested accords with all the 
notices of the mutual relations between 


1 See note on v. 12. At present it is a very 
common and exceedingly mischievous habit to 
assert or suggest that points of fact, or of doc- 
trine, not expressly stated in any book in the 
N.T., are unknown to the writer. Applied to any 
one of St Paul’s shorter Epistles, indeed to any 
except Romans and Galatians, the results would 
be confessedly misleading. Applied to this 
Epistle, shorter than Galatians or Ephesians, it 
is used to justify the astounding assertion that 
St Peter knew not the deepest and most funda- 
mental principles of the Christian faith. That 
assertion is the more remarkable, inasmuch as it 
is urged most vehemently by critics who reject 
the central truth on which the doctrine specially 
in question rests. 

2 See note on 2 Pet. iii. 16, 


THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER. 


the two Apostles which are to be found 
(1) in St Paul’s own writings, (2) in the 
other books of the New Testament, speci- 
ally in the Acts of the Apostles, and (3) 
in Christian writers in all quarters of 
Christendom within the period when the 
Apostolic tradition is held by the sound- 
est critics to have been retained without 
intermixture or deterioration. 

(1) St Paul tells us (Gal. i. 18) that 
fifteen days of his visit to Jerusalem, the 
first after his conversion, were spent in 
personal intercourse with St Peter, pro- 
- bably in the same house, if not in 

St Peter’s own home; that on the next 
occasion of his visiting that city, at a 
crisis of exceeding interest and impor- 
tance, St Peter in common with the two 
Apostles who are equally calumniated, 
St John and St James, accepted his doc- 
trinal teaching as complete and sound, 
needing no addition and calling for no 
amendment’; that they gave him the 
right hand of fellowship, and distinctly 
recognised his peculiar position as called 
to evangelize the vast realms of hea- 
thenism ; and that on the solitary occa- 
sion when the two Apostles, each acting 
in accordance with his own position and 
temperament, stood out in open opposi- 
tion, St Paul had not to maintain a dif- 
ferent principle, but to appeal with full 
confidence to the deepest feelings of St 
Peter and to the identity of principles 
maintained by both. See Gal. ii 11f. 
Observe also the explicit affirmation by 
St Paul touching the entire correspond- 
ence between his teaching and that of 
the other Apostles, 1 Cor. xv. 11. 

(2) In the Acts (ch. xv. 7—9) we 
find St Peter, in exact accordance with 
these statements, vindicating the pro- 
ceedings of St Paul which had been 
assailed by the party which St Peter is 
said to have countenanced, and most 
materially influencing the decision of 
the Apostolic council which attested the 
soundness in the faith, and confirmed 
the authority, of the beloved Barnabas 
and Paul. It should be remembered 
that St Peter had himself been specially 
assailed by the representatives of the 
Pharisaic party after the Baptism of Cor- 
nelius ; see Acts xi. 2, 3. 


1 See Bishop Lightfoot’s note on Gal and 
our Introduction to Acts, p. 324, note 3 


171 


(3) The testimony of Polycarp, Ire- 
nzeus, Dionysius of Corinth, Clement of 
Alexandria, Tertullian and in short every 
Christian writer of the first three cen- 
turies, is beyond all question in perfect 
agreement with these utterances of in- 
spiration. Foremost and most distinct 
among them we have the words of St 
Clement of Rome, addressed, within some 
30 years, to a Church in which, if in 
any Church of Christendom, traces of 
the assumed antagonism of the two. 
Apostles might be looked for. Those 
words in part we have already quoted in 
the Introduction to the Acts, p. 326, note 
1, but cannot refrain from citing here at 
length as they now stand in the edition of 
Bryennios, and as they are accepted by 
Bishop Lightfoot and other critics. They 
convey the strongest imaginable attesta- 
tion to the judgment of the early Church 
touching the mutual relations of St Peter 
and St Paul. “But to pass from the an- 
cient examples let us come to those 
athletes who are very near to us in time: 
let us take the noble examples of our 
own generation. Owing to iealousy and 
envy the greatest and most righteous 
pillars (cf. Gal. i 9) were persecuted 
and suffered even unto death. Let us 
set before our eyes the good’ Apostles : 
Peter who, owing to unrighteous jea- 
lousy, endured not one or two but nu- 
merous sufferings, and thus, having borne 
witness as a martyr, departed to the 
abode of glory which was due to him. 
Owing to jealousy and strife Paul exem- 
plified the reward of patient endurance. 
Seven times he was a prisoner in chains, 
he was exiled, he was stoned, he preach- 
ed both in the east and in the west, and 
attained the noble renown of his faith, 
having taught righteousness to the whole 
world ; and finally having arrived at the 
boundary of the west, and borne witness 
as martyr before the governors, he was 
then released from the world, and de 
parted unto the holy place, having: be- 
come the greatest pattern of endurance.” 


1 The word is emphatic, in the special sense 
of kindliness and generosity, see 1 Pet. ii. 18, and 
cp. Grimm, ‘Lex. N.T.’ s.v. ‘‘arctiore sensu, 
benevolus.” Hence the appropriateness of the 
epithet in this passage, which inculcated such e& 
feeling as indispensable to peace; a point seem- 
ingly overlooked by editors, who have even pro- 
posed an alteration in the text. 


172 INTRODUCTION TO THE 


‘Clem. Rom. to the Corinthians,’ c. vi.’ 
These two Apostles are thus held up 
together as the two great examples for 
the imitation of all Christians, with spe- 


1 On this whole passage the reader should 
consult the notes of Bishops Jacobson and Light- 
foot, especially the Appendix by the latter. 
Readers interested in German speculations will 
do well to compare Hilgenfeld, who, both in his 
‘Introduction to the N. T.’ and in an article in 
his ‘Zeitschrift f. w. T.’ 1877, pp. 486—508, 
entirely disposes of the arguments alleged by 
Lipsius and other critics against the presence and 
martyrdom of St Peterin Rome. He twice ad- 
ministers the caution, which we have suggested 
above, p. 57, in reference to Calvin, against the 
blind and dangerous spirit of partizanship, which 
in this and other questions seriously damages the 
cause of truth, and gives a vantage-ground to 
Romish controversialists. 

3 Bishop Lightfoot has an important state- 
ment in the Appendix to his edition of the Epi- 
stle of St Clement. ‘‘In the close of the epistle 


FIRST EPISTLE OF PETER, 


cial reference to the maintenance of the 
unity of the Church and to the suppres- 
sion of all unseemly antagonism’*. 


mention is made of the bearers of the letter, two 
Romans, Claudius Ephebus and Valerius Bito. 
—These delegates are described as ‘ faithful and 
prudent men who have walked among us from 
youth unto old age unblameably’—they must 
have been close upon thirty years of age when 
St Paul first visited Rome. They must there- 
fore have had a direct personal knowledge of 
the relations between the two Apostles, St Peter 
and St Paul (supposing that St Peter also visited 
Rome, as I do not doubt that he did), and of the 
early history of the Roman Church.” We owe 
this among other facts of exceeding interest to 
the late discovery, by Archbp Bryennios, of the 
missing portion of St Clement’s Epistle. Bishop 
Lightfoot further adds, ‘‘to this theory (sc. the 
Tiibingen theory of antagonism between the 
teaching of the two Apostles) the Epistle of 
Clement, the one authentic document which has 
the closest bearing on the subject, gives a de 
cided negative.” 


THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF 


2 oe 


CHAPTER I. 


1 He blesseth God for his manifold spiritual 
graces: 10 shewing that the salvation in 
Christ is no news, but a thing prophesied of 
old: 13 and exhorteth them accordingly to a 
godly conversation, forasmuch as they are 
now born anew by the word of God. 


THE SALUTATION (i. 1, 2). 


Cuap. |. 1. Peter] In addressing Chris- 
tians the Apostle here calls himself by that 
name which was most precious to himself and 
most impressive for them, inasmuch as it was 
given to him by his Lord, Matt. xvi. 18. In 
the Second Epistle he uses the two names, 
Simon, or Symeon, Peter. 

an apostle} A Roman Catholic commen- 
tator (Estius) remarks, as an instance of 
modesty, that St Peter does not call himself 
the Prince of the Apostles. He might have 
also drawn the obvious inference that the 
Apostle neither claimed nor recognised any 
distinction of rank or authority between him- 
self and his colleagues. 

to the strangers...| Lit. ‘to the strangers, 
or sojourners, of the dispersion.” The word 
rendered ‘‘ strangers” means persons sojourn- 
ing for a brief season in a foreign land. See 
Note at the end of the Chapter. The question 
whether it here applies exclusively or chiefly to 
the Jews, or includes all believers, is of con- 
siderable importancefor the right understanding 
of the Epistle. There can be no doubt that the 
expression did primarily apply to Hebrews 
dispersed throughout the world, whether they 
were voluntary or involuntary exiles. But it is 
equally certain that the Apostles and intelli- 
gent Christians of the Apostolical age under- 
stood such designations in a wider and more 
spiritual sense. See Bp Lightfoot on Clem. 
Rom. ‘1 Cor.’ p. 32. They knew that Israel 
was a type of the Church, and that every one 
of its special privileges and peculiar circum- 
stances has a true and far more perfect fulfil- 
ment in Christians. These words, therefore, 
apply to all believers, Jews or Gentiles, whose 
true home, whose citizenship and conversation, 
is in heaven, and who, like their prototypes 
the patriarchs, are strangers and pilgrims upon 
earth. Hengstenberg (on Revelation xi. 13) 
Temarks that ‘‘ the words as here used include 
all Gentile converts, and exclude all unbeliev- 
ing Jews, for the Apostles always understand 


ETER, an apostle of Jesus 
Christ, to the strangers scattered 
throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappa- 
docia, Asia, and Bithynia, 
2 Elect according to the foreknow- 
ledge of God the Father, through 


the elect of God, even His Church, when they 
use words which, in their primary sense, be= 
longed to the people of Israel.” Thus too 
Grimm, ‘Lex. N. T.’ s.v., holds that the 
name is applied to Christians dispersed among: 
the Gentiles. Cf. John xi. 52. So also Hil- 
genfeld, ‘ Einl. p. 627. In this Church there 
is neither Jew nor Gentile, nor did St Peter, 
when he wrote this Epistle, admit or re- 
cognise any peculiarity of position or privi- 
leges in the converts of the circumcision. He 
was their Apostle, but, as such, it was his- 
special work to complete the fusion which 
had been commenced by his special ministry 
in the case of Cornelius. 

Pontus... Some commentators consider that 
the order in which these countries are named 
shews that the Apostle directed his Epistle to 
them. from the East. (Bengel and Steiger.) 
This is very doubtful. ‘The provinces are not 
geographically situate in an order correspond- 
ing to this enumeration. In that case, as 
Ewald observes, Cappadocia would have come 
first. It is possible that St Peter may have 
had in mind the route which his emissary 
would pursue, but that route was determined 
by considerations which we have no data to 
appreciate. His messenger may have gone by 
sea to Pontus, which had lately been made a 
Roman province (cf. Sueton. ‘ Nero,’ c. XVIII.), 
and thence to Galatia and Cappadocia, and 
afterwards proceeded to Ephesus, the capital of 
the province then called Asia, and thence to. 
Bithynia. In all these provinces would be 
found numerous Churches, planted by St 
Paul. See notes on Acts ii. 9 and xvi. 7. 


2. lect] (On the probable construction 
see Additional Note.) The question will of 
course be raised whether St Peter addresses 
all baptized and professing members of the 
Church, elect to the means of grace and to- 
the hope of glory, or those only who are elect 
unto final salvation. But it is clear that he 
speaks to all who require exhortation, re- 
proof and correction, and that he considers al} 


174 


L-Pa Pe Re 


[v. 2 


sanctification of the Spirit, unto obe- Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and 
dience and sprinkling of the blood of peace, be multiplied. 





to be in a state of salvation, but far from 
being assured of the same result. 

according, &c.| We have here the origin 
of election, viz. the foreknowledge of God the 
Father. It is a weighty question whether this 
expression necessarily implies that election de- 
pends upon personal qualities in individuals 
foreknown to God, or rather upon the use 
which they will make of the means of grace 
offered equally to all. This appears to have 
been generally the opinion of the early Fathers, 
and without an exception of the Eastern 
Church for ages. See Additional Note. The 
Latin Fathers, however, who are followed 
by the great majority of modern divines, 
especially by those who represent most faith- 
fully the tradition of the Western Church, held 
that foreknowledge is inseparable from pre- 
destination. As Augustine says, God foresees 
nothing of good which He does not effect. 
There is no difficulty so far as regards the 
general purposes of God with reference to His 
Church. That He foreknew, or that He pre- 
destined the gathering of the Church of the 
elect from Judaism and heathendom, is not a 
proposition which can be controverted or 
which could give offence. This we believe to 
be the meaning of the Apostle. It accords 
with one principal object which St Peter keeps 
in mind throughout this epistle, that of shew- 
ing the perfect harmony in doctrine between 
himself and St Paul. Cf. Introd. to Ephesians. 

. It must also be remembered that the cate- 

gories of time and space do not apply to 
God or to His eternal acts. Thus Dionysius 
Alex., ‘O pev Oeds €orw del, kat ovpmas 6 aiav 
€véatnkev OAos avT@ kai mapeotw- ap. Routh, 
*Rel. Sac.’ Iv. p. 442. It should suffice for 
His creatures to know that their salvation 
depends upon His infinite justice, which is 
absolutely identical with His love. 

through sanctification] Sanctification is the 
cause, condition, and means of the admission 
into the inheritance. The precise meaning of 
the word, in fact the sense in which it would 
naturally be understood by the Jewish, as well 
as Gentile converts, is separation from an evil 
world and dedication to God. (Hence W171) 
is explained W175 by the Rabbins. See Schoett- 
gen ‘Hor. Heb.’ 1. p. 487.) The expression 
is not without ambiguity as it may mean sanc- 
tification of the Spirit, bestowed by the Holy 
Ghost, or sanctification of the believer's spirit. 
This ambiguity may represent the certain truth 
that sanctification is the result of a complex 
work wrought by the Spirit on the consenting 
will.” 

N.B. Remark the force of the three pre- 
positions, (xara) in accordance with the fore- 
knowledge and eternal will of the Father, (ev) 


through or, more exactly, im the initiative act 
and the progressive course of spiritual sancti- 
fication, (cis) unto the effect and end of that 
election and work. Observe also that the word 
Sanctification (ayacpos) is used eight times by 
St Paul, but does not occur elsewhere in the 
Naw 

unto obedience and sprinkling| The end, so 
far as our actual state is concerned, is twofold. 
We are brought into a state of obedience, 
prompt and willing obedience to our Lord, 
and of purification from guilt by virtue of His 
atoning blood. It is perhaps singular that St 
Peter should make obedience precede thesprink- 
ling Since, however, obedience is the imme- 
diate result of the sanctifying work of the Spirit, 
this order may be taken to indicate that the 
first movement of the awakened will is to obey 
the call (cf. Acts ix. 6), and so to approach 
the cross, of the Redeemer. Obedience is 
therefore the first act, as well as the perma- 
nent characteristic of true faith. 

and sprinkling| The sprinkling of blood, ac- 
cording to the terms of the eternal Coverant, has 
the special effect of cleansing from the guilt of 
sin. It is applied to the conscience by the Spirit 
in Baptism; thus ‘Arise, and be baptized, 
and wash away thy sins,” Acts xxii. 16. The 
blood of the paschal lamb, and of other sacri- 
fices, especially of the heifer, typified this ex- 
piatory efficacy of Christ’s blood, and also the 
propitiation which it ensures: cf, Heb. ix. 13, 
14, 22. Our Lord expiated our sins by pour- 
ing out His blood, i. the life-blood of the 
human nature which He assumed, and fede- 
rally represented. At the same time, and by 
the same act, He propitiated the Father, in- 
asmuch as He then and there, on our behalf, 
and in our stead, exemplified the entire ful- 
filment of the fundamental principle of His 
Law, absolute, entire, all sacrificing love. Faith 
makes Christians partakers of that act, repre- 
sents and applies to the conscience the shed- 
ding of that blood; being thus sprinkled with 
it they have remission of sins and entire ace 
ceptance, for ‘‘God hath set Him forth to be 
a propitiation through faith in His blood, to 
declare His righteousness for the remission of 
sins that are past.” Rom. iii. 25. 

(‘Pavricpos, in the passive sense, the act 
of being sprinkled. Thus Bengel, passive quia 
obedienter admittitur aspersio.) 

Observe the mode in which each Person of 
the adorable Trinity is represented as concur- 
rently acting for our salvation, the Father 
foreknows, the Son atones, the Spirit applies 
the work of the Son to the conscience. 

Grace] St Peter, like St Paul, Rom. i. 7, 
and St Jude, combines the two beautiful salue 
tations of the Greeks (yaipe) and of the He- 





v. 3-] I. 


REFERER I: 


3 Blessed Ze the God and Father begotten us again unto a lively hope 


of our Lord Jesus Christ, which ac- by 


the resurrection of Jesus Christ 


cording to his tabundant mercy hath from the dead, 


prews (012), but gives to each the true and 
full Christian significance. Grace, that is not 
merely favour with man, and earthly joy, but 
spiritual blessing bestowed gratuitously by a 
loving Father (thus Theophylact and Ccu- 
menius); and peace, not merely security and 
tranquillity in temporal matters, but peace 
with God, peace in Christ accorded to those 
who were enemies to God, peace applied to 
the conscience by the Spirit, and pervading the 
whole existence of believers. Thus the Angel, 
who announced the Incarnation, saluted the 
Virgin, Hail thou who art highly favoured, or 
endued with grace, and thus our Lord saluted 
His disciples after the resurrection, Peace 
be unto you. St Peter adds ‘‘be multiplied,” 
an expression which has a peculiar fitness, 
for they to whom it was addressed were 
elect, called, and sanctified, and had there- 
fore the firstfruits of the Spirit, needing only 
continuance and increase. 

N.B. n’néuvGein is used in the New Tes- 
tament only by St Peter—in both epistles—and 
by St Jude; cf. Daniel iii. 31, LXX. St 
Polycarp uses it in the salutation of his Epis- 
tle to the Philippians. The same form is 
found in Rabbinical writers, quoted by Wet- 
stein; Sanhedrin f. 11. 2, Scribit fratribus 
filiis meridiei: pax vestra multiplicetur. 


3—12. St Peter now introduces the great 
subject of his epistle (a. 3—»:) with a thanks- 
giving for the privileges of Christians, sc. re- 
generation, living hope, a future inheritance 
and preservation unto final salvation. (4.6—g.) 
He passes on to the feelings which characterize 
true Christians in seasons of severe trial, such 
as were then afflicting them; they rejoice in 
sufferings which are needful for the attestation 
of faith, and by which it is fully developed, 
giving a sure earnest and foretaste of salva- 
tion. 


3—5. THANKSGIVING. 


3. Blessed, &c.] St Paul begins the second 
Epistle to the Corinthians and that to the 
Ephesians with the same form of words. If, 
as we believe, St Peter had seen one or both of 
those epistles, he must have adopted the words 
expressly to indicate the perfect harmony of 
feeling, as well as of doctrine between himself 
and the apostle of the Gentiles, an object 
which he had very specially at heart. See In- 
trod. §§ 2 and s. 

Father of our Lord Jesus Christ] Itis a 
peculiar characteristic of the Christian revela- 
tion that it makes God known to us in those 
persona relations upon which the economy of 
oul salvation is based. It is because the Father 





is the Father of our Saviour that we bear to 
Him the relation of adopted children, that He 
is our merciful, forgiving and loving Father. 

N.B. EvAoyyros in the New Testament is 
always used in speaking of God, evAoynpevos 
in speaking of man. 

which...hath begotten] Rather, who... 
begat. St Peter refers our regeneration 
to the act, by which Christ completed 
His work. ‘This passage teaches us (1) that 
the original cause of our regeneration is 
the will of the Father, determined solely 
by His own great mercy: thus St James 
‘‘of His own will begat He us,” and St Paul 
‘not for works of righteousness which we 
had done, but according to His mercy He 
saved us.” (2) That the effective cause, 
i.e. the agency by which that purpose was 
carried into effect, was the resurrection of 
Jesus Christ from the dead. In the same way 
as His death both represented, and virtually 
effected, the death of the old man in Christians, 
so His rising both represented, and assured, as 
a pledge and means, their resurrection from 
the death of sin, when being regenerate, they 
were bom again unto the life of Holiness. It 
was a pledge, inasmuch as He lived again unto 
righteousness, to become a sanctifying as well 
as justifying principle of life; it was the means, 
because He rose to take possession of His 
throne, there to receive, and thence to bestow, 
gifts upon men, that the Lord God might 
dwell among them. ‘He rose again for our 
justification; see note on Rom. iv. 25. Nay 
more, the whole Church is declared to have 
risen again in the resurrection of Christ, in 
virtue of that spiritual union which identifies 
Him with His members. That resurrection 
recommences, or is repeated in the regeneration 
of each Christian, it will be completed in the 
ultimate glorification of all true believers. 

N.B. This construction connects 6v avacra- 
oews With dvayevvjcas, not with (ocav,compare 
Rom. iv. 25, and this Ep. iii: 21. Thus Estius, 
Calvin, Huther. The other construction how= 
ever is preferred by CEcum., Luther, Bengel, 
Steiger, De Wette, &c., and it gives an excel- 
lent sense—the hope of the Christian lives and 
is quickened by the power of our Lord’s re- 
sutrection. 

lively hope] Or, a living hope, i.e. a hope 
having in it the principle of spiritual life, spring- 
ing as from a root, from the resurrection of 
our Lord, and producing the fruits of life. 
It has been often remarked that St Peter 
dwells with peculiar earnestness and frequency 
on the doctrine of the Resurrection, and on 
the hopes and blessings which it involves; and 
also that he loves the epithets, lively and living, 


175 


170 


4 To an inheritance incorruptible, 
and undefiled, and that fadeth not 
away, reserved in heaven # for you, 


and the mention of hope, so much so that a 
late commentator observes that if St John 
may be called the apostle of love, and St Paul 
of faith, our Peter is especially the preacher of 
hope, It is remarkable that the word ope 
does not occur in the synoptic gospels. Asa 
Christian grace it is derived from the Resur- 
rection. In fact in classical writers the word 
rendered Aope means simply expectation. 

(Bengel. Amat Petrus epitheton vivus, et 
mentionem spei. Thus also Pott and Steiger. 
Heidegger. (éca quia et fructus vite edit, et 
spes vite est et permanet.) 


4. To an inheritance} The Christian is 
born again not merely to the subjective, or 
inward, change from despair to living hope, 
but to the objective change from the mor- 
tality, corruptible. polluted, and withering, 
which he inherited from Adam, to the im- 
mortality incorruptible, not liable to disso- 
lution—undefiled, not subject to pollution— 
that fadeth not away, having in it the principle 
of eternal youth, which is his inheritance in 
Christ. Each word is emphatic and refers to 
a special blessing and privilege of the Saints in 
light. This redundance of epithets, with a 
remarkable fulness of spiritual meanings, is 
characteristic of St Peter. In each of these 
expressions there appears to be a tacit refer- 
ence to the temporal, and therefore typical, 
inheritance bestowed upon the people of the 
ancient covenant. 

reserved in heaven] ‘The ancient commen- 
tators infer from this that Christians are not 
to look forward to a state of millennial felicity 
on earth. The inference may be evaded, but 
it is obvious, natural, and in accordance with 
many important declarations of Holy Writ. 
The expression ‘‘reserved” is remarkable. 
It implies (Est.) that the care of God for His 
elect is from everlasting, and that in founding 
the heavens He reserveda portion for the inherit- 
ance of His children, not like Paradise open 
to the assaults of the evil one, but having sal- 
vation for its walls. Some have believed that 
the ancient Paradise was taken up into heaven 
at the Fall, and is there ‘‘ reserved” until the 
Second Advent, an opinion which, though fan- 
ciful and unfounded, typifies the great truth, 
that the paradisiacal state of bliss and innocence 
will be restored, and that the purposes of God 
remain unchanged. 

N.B. Thus Didymus, Theophylact, and 
(cumenius, who uses the strong expression 

vbadns 7 xtAtoerns droxaracracts ‘the mil- 
feeinarian restoration is purely fabulous.” The 
vehemence with which all the Fathers, from 
se third century downwards, attack all 
modifications of the millennarian doctrine is 


I“ RET ER 1 


[V. 4) 5- 


Who are kept by the power 
of God through faith unto salvation 
ready to be revealed in the last time. 





most remarkable. See especially S. Basi 
‘Ep.’ 263, c. 4, S. Greg. Naz. T. iz, p 
gz and gs, and Dionys. Alex. ap. Eus. 
CHE. Vil. ©. 2as The passages of the 
earlier Fathers are collected, and carefully 
examined by the Oxford translator of Ter- 
tullian, Vol. 1. p. 120. He holds that they 
generally, indeed without exception before 
Origen, believed in a Millennium, but not 
a carnal one, a spiritual reign of resuscitated 
saints preparatory to the entire fruition of the 
Godhead. It is difficult to reconcile that view 
either with such passages as this in Scripture, 
or with the statements of Hegesippus and 
Polycrates ap. Eus. ‘H. E.’ 111. c. 20 and V. 24. 
N.B. Schoettgen quotes a passage from the 
Sohar which bears some resemblance to this, 
Beata est portio illius hominis (SMIDNSX NF 
mS 00) NT) qui accipit hereditatem hanc; 
et cui ila adservata est; 193 corresponds very 
accurately to rernpnuemmy. Sohar Exod. f. 
36, col. 142. See also the passage quoted by 
Schoettgen on Rom. xi. 16. 

for you) There isa t nderance of 
Pate this a eS in 

5. Who are kept} An expression which 
suggests a warning, for it excludes those who 
do not remain in the faith, but which is full 
of comfort, since it assures us that the Father 
who preserves the inheritance, also protects 
and guards the heirs. The word for dept here 
used in the original is a military term, and 
means such a guard as is maintained by a 
powerful garrison to protect a fortress from 
assault or surprise. ‘The Christian is thus 
kept by the power of God and by His hosts, 
for ‘‘ the angel of the Lord encampeth around 
them that fear Him.” 

by the power] The original has ‘im the 
power,” a striking and peculiar expression, 
which here implies that the believer is kept 
within the sphere of God’s special manifesta- 
tion of power. He is encircled by the ever- 
lasting arms. ‘‘ He lives and exists m the 
power of God, and within this he is kept.” 
Steiger. 

through faith] Lit. ‘through the faith,” 
that is the subjective condition, not that faith 
has any power in itself, but it constrains us 
to keep within the fortress, trusting in His 
protection. 

ready to be revealed] The Apostle thus 
speaks of the salvation, unto which we are 
kept, as already accomplished, though not yet 
fully manifested. The inheritance is already 
secured, but it w'* ot be bestowed until the 
last time. Even w .ifparted saints who are 
secure of salvation, if tiie ancient Fathers are 
right, that glory will not be fully manifested 


v. 6, 7.] 


6 Wherein ye greatly rejoice, 
though now for a season, if need be, 
ye are in heaviness through manifold 
temptations : 


until Christ who is their life shall appear, and 
they with all believers will appear with Him 
in glory. Can such an anticipation be recon- 
ciled with a preliminary manifestation of the 
Messiah upon earth? Whether St Peter and 
the other apostles believed that the last time 
was close at hand according to our ordinary 
notions is quite uncertain, nor should we at- 
tach weight to the arguments of commenta- 
tors who always adopt that interpretation of 
Holy Scripture which is most unfavourable to 
the inspiration of the sacred writers. The 
word ‘“ready” proves absolutely nothing. 
The salvation was ‘“‘ready” in the eternal 
counsels of God. See note on ch, iii. 7. 
(T. Burnett was among the first, if not the 
first, who held the notion that the Apostles, 
mistaking the meaning of our Lord’s predic- 
tion, believed in a speedy termination of the 
world. ‘De statu Mort. et Resurg.’) 


6—9. FEELINGS OF CHRISTIANS. 


6. Wherein] ‘This word may refer either 
to the last time, or to the whole sentence 
enumerating the Christian’s privileges. The 
contemplation of the last time is always repre- 
sented as a source of rejoicing to believers, 
for, notwithstanding all the terrors of judg- 
ment, the predominant idea is that of a mani- 
festation of the sons of God (Rom. viii. 19), 
which will accompany the full revelation of 
the glory of Christ: so that believers may 
truly be said to rejoice greatly in the contem- 
plation of the last time. It is however more 
probable that ‘‘ wherein” refers to the state- 
ment of present and future blessings, the lively 
hope and the assured inheritance. There is 
no,real incompatibility between the two states 
of rejoicing and sorrow. ‘The sorrow is on 
the surface only, the joy pervades the very 
depth and centre of the believer’s being, 
‘« Blessed are they that mourn ;” blessed even 
now, who are ‘rejoicing in hope,” ‘‘as sor- 
rowful, yet always rejoicing.” Rom. xii. 12; 
2 Cor. vi. Io. 

Jor @ season] Literally, ‘‘ fora little,” which 
may mean, little in degree, slight in come 
parison, or, as is more probable, briet in dura- 
tion; brief, that is compared with eternity, 
although the affliction might, and very gene- 
rally did in those days, extend over the entire 
earthly existence of believers. Their light 
affliction which was but for a moment, worked 
for them ‘‘a far more exceeding and eternal 
weight of glory.” 2 Cor. iv. 17. 

N.B. ’OX‘yov is not used thus in the N. T., 
excepting in v. 10 of this Epistle, in the same 


connection. Syr. N\s; Vulg. modicum; 
New Test.—Vot. IV. 


L'PETER. I. 


7 That the trial of your faith, being 
much more precious than of gold that 
perisheth, though it be tried with fire, 
might be found unto praise and ho- 


i.e. in a moderate degree. _C&cumenius says, 
pxpov Gpte émei puxpos Kai odtyos 0 Tmapav 
Bios. It seems not improbable that St Peter 
combined both notions in one word, as St 
Paul keeps both in view in the beautiful text 
which is quoted above. 

if need be| This implies that afflictions do 
not come unless they are necessary conditions 
of the accomplishment of God’s work, whe- 
ther they be for the salvation of the suffering 
believer, ‘‘for through much tribulation we 
must enter into the kingdom of God,” Acts 
xiv. 22, or for the advancement of the king- 
dom of Christ, the blood of martyrs being 
the seed of the Church. Both motives con- 
cur in teaching, not merely resignation, but 
cheerful acquiescence in this trying proof or 
His love, who “doth not willingly afflict” 
any. 

N.B. ‘The passages from Lysias and Anti- 
phon quoted by Wetstein do not correspond 
to, or serve to explain, this phrase. In the one 
passage et rs S€ox, ‘‘ whatever might betide,” is 
an euphemism for death; in the other ei déov 
€ori Means since it is needful, and does not 
involve any notion of contingency. Ccu- 
menius gives the true interpretation, ‘‘ If need 
be,” because not every believer is tried by 
affliction, not every sinner. Luther remarks 
that the phrase is equivalent to that which best 
explains it, ‘‘if such be the will of God,” 
iii. 17. 

ye are in heaviness] ‘This should rather be 
translated, have been afflicted. St Peter 
does not refer to possible, or general trials, but 
to afflictions which actually had befallen the 
churches planted by St Paul. 


7. That the trial, &c.) The result of all 
temptation to the faithful is uniform. It at 
once purifies them and attests the sterling 
qualities of their hearts. If gold, which is a 
material and therefore a perishable thing, is 
benefited by the purifying fire, much more 
must this be the case with the imperishable 
man. The fire of affliction can only affect 
the accidents of his external condition, it will 
prepare him for a state of grace, and entitle 
him to those rewards which, though proceed- 
ing from free grace, are bestowed condition- 
ally—the reward of praise, for then ‘every 
man shall have praise of God,” 1 Cor. iv. 5; 
of honour, ‘‘for them that honour me will 
I honour,” 1 Sam. ii. 30; and the reward of 
glory, ‘‘ for glory, honour and peace shall be 
to every man that worketh good,” Rom. ii. ro. 
The order in which these rewards are mentioned 
depends upon their internal relation. Commen- 
tators have not been generally careful enough 

M 


177 


178 


nour and glory at the appearing of 
Jesus Christ : 

8 Whom having not seen, ye 
love; in whom, though now ye 
see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice 


in explaining these words; but ‘‘praise” means 
the approbation of God, the immediate result 
of triumph over temptation; ‘* honour” refers 
to the distinction conferred upon the good 
soldiers of Christ in the Church militant ; 
‘‘elory,” which includes both the preceding, 
and raises them to their highest intensity, is 
already their portion, now reserved in heaven, 
and to be manifested when the Church trium- 
phant will be enthroned with the Lord, and 
share that glory which was His ‘from the 
beginning of the world.” 

N.B. To Ooxiptov, a good classical word 
used by Plato in the sense of ‘‘ touchstone.” 
Here it means the result of the trial. Calvin ob- 
serves, there is a twofold trial of gold by fire, 
one when it is purified of dross, the other when 
it is assayed. Both are here included. This 
metaphor is so common among classical wri- 
ters that it had become proverbial. Wetstein 
collects numerous passages, to which may be 
added this older and more forcible one. Pindar 
*Pyth.’ x. Ep. iv. wespavre dé kat ypvods ev 
Bacave mperet Kai voos épOds. ‘This pas- 
sage also from St Augustine is worth quoting. 
Sicut sub uno igne aurum rutilat, palea fumat 
—ita una eademque vis irruens bonos probat, 
purificat, eliquat: malos damnat, vastat, ex- 
terminat. Tantum interest non qualia, sed 
qualis patiatur. ‘De Civ. D.’ 1.¢. 8. Greg. 
Nyssen also has a fine passage on repeated 
trials of gold compared with those of Chris- 
tians. ‘Vit. S. Macrin.’ 11. p. 187. There is 
some difference of opinion as to what is meant 
by gold being perishable, Perit aurum vel a 
furibus ablatum, vel certe morte domini. 
Wetstein. Quod aliquando periturum est. 
Grotius. Aurum cum mundo perit, nec tum ju- 
vabit quemquam. Bengel. The word rendered 
‘‘which perisheth,”’ is omitted in some edi- 
tions and MSS. of the Vulgate, probably on 
account of this difficulty. ‘There is no doubt 
of its genuineness. Cf. Irenzus, IV. 9. 

at the appearing] Or,revelation. The 
word implies that a glory now complete will 
be unveiled, and manifested. See iv. 13; 
Rom. viii. 18, 19; 1 Cor. i. 7; 2 Thess. i. 7. 


8. having not seen] St Peter seems to refer 
to our Lord’s saying, ‘‘ Blessed are they who 
have not seen, and yet have believed.” ‘The 
Gentile converts in Asia Minor could not 
have seen Him, nor probably had many of the 

ews resident in those parts. ‘The expression 
is rightly understood to imply that the writer 
had himself seen the Lord, and it is there- 
fore a mark of authenticity. This passage is 
quoted by Polycarp, ‘Ep, Ph.’ 1, 


CL PETER, - 


[v. 8—z0, 


with joy unspeakable and full of 
glory: 

g Receiving the end of your faith, 
even the salvation of your souls. 

10 Of which salvation the pro 





9. Recerving] This represents believers 
as already receiving, if not in complete 
sion of, the object and reward of faith, The 
Christian who is virtually dead with Christ is 
also virtually risen with Him, and in a very 
true, though inchoate, or incomplete sense, 
does receive salvation. ‘‘ By grace ye are 
saved through faith,” Eph. ii. 8, ‘* According 
to His mercy He saved us,” Tit. iii. 5. ‘* We 
have peace with God,” Rom. v. 1. 

N.B. Thus Clemens Alex. ‘Strom.’ vit. p. 
727 A, says of the mature Christian yaipe 
pev' él Tois mapotow ayabois, yeynbe dé emi 
Tois emnyyeAuevots ws 7On mapovow. In the 
preceding page he says very beautifully that 
their souls not yet arriving unto the absolute 
good dwell, as it were, in the vestibules of 
their Father’s Palace, near to the Great High 
Priest. Tédos includes the two ideas ‘‘ result” 
and ‘“‘reward.” This is admitted by Calvin 
and Beza, a point of some importance, since 
the interpretation is sometimes objected to, 
as not Protestant. 

even the salvation] Some have inferred 
from this text that Faith which secures justi- 
fication is indefectible. Of course if we were 
to take “ rejoice” in the future sense (see note 
above), the interpretation would fall, and with 
it the inference. This, however, is not neces- 
sary, for in truth the participle ‘‘ receiving ” 
has an imperfect sense, very different from 
“having received.” It implies that in propor- 
tion as the Christian realizes by faith, he ap- 
propriates and enjoys by anticipation, the 
ultimate blessings of salvation. De Wette 
says untruly that ‘ salvation” is a word and 
an idea peculiar to St Paul. There is not a 
book in the New Testament in which the 
word, either as a verb, or as a concrete 
noun, does not occur. The idea is the very 
foundation of the Gospel. See the Con- 
cordance for ‘‘ save, Saviour, salvation,” &c. 


10. the prophets} No sacred writer refers 
more frequently to the prophetical Scriptures 
than St Peter, both in his speeches and epistles. 
The view of prophetic inspiration in this 
passage is peculiar and striking. The words 
ana declarations which the prophets were 
commissioned to utter are represented as sub- 
jects of diligent inquiry to themselves; so far 
were they from being the products of their 
own intelligence. Doubtless had the pro- 
phecies been the result of reflection, or of a 
certain instinctive intuition, in minds quickened 
by the Spirit of God, they would be truly 
represented as inspired. This passage, how- 
ever, goes much farther. It certainly implies 


E'PHRER &§ 


ets have enquired and searched di- ner of time the Spirit of Christ which 
ligently, who prophesied of the grace wasin them did signify, whenit testified 
that should come unto you: beforehand the sufferings of Christ, 
11 Searching what, or what man- and the glory that should follow. 


v. 11] 


179 


that the Spirit of Christ presented images to 
their minds, and put words into their mouths, 
which so far from originating they were un- 
able to comprehend. Thus we read of Daniel 
inquiring of the Angel as to the meaning of 
the revelations which he received, Dan. vii. 
16. Some of the earlier commentators (CEcu- 
menius and Theophylact, followed by Est) 
consider that this inquiry and diligent search- 
ing refers to the movements of the prophets’ 
spirits before and during the process of inspira- 
tion, and that having found what they sought, 
they recorded it in the sacred oracles. The 
former interpretation seems preferable. The 
Targum on Ecclesiastes i. 8 says, the ancient 
prophets inquired earnestly about all events 
that were preordained in the world, and were 
unable to discover their limits, and Rashi on 
Numbers xxiii. 23 represents the Angels as 
“inquiring from the Saints, what is God doing? 

of the grace] De Wette says that “ grace” 
is an expression so entirely Pauline that its 
occurrence in a work attributed to any 
other Apostle makes its authenticity ques- 
tionable. That it is Pauline is true, but it 
is Pauline because it is thoroughly Christian. 
In the controversy against Judaizers the mind 
of St Paul was especially directed towards 
this aspect of Christ's religion, but the grace 
and truth which came by Jesus Christ are 
the common treasure of the faithful. There 
is no point which such writers as De Wette 
are more anxious to establish than the radical 
discrepancy of Pauline and Petrine doctrine, a 
notion which is completely overthrown by 
this Epistle, and by the frequent use of such 
expressions as ‘‘ grace,” ‘‘salvation,’ &c. See 
Introduction to Acts, p. 330. 


ll. what, or what manner] The points, 
about which the prophets are said to have 
been specially anxious, are the date and the 
circumstances of our Lord’s Advent in the 
Flesh. There seems to be a special reference 
to Dan. ix. 25. It is certain that believers in 
prophecy were convinced from the study of 
that and other passages that the Messiah was 
to come about that very time; a persuasion 
which extended far beyond the borders of 
Palestine, and was noted by the historians of 
Greece and Rome. 

N.B. ts tiva refers to the simple date, eis 
srotoy to the characteristic features of the time. 
Thus all commentators of any weight from 
(Ecumenius downwards. 

the Spirit of Christ| In this most important 
text we have to consider in the first place the 


exact meaning of the expression “Spirit of 





Christ.” In some passages it might signify the 
Spirit, as communicated to Christ, the Incar- 
nate Mediator, and through Him, to His 
people; in others, the higher or spiritual 
principle of life in our Lord’s humanity ; but 
neither signification can apply to Him before 
the Nativity. Here it must mean the Spirit 
proceeding from the Father and the Son, who 
therefore is called indifferently the Spint of 
God, the Spirit of the Father, and here, the Spirit 
of the Son, or, asin Rom. viil. 9, of Christ. See 
also Gal. iv. 6. We have therefore the strongest 
possible declaration of the Godhead of Christ, 
for none ever doubted that the Spirit which 
dwelt in the prophets was the Spirit of God. 
The text is of great weight in the controversy 
with the Eastern Church, which does not hold 
the procession of the Spirit from the Father 
and the Son ; but of still greater, as expressing 
in the clearest and most convincing form that 
truth, on which all the early Fathers dwelt so 
lovingly, that the Spirit, which dictated the 
laws, inspired the seers, and animated the 
heroes of patriarchal and Jewish times, was 
the same Spirit by Which the Son even now 
lives and works in His Church, bestowed then 
indeed partially, manifested but in figures, 
speaking in enigmatical utterances, but still 
the same Spirit then preparing the hearts and 
understandings of men for His coming in the 
Flesh, even as now It is preparing them for 
His second coming in glory. 

N.B. St Athanasius states a doctrine held 
by the greatest doctors of old that the Spirit 
bears a special relation to the Son, Ei yap eppo- 
vouv op§as _Tept TOU Aoyov, éppovowy vyias 
kal Tept Tou Tvetparos, 5 Tapa Tov Tlatpos 
exrropeverat, kal Tov Yiow tdtov 3 ov Tap avrou 
didorat Tois pabyrais Kal mace Tots mioTevourw 
eis avrov, ‘Epist. ad Serap.’ pp. 518, 519, 
Tom. 11. ed. Bened. In the same treatise he 
quotes this and other passages, in which the 
Spirit is specially called the Spirit of the Son. 
See also Didymus ‘de Spiritu Sancto,’ who 
takes great pains to shew that the Holy Spirit 
is equally called the Spirit of the Father and 
of the Son. 

when it testifed| It was a saying of the 
Jews that the prophets universally and ex- 
clusively prophesied of the days of the Messiah. 

the sufferings of Christ] St Peter was espe- 
cially concerned to shew that the sufferings 
were foretold, because one of the very chiefest 
points of controversy with the Jews referred 
to the question whether Christ was to suffer. 
(See Acts iii, 18, and xxvi. 23, and Justin 
Martyr, ‘ Dial. with Trypho,’ cc. 22 and 68.) 
Our Saviour had declared repeatedly before 


M2 


180 


12 Unto whom it was revealed, 
that not unto themselves, but unto 
us they did minister the things, which 
are now reported unto you by them 
that have preached the gospel unto 


I PETER. 1. 


[v. 12, 13. 


you with the Holy Ghost sent down 
from heaven; which things the angels 
desire to look into. 

13 Wherefore gird up the loins of 


your mind, be sober, and hope to Sie : 





and after His crucifixion that those sufferings 
had been represented by all the prophets as 
necessary conditions of His triumph. See 
especially Luke xxiv. 25, 26, ‘¢O fools, and 
slow of heart to believe all that the prophets 
have spoken. Ought not Christ to have suf- 
fered these things, and to enter into His glory?” 
The veil which still hangs over the Jews (see 
a Cor. iii. 13—16), and prevents them from 
recognising their own Messiah, is their in- 
vincible prejudice touching His humiliation 
and suffering. 

N.B. Remark the construction ra eis Xpiorov 
ma@jpara—the sufferings destined for Christ, 
“or rather which were to befall Him, as Hip- 
polytus ‘de Antichristo,’ § 12, who seems to 
have had this passage before his mind, ra eis 
Xpiocrav cupByoopeva abn. Some few com- 
mentators follow Luther and Calvin, who 
contrary to all authorities ancient and modern 
understood the Church, as well as the Person 
of Christ, to be comprehended in this expres- 
sion. ‘The‘r interpretation proceeded from a 
profound and spiritual view of the union of 
the Body with the Head, but it has no place 
here. 


12. Unto whom it was revealed) ‘The 
truth here inculcated is that the prophets were 
taught by a Divine revelation that the subject- 
matter of their inspired utterances belonged 
not to their own time, or the special circum- 
stances of Israel, but to the latter days, i.e. 
to the Christian dispensation. That both they 
and their faithful hearers derived spiritual 
benefits from such instruction is certain, but 
it was a partial and so to speak reflected light 
caught from the far-off dawn of the rising of 
the Sun of righteousness. ‘This was the only 
view of the text taken by ancient commenta- 
tors, though it appears with a slight modifica- 
tion in the Syriac version: ‘‘and to them it 
was revealed because they sought it not for 
themselves.” 

but unto us| All the best MSS. have “unto 
you.” St Peter has the state of his readers’ 
minds before him. 

they did minister] All preaching of the 
Word is called a ministration, with the special 
idea of subordination to God and service to 
man, 

which are now reported unto you by them that 
have preached| Rather, which were now re- 
ported to you by them that preached 
the Gospel The two expressions reported, 
i.e. announced as actual and realized events, 
and preached the Grstel (a single word, 
evangelized), are corre:-“~s with “testifiea 


beforehand” and ‘ prophesied.” The same 
Holy Spirit which predicted the events by 
the prophets announced their fulfilment by 
the preachers of the Gospel. In the former 
He was the ‘indwelling Spirit of Christ, even 
as in the latter, but with this difference, that 
in these He was present in a special manner, 
having been sent down from heaven, a mission 
first manifested at Pentecost. The reverence 
which all converts, Jews or Gentiles, were 
ready to render to the prophets, is thus 
claimed by St Peter for those who had 
preached the Gospel to his readers, i.e. for St 
Paul and his fellow-labourers; a point to 
which attention is repeatedly called in these 
notes, as most important in its bearings upon 
the special object of the Epistle. 

which things the angels desire to look into} 
The word rendered ‘‘to look into” is empha- 
tic and highly graphic, It means to lean side- 
ways in order to look into a vessel, or place; 
as in Joh, xx. 5, where see note, and James i. 
28. Here the mysteries of the Gospel are re- 
presented as objects of deep contemplation and 
earnest inquiry to the angels; a truth which, 
as even Grotius and Beza hold, was mysti- 
cally signified by the two cherubs whose wings 
overshadowed the ark, and, as we may reve- 
rentially assume, by the two angels whom 
Mary Magdalene saw in the Holy Sepulchre. 
The early Fathers, Justin M. and Irenzus, Iv. 
67, understood this statement to refer to 
the desire which the angels felt when ponder- 
ing on the prophecies upon our Lord’s coming. 
But Didymus, C&cumenius and others take it 
more generally as including the whole scheme 
of redemption predicted by the Prophets and 
announced by the preachers of the Gospel. 
Cf. Ephes. iii. ro. 

We must not omit to notice the compre- 
hensive grandeur of the view thus presented to 
us by St Peter of the agents engaged in the 
ministry of redemption: prophets from the 
beginning, evangelists in the fulness of time, 
angels throughout watching and inquiring, all 
alike overshadowed, possessed and energized 
by the ever-present Spirit of Christ. 


EXHORTATION TO EARNEST EFFORTS. 
vv. 13—16. 


18. Wherefore] This connects the exhor- 
tation closely with the preceding statement; if 
such were the feelings and acts of prophets, 
evangelists and angels under the abiding pre- 
sence of God’s Spirit, what ought your exer- 
tions to be? 


gird up the loins of your mind] /,s persons 


v. 14, 15.] 


the end for the grace that is to be 
brought unto you at the revelation 
of Jesus Christ ; 

14 As obedient children, not 
fashioning yourselves according to 


setting out oa a journey, or undertaking a 
great work, gathered up their loose robes with 
a girdle, that their movements might be unim- 
peded, so Christians must bring all loose 
thoughts and feelings under restraint, and brace 
all the powers of the inner man, or, as the 
word (S:dvora) signifies, the ‘thinking faculty, 
the soul as the living intellectual principle of 
our nature,” in order to meet the trials and 
fatigues of a pilgrimage towards heaven. The 
metaphor is scriptural, cf. Luke xii. 35; Eph. 
vi. 14; and classical; but the word here used 
does not occur elsewhere in the New Testa- 
ment. This passage is quoted verbatim by 
Polycarp, ‘ Ep. Ph.’ § 1. 

be sober] ‘This may be a practical explana- 
tion of the metaphor; but more probably it 
points to the sobriety of spirit, specially cha- 
fracteristic of Church teaching, which Divine 
grace alone makes compatible with fervent zeal 
and lively hope. Enthusiasm combined with 
self-control and perfect self-possession is found 
in such a Christian warrior as St Paul, who 
when accused of madness for preaching doc- 
trines which to the cold man of the world 
savoured of fanaticism, could answer: ‘I 
speak forth the words of truth and soberness,” 
Acts xxvi. 25. 

hope to the end| Rather, hope perfectly, 
#.e. with a perfect and enduring hope. The 
exhortation applies specially to the grace 
offered to you, and bestowed upon you by the 
revelation of Jesus Christ. 

that is to be brought unto you at the, &c.] 
Rather, ‘‘which is (now) being brought 
unto you in the revelation of Jesus Christ.” 
The A.V. takes the word as referring to future 
salvation, but the Greek is clear, and grace is 
a present blessing. The word ‘‘ revelation” here 
does not mean simply the disclosure of saving 
truth proclaimed by Christ, but the manifes- 
tation of Himself; the highest truth, which 
involves all other truths. Cf. John i. 14. 


14. As obedient children] Lit. ‘children 
of obedience,” an emphatic Hebraism, de- 
noting the inherent and inseparable union be- 
tween the soul and its motive principle. The 
Christian is not merely an obedient child, so 
that if he ceased to be obedient in will and 
intention, he would still be a child (the adjec- 
tival form not implying, of necessity, an es- 
sential and characteristic attribute), but he is 
a child of obedience; his obedience makes him 
a child, first, as above, in the act of obeying 
God’s call, and it keeps him a child, by pre- 
serving his union with God. 

N.B. In Hebrew and Arabic two distinct 


Live TER. TI. 


the former lusts in your igno- 
rance: 

15 But as he which hath called 
you is holy, so be ve holy in all man- 
ner of conyersation ; 


words are used in such phrases as these; the 
one (meaning ‘‘possessor”) denotes an acci- 
dental, the other (meaning ‘‘son”’) a permanent 
connection of ideas. The reader who would 
judge for himself of this not unimportant 
point may consult the long list in Freytag’s 
‘Arabic Lexicon,’ Tom. I. pp. 7, 54 and rér. 
He will find exceptions, but the principle 
seems to run through the whole series of ex 
amples. 

not fashioning| Or, not conforming 
yourselves, a distinct allusion to Rom. xii. 
2; cf. Eph. ii. 3. The expression implies that 
the soul becomes similar to, all but identified 
with, the object which it pursues. Contem- 
plating Christ it becomes Christlike, pursuing 
sensuality it becomes gross, sensual, devilish. 

according to the former lusts in your igno= 
rance| ‘This refers to the state of the uncon- 
verted, and doubtless applies to Jews as well as 
Gentiles, but it has a special force and signi- 
ficance as applied to the latter. The uncon- 
verted Jew sinned against light, the Gentile 
without direct or sufficient light (ev 77 dyvoia, 
a state of absolute, but not wilful ignorance ; 
see Eph. iv. 18 and Acts xil. 30): nor can it 
be questioned that the strange grossness of 
Gentile sensuality called for special warnings, 
such as we find most strongly urged by St 
Paul in Epistles addressed to Gentile con- 
verts. So Hilgenfeld, ‘ Einl.’ p. 448. Bleek 
notices the bearing of this passage on the 
date of the Epistle. It is addressed not to 
the descendants of converts, but to men them- 
selves recently converted. ‘Einl.’ § 215. 

lusts| ‘The Greek Fathers are most careful 
to point out the distinction between inordinate 
lusts and strong but natural appetites. Even 
the word here used is regarded by Chrysos- 
tom in very different aspects when connected 
or not connected with unjustifiable excess 
(meovefia). We do well to confine the word 
which is here used, exclusively to inordinate 
sensuality. 


15. be which hath called] Or, He who 
called you. JT.e. God the Father, to whom 
the calling and election of believers are always 
attributed. The Christian is called upon to 
look up to God as his example, an exhorta- 
tion in accordance with our Saviour’s word, 
Matt. v. 45. Compare also Eph. iv. 24; Col. 
iii. ro. The special end of God’s calling and 
election is “‘aoliress” (see 1 Thess. iv. 3, and 
7), consisting characteristically in entire sepa- 
ration from sin, and here, most probably with 
reference to sensual defilement. 

conversation] ‘The word (dvaorpodn) here 


182 T. BE LE 0 


© Lev. 11. 
& 19.2. 
20. 7. 


Lv. 16—18. 


16 Because it is written, *Be ye pass the time of your sojourning here 


in fear: 


holy ; for I am holy. 

17 And if ye call on the Father, 
who without respect of persons-judg- 
eth according to every man’s work, 


used applies peculiarly to the outward course 
of life, the discharge of relative duties. It 
occurs twice in the Apocrypha, thrice in St 
Paul’s Epistles, once in St James. St Peter 
uses it very frequently, six times in this, and 
twice in the second Epistle. 


16. Beye holy] Or, according to all the best 
MSS. Ye shall be holy, as in the Septuagint 
version of the five passages in Leviticus to 
which St Peter refers. This injunction in- 
volves the necessity of conformity to God, a 
spiritual change going farther even than sub- 
mission to His will. Bp Lightfoot com- 
pares Clem. Rom. ‘1 Cor.’ Xxx. 


17—21. EXHORTATION TO GODLY FEAR, 
FOUNDED UPON CERTAINTY OF Gop’s 
JUDGMENT, AND KNOWLEDGE OF REDEMP- 
TION BY CHRIST’S BLOOD. 


17. Andif| The word “if” does not im- 
ply doubt, or contingency, but marks an in- 
dispensable condition. It is not quite equiva-: 
lent to ‘‘since,” but means that you cannot 
be Christians if you do not pray. 

if ye call on the Father| Or, if ye invoke as 
Father Him who. So every Christian does 
who uses the Lord’s Prayer: in doing so he 
must bear in mind that his Father is his 

_ Judge; and that He judges every man accord- 
ing to his own work, without reference to his 
nation, his position, or his privileges—points 
specially applicable to Jewish converts, cf. 
Rom. ii. 1—3—but of practical importance 
to all. The word here used by St Peter 
without respect of persons, is peculiar to our 
Apostle, cf. Acts x. 34, to St Paul and St 
James, and as such is a characteristic of style; 
see also Clement of Rome, ‘1 Cor.’ I., and 
‘Ep. Barn.’ Iv. 12; but the corresponding 
idiom is found in Luke xx. 21; and is not 
uncommon in the Old Testament. Steiger 
takes great but unsuccesful pains to reconcile 
this statement with the doctrine of absolute 
justification by faith, as exempting the believer 
from judgment to come. It is evident that 
St Peter, in that agreeing entirely with St Paul 
(Rom. xiv. 10; 2 Cor. v. 10), inculcates a 
godly fear, in this life a preservative from sin 
and a guide of conduct, as inseparable from 
the sense of an ever-present Judge. ‘‘Man” 
in fact, as St Augustine, speaking of the strug- 
gle between the flesh and the spirit, observes, 
‘is ever in peril until the hour of his death,” 
‘Serm.’ 151. 6. It is also to be observed that 
im this passage St Peter refers not to the 


18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye 
were mot redeemed with corruptible 
things, as silver and gold, from your 


future, but to the present, continuous jadge 
ment of a man’s work. 

of your sojourning | See note above, on v. I, 
and cf. Eph. ii. 19. 


18. A second and not less cogent argu- 
ment; ye ought to be holy because your de- 
liverance from the bondage of inherited guilt 
has been effected at an infinite cost. You 
have not the excuse of servitude, for the bonds 
are broken, the ransom has been paid. 

redeemed| Or, ‘‘ransomed.” All theolo- 
gians agree that the ransom was the life-blood 
of Christ, and that the bondage from which 
we were thus delivered was subjection to the 
power and guilt of sin, specially from the evil 
spirit that worketh in the children of disobe- 
dience, and leadeth them captive according to 
his will. The principle underlying the act of 
redemption is variously apprehended, see 
Thomson’s ‘Bampton Lectures,’ and the note 
on Rom. iii. 24. Here it may suffice to re- 
mark (a) that our Lord took not a man, but 
man’s nature into His Person, and that He so 
completely identifies Himself with His own 
that His blood becomes, mystically, but to 
all intents and purposes, their blood; and (4) 
that His offering represents and virtually effects 
an entire surrender of that nature in and by 
Him to God. This passage of St Peter ex- 
presses, more fully than any other in which 
the word occurs, the special object of the 
Redemption, viz., deliverance from sin. It is 
also remarkable as resting the duty of obe- 
dience and holiness on the highest and most 
sacred ground. 

vain conversation] Or, ‘‘*manner of life.” 
See note on v. 15. It is here described as in- 
sensate;. wickedness and folly are synonymous 
terms in Holy Scripture: the word rendered 
vain has generally a special reference to idolatry 
and is equivalent to heathen (cf. Acts xiv. 15 
and note on Rom, i. 21), a point of ims 
portance in reference to the following state- 
ment that it was ‘received by tradition from 
your fathers.” St Peter here uses an idiom 
common in Rabbinical writings which speak 
of heathen rites and customs as to some ex- 
tent excusable, being derived by tradition from 
their fathers: see ‘ Meg. Esther,’ and ‘ Cholin,’ 
quoted by Wetstein. Thus the Koran repre- 
sents idolaters as generally rejecting God's 
messengers because they preferred to follow 
the traditions of their fathers: cf. Sur. X. 79. 
It can therefore scarcely be doubted that 
Gentiles are specially addressed in this pas- 
sage. Of course St Peter would not have 


v. 19—21.] 


vain conversation received by tradition 
from your fathers ; 

1g But with the precious blood of 
Christ, as of a lamb without blemish 
and without spot : 


exempted the Jewish converts from the charge, 
but it applied to them far less forcibly than 
to idolaters practising cruel and licentious 
rites without compunction or remorse. 


19. But with the precious blood] ‘The 
doctrine of atonement by Christ’s blood, typ- 
ified by that of the paschal lamb, is thus 
stated with the utmost completeness and dis- 
tinctness. It was the doctrine which the 
Apostle had learned originally from John the 
Baptist, John i. 29, where see note. The 
correspondence between the type and the Anti- 
type, and the distinction, are expressed with 
equal clearness. The lamb was without ble- 
mish and spot, a law which applies to all 
sacrificial offerings, see Lev. iv. 32; to the 
peace-offerings, Lev. iii. 6, xxii. 22—24; and 
to the burnt-offering, Lev. i. 10, xii. 6, xiv. 
to; Num. xxviii. 3,11. The first condition 
of an atoning sacrifice is that it shall be free 
-from the pollution which it expiates; so our 
Paschal Lamb, in a sense peculiar to Himself, 
was without all taint of sin. The word 
‘« precious” intimates the fundamental distinc- 
tion between all legal sacrifices and Him who 
was not only sinless Man, but One with 
God. Isaiah undoubtedly referred to the pas- 
chal lamb when he represented Christ under 
this image, ch. lili. 7, Compare Clement of 
Rome, ‘1 Cor.’ c. vii, ‘‘ Let us fix our thoughts 
intently on the blood of Christ, and know 
how precious it is to God His Father, because 
being poured out for our salvation it brought 
the grace of repentance to the world.” Again 
in ch. xii., ‘Through the blood of the Lord 
there will be redemption to all who believe 
and hope in God.” See too chh. xxi. and 
xlix. These passages indicate familiar ac- 
quaintance with our Epistle on the part of St 
Clement, and shew how deeply the doctrine 
of Atonement was impressed upon the consci- 
ousness of the primitive Church, 


20. foreordained} Lit. ‘‘ foreknown ;” but 
the knowledge of God is inseparable from 
His will. 

before the foundation of the world| Not in 
time, which began with creation, subject to 
vicissitudes and change, but in eternity, rest- 
ing upon the unchangeable will of God, and 
determined by considerations which cannot be 
fully understood by His creatures. The 
events by which the determination was effect- 
ed, were simply manifestations of eternal reali- 
ties. ‘The sacrifice of Christ has been from 
the beginning the only meritorious cause of 
salvation. ‘Thus Quensted, ‘the eternal con- 


R PEER i 


20 Who verily was foreordained 
before the foundation of the world, but 
was manifest in these last times for yo'1, 

21 Who by him do believe in God, 
that raised him up from the dead, and 


templation of Christ’s sacrifice is the ground 
of all divine grace.” See the fine remarks of 
Augustine, ‘Confess.’ vii. 1. No spiritual 
work of God falls under the categories of 
time or space. This is a truth of vital impor- 
tance, for it teaches Christians to rest with 
confidence on the eternal and unalterable good- 
ness of the Father who sent His Son to be 
the propitiation for our sins; and it refutes 
the erroneous notion that the sacrifice thus 
offered in accordance with His will was the 
cause of a change in His purposes. Both 
Jews and Gentiles thus learned that the elec- 
tion of the whole body of believers was not a 
new thing, but the accomplishment of an 
eternal purpose; see the Introduction to the 
Ephesians. 

in these last times] Or, at the end of 
the times, i.e..in the period which apper- 
tains to the final dispensation of God. The 
‘¢Jast,” because it is not to be superseded by 
any further manifestation until the end of 
time. N.B. The reading én’ éoydrov follows 
the best MSS. and is undoubtedly correct. 

for you| The manifestation had for its spe- 
cial object those who through faith should 
receive Christ as their Saviour, 7.e. all be- 
lievers, Hebrews and Gentiles alike, without 
reference to any previous qualifications or pri- 
vileges. It is contrary to the principles held 
alike by St Peter and St Paul to limit this 
declaration to the one or to the other. Faith 
in the Resurrection levels all distinctions. 


21. Who by him do believe] Or, according 
to two principal MSS., ‘‘ Who through Him 
are faithful to God.” Our version however 
gives the true meaning. ‘The expression ap- 
plies with special force to Gentile converts, 
who learned to know and to believe in God 
through the Gospel of Christ; but St Peter 
certainly includes all his readers, Jews as well 
as Gentiles; both receiving from Christ the 
only saving knowledge, that which is insepa- 
rable from living faith. 

N.B. The reading mcrovs is supported by 
A, B, but micrevovtas rests on high authority, 
and yields at least as good a sense as the 
other reading. 

that raised him up from the dead| Thetwo 
main truths which effected the conversion both 
of Jews and Gentiles were the Resurrection of 
Christ and His Ascension. To these, cone 
sidered as one in substance, St Peter in his 
first address to the Jews, and St Paul in the 
beginning of his great doctrinal Epistle, Rom. 
i. 4, appeal as proofs of Christ’s relation to 


183 


ve him glory; that your faith and 
ose might be in God. 

22 Seeing ye have purified your 
sou’s in obeying the truth through 
the Spirit unto unfeigned love of 
the brethren, see that ye love one 


another with a pure heart fer- 
vently : 
the Father. Salvation is purchased by the 


death of Christ, justification is appropriated 
by the faith which was established by His 
resurrection. Observe that the Scriptures in- 
differently represent the Father as raising the 
Son, thereby recognising Him as His true 
Son, Rom. i. 4, and the Son as raising Him- 
self, thereby declaring the absolute oneness of 
the Godhead in both, and the unity of Their 
work. 

that your faith and hope might be in God| 
Or, more accurately, so that your faith 
and hope are in God. The A.V. follows 
the generality of the old versions and early 
commentators, and the construction, though 
not common, is certainly admissible, cf. Matt. 
Xxiv. 24, xxvil. 1: but the idiom is more pro- 
bably explained as referring to fact rather than 
to intention. St Peter shews that inasmuch 
as the proof and completion of Christ’s work 
was the resurrection, effected by the will and 
power of God, all Christian faith and hope 
rest upon the Godhead, and are therefore like 
Him stedfast and unchangeable. 


22—26. EXHORTATION TO BROTHERLY 
LOVE, AS A RESULT AND PROOF OF OBE- 
DIENCE AND REGENERATION. 


22. Seeing ye have purified, &c.] St Peter 
argues thus. The souls of Christians are 
purified, an actual process begun at conversion 
and going on through life (such is the force of 
the perfect part. 1yuxores), having one per- 
manent and paramount object, the unfeigned 
love, in which our Apostle, like St John, St 
Paul, and St James, recognises the true fulfil- 
ment of the law of righteousness, see therefore 
that ye so love one another, heartily and fer- 
vently. Here we must notice the force of the 
expression ‘‘in obeying the truth,” #.e. in the 
obedience which has for its object truth as 
made known by Christ, that is the condition 
and the effective instrument of Christian sanc- 
tification. ‘Two sayings of our Lord are thus 
illustrated: ‘‘sanctify them by Thy truth,” 
John xvii. 17, and ‘‘hereby shall all men 
know that ye are my disciples if ye love one 
another.” John xiii. 35. The best MSS. omit 
the words ‘‘through the Spirit.” They are 
probably a gloss, stating a true doctrine, but 
not needed in this passage, where St Peter is 

dwelling throughout on the living power of 
* God’s truth. Again, the word “pure,” though 

found in some ancient MSS. and versions, is 


I. PETER IL. 


[v. 22—24. 


23 Being born again, not of cor- 
ruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by 
the word of God, which liveth and 
abideth for ever. 


24 'For all flesh is as grass, and !0r, a 


all the glory of man as the flower of 
grass. he grass withereth, and the 
flower thereof falleth away : 





omitted in the oldest, and, like the preceding, 
was probably a marginal gloss. The word 
rendered ‘‘fervently” is emphatic; it involves 
the idea of intensity, and, as used in later 
Greek, persistency; Grimm, ‘Lex. N. T.’ in- 
tentus, assiduus. 

The exhortation throughout may possibly 
imply that St Peter felt anxious about the 
state. of his readers, who in all regions, and it 
may be more specially in the districts which 
he specially addresses, were moved by various 
and conflicting influences; but there is no 
indication of his making any distinction be- 
tween them; Jews and Gentiles equally need 
his pastoral monition and are equally its ob- 
jects. The earnestness indeed is but the out- 
come of his own loving and affectionate heart. 


23. Being born again, &c.| A further . 
and even deeper appeal, not merely to an in- 
tellectual, though spiritual process, but to the 
very principle, root and origin of the Chris- 
tian life. They must love one another, and 
thus fulfil ‘‘the royal law” of Christ by reason 
of their ‘‘ having been born again,” become re- 
generate. The spirit of sonship is the spirit ot 
brotherhood: becoming children of one Father 
we become brethren, members of one family, 
of one body, members each of the other: this 
in a far higher sense than that of natural rela- 
tionship, since we are born, not as in our first 
birth of corruptible seed, with sensual affec- 
tions, but of incorruptible, the germ of spi- 
ritual life, of which the giver and implanter is 
the living and eternal Word of God. Here 
the question rises whether by the Word of 
God (in this verse Adyos, in the 25th pyya) 
St Peter refers to the will of God expressed 
and revealed in the Gospel, or to the Personal 
Word incarnate in Christ Jesus. Comparing 
our Apostle’s own words in Acts x. 36, we 
infer that the preaching, not the person, of 
our Lord is here meant; but the connection 
between the word uttered and the Son, the 
Divine Word who utters it, is invariable, 
and is always distinctly recognised by St Peter 
and St Paul. See note on Jamesi. 18. No 
teacher of the early Church ever dissociated. 
the ideas of the Word and the Son, as was 
done at a later period on the one hand by 
Paul of Samosata and Photinus, on the other 
by Marcellus of Ancyra: see S. Basil, ‘ Ep.’ 
235, 263, and Euseb. *c. Marcell.’ 


24. For all flesh is as grass, &c.] The 


v. 25.] 


25 But the word of the Lord 
endureth for ever. And this is the 


immediate object of St Peter is to enforce the 
preceding argument. As men born of flesh, 
merely natural men, your feelings of love 
might be transient and fickle, like the nature 
to which they belong, and however attractive 
and specious they would perish without result ; 
that nature is like grass that is scorched by 
the sun, and flowers that fall off yielding no 
fruit: but the Word of God being eternal 
must produce durable effects, and, as the 
Apostle declares in the next verse, that is the 
word which has been preached to you in the 
Gospel. The whole passage however and its 
application suggests other considerations of the 
highest importance in their bearings upon the 
general purport of the Epistle and the question 
to what class of readers it was specially ad- 
dressed. In the first place St Peter follows 
the Septuagint so closely as to prove that he 
addressed persons who would be more familiar 
with it than with the original Hebrew, omit- 
ting one verse, Isai. xl. 7, which is not found 
in the Septuagint, but which, though omitted 
in some MSS. probably influenced by the 
LXX., is unquestionably genuine. It is true 
that it does not bear directly upon the argu- 
ment here, but the omission indicates a feeling 
in St Peter that it would be strange to most 
of his readers. Thus too the adoption of 
‘“slory” for ‘‘comeliness” or ‘‘grace,” of 
“grass” in the second clause for ‘‘the field,” 
and ‘‘falleth off” for ‘‘ withereth,” is best ac- 
counted for by assuming either Gentile or 
Helleristic readers, to whom the Hebrew was 
unknown. On the other hand, two changes 
are highly significant: instead of ‘‘all glory of 
man” in the LXX. St Peter has all is glory, 
agreeing with the Hebrew, thus shewing his 
own knowledge of the original; and again, in 
the concluding clause he substitutes ‘the 
Lord” for ‘‘our God,” a most important 
point, for it proves that St Peter identifies the 
Lord, that is our Lord Jesus Christ, accord- 
ing to the usage of the New Testament, with 
Him whom Jews and Christians alike call 
“our God:” see the following note. These 
considerations may not prove, but they are 
thoroughly in accordance with, the view that 


ADDITIONAL NOTES 


1. (@)_ mapemidnuos is used by the LXX. 
as a translation of 1W1N, Gen. xxiii. 4; Ps. 
Xxxix.12. The Syriac uses the same word 


here 120. It is nearly equivalent to rdp- 


oios, Acts vii. 6,29. Ps. cxx. 5, otwor ore 
} maporxia pov éyaxpvvén. Both words are 
used together in Ps. xxxviii. 17, quoted by 


@cumenius. Some commentators consider 


E PETER: £ 


word which by the gospel is preached 
unto you. 


St Peter has in mind the position, feelings and 
knowledge of a class of readers, all of whom 
were familiar with the Old Testament, espe- 
cially with the great Messianic prophecy of 
Isaiah, but of whom the great majority knew 
it only through the medium of the Septuagint 
version. 


25. But the word of the Lord] As it was 
observed in the preceding note, St Peter sub- 
stitutes ‘‘the Lord” for ‘‘our God,” as it 
stands in the Hebrew and in most, though not 
all, copies of the LXX. Both Hebrews and 
Gentiles would see in this a distinct recogni- 
tion of the Godhead of Christ, and that in 
reference to the grand attribute of God as 
source and giver of revealed truth. Having 
brought his readers so far, St Peter clinches 
his whole argument with a declaration, bear- 
ing upon the point which lay especially near 
to his heart, viz. that this Word. eternal in 
duration, is that which had been preached to 
his hearers and had been received by them. 
The expression which he uses is singularly 
forcible, this word is the joyous tidings or 
Gospel which was declared unto you. Now 
there is no question as to the person by 
whom the Gospel had been introduced into 
the districts; what St Peter here asserts is 
that in the form in which it was presented to 
them it was substantially and essentially the 
very Word of God. So that here, as in the 
close of the Epistle, we have the attestation of 
St Peter to the absolute integrity of Gospel 
truth as it had been preached in the Churches 
of Asia Minor by St Paul. Such an attesta- 
tion would be specially needed, it may be, by 
that portion of the converts which may have 
still retained aught of the old leaven of Juda- 
ism, to whom however no distinct allusion is 
ever made in this Epistle; but it would be un- 
speakably precious to all true-hearted Chris- 
tians, who looked up with equal love and 
reverence to their own converter St Paul, and 
to St Peter as the recognised mouth-piece and 
representative of the Apostles, to whom our 
Lord first committed the ministry of the 
Word. 


on Cuap. I. 1, 2, 6, 8. 


that the prefix rapa has no special force: but 
(Ecumenius is quite right in maintaining a 
distinction. apemidnyos, one who sojourns 
without any fixed home or special right in an 
alien land. The rapa in composition is here 
not local, but denotes transitoriness See Bp 
Lightfoot on Clem. Rom. p. 32. Mangold 
observes that the word indicates persons at- 
tached to the Jews of the dispersion, not 


185 


186 


ews themselves, but Gentile converts to 
ristianity. See Bleek’s ‘Einleitung,’ ed. 
Mangold, p. 658, note. 

2. Elect. Electis in celo, advenis in terra. 
Bengel. Thus Didymus and (CEcumenius. 
Compare the fine passage in the ‘Epistle to 
Diognetus,’ appended to the works of Justin 
Martyr, ¢. 5, warpidas oixovow idias add’ ws 
mapotkot—nraca Syn tarpis €oriv avtay, Kat 


maca trarpis &évn. Thus Ccumenius, 7rot dia * 


thy Ovagmopay eimev, 7) Kal OTL TavTes Of KaTa 
Geov Cavres maperridnuor A€yovrat THs yijs- 

Chrysostom expresses very faithfully the 
doctrine of the early Greek Church. On 
Romans, ‘ Hom.’ xvi. 5, ‘O @eds ovx davapever 
xadarep avOpwros aro Tov TéAous TOY Tpaypa- 
Twv ideiv Tov ayaboy Kai Tov ov ToLOvTOY, GAA 
«al 7po TovT@y olde Tis pev O Tovnpos Tis be 
© wn To.odros. Abundance of similar passages 
may be quoted from Justin M., Clement Alex., 
Origen, &c. Spencer on Origen ‘c.-Cels.’ II. 
p. 38, ed. Cant. says, somewhat too broadly, 
that all the Fathers before Augustine held the 
opinion that predestination is based on fore- 
knowledge. It is, however, quite true of the 
Greeks, and even of St Ambrose, who stands 
nearest to Augustine in doctrine as well as 
time; he says, Quorum merita prescivit, eorum 
premia predestinavit. ‘De Fide,’ Tom. 11. 
p- 565, n. 83. It is difficult to see why zpo- 
yvoors Should mean anything but foreknow- 
ledge, as e.g. in Clemens Rom. ‘ Ep.’ I. 44, of 
the Apostles, mpoyywow ciAndores TeXetav. 
Thus all the ancient commentators. Didymus 
(who says, prescientia nihil est putanda quam 
contemplatio futuri, an expression which is 
taken from Origen, zpoyvwow yap ovK ado 

| Tt HYynTéov 7) €gopevav Gewpiav, ap. Cramer, 
‘Caten.’ iz Joc.), the Greek Scholiast ap. 
Matthei, and many wf the moderns. The 
fact that what God knows He wills, and what 
He wills He knows, does not affect the mean- 
ing of this word. 

N.B. We have followed modern com- 
mentators in making the construction of the 
sentence to depend upon éxdexrois, as it does of 
course in our version. Most of the ancients 
however, (all the Greek Fathers, as Cyril, 
(Ecumenius, Hesychius, the Scholiast in Cra- 
mer’s ‘Catena,’ and Theophylact,) refer the 
words xara mp. &c. to dmwoarodos. There is 
much to be said for their view. ’*ExXexrois is 
not placed wnere it was to be expected, and 
where it occurs in our version. On the 
other hand the word ‘‘ Apostle” has its po- 
sition marked out at the beginning of the 
epistle, while the designation of the persons to 
whom it was addressed is naturally placed in 
a parenthesis. It is indeed no exaggerated 
descniption of an Apostle to say that he holds 


I; PETER: I: 


that office in accordance with the Fatser’s fore 
knowledge, under the ing influence 
of the Spirit, to win men to obey Christ, and 
to be sprinkled by His blood. It is also in 
accordance with St Paul’s custom, thus to 
state the grounds of his apostolical authority 
in the beginning of an Epistle. There is in- 
deed a very remarkable resemblance between 
this passage, if thus constructed, and the 
opening of the Romans. There the words 
rAnros, dpwpirpévos cis €. 8., and & mpoerny- 
yetharo are nearly equivalent to xara zpd- 
yroow and év adyacue, while eis Umaxony 
corresponds to cis taxonv micrews- A com- 
parison of these passages with the introduc- 
tory sentences of the Epistles to the Galatians, 
Ephesians, and Colossians, strongly confirms 
this interpretation. It may further be remark- 
ed that a full enumeration of the blessings, 
duties, and characteristics of believers is given 
in the following verses, and is scarcely needed 
here. The tendency of modern criticism is to 
undervalue ancient commentators, who were 
often men of sound judgment and acute per- 
ception, and were generally guided by a sure 
instinct in questions depending upon the con- 
struction of their own language. Bede, Ly- 
ranus, the Syriac, and Estius agree with our 
version. 


6. Some of the ancients read dya\hidoeoOe, 


thus Origen, Syr. Onl, adding So\s\ 
for ever. Thus also a few MSS. On the 
other hand (Ecum. 7d yap dyad\aobe avrt 
pédAovtos eltAnmra’ 9 Kal KaTa TO eveoTas. 
This makes it doubtful whether the Latin 
translator, who uses the future tense, followed 
the common reading or not. Most commen- 
tators take the second construction, e.g. Bede, 
Est, Grotius, Bengel, Steiger, &c. 


8. Some MSS. have eiddres, not having 
known. Theophylact, however, who reads ei8o- 
tes, understands it to mean iSdvres* ov eidaTes 
avrov capkos opbadpois ex porns axons ayarare. 
We doubt much whether this is admissible. 
There can be no question that idovres is the 
preferable reading, and it has stronger sup- 
port of MSS. St Polycarp read eis év ovx 
idovres, ‘Ep. ad Phil.’ c. 1. But the reading 
there is not certain. Two MSS. have eidav=- 
tes, Which may be for eidores, ed. Dressel. 
*AyaA\acbe, Ireneus seems to have read 
dya\\tdoecGe; he certainly understood the 
word in the future, exultabitis, and draws 
from it an argument for the resurrection, V. 
c. 7. This gives a satisfactory connection 
with xoustouevor in the next verse, which in 
that case would refer to the future realization 
of the believers’ hopes. 


v. 1, 2.] 


CHAPTER II. 

1 He dehorteth them from the breach of cha- 
Pity: 4 shewing that Christ ts the foundation 
whereupon they are built. 11 He beseecheth 
them also to abstain from fleshly lusts, 13 to 
be obedient to magistrates, 18 and teacheth 
servants how to obey their masters, 20 pa- 
tiently suffering for well doing, after the 
example of Christ. 


fi PETERS Tf. 


Nee G laying aside all 
malice, and all guile, and hy- 
pocrisies, and envies, and all evil 
speakings, 

2 As newborn babes, desire the 
sincere milk of the word, that ye 
may grow thereby : 





Cuap. II. 1—5. EXxHORTATIONS AND 
WARNINGS FOUNDED ON THE PRECEDING 
VIEWS ON THE CONDITION AND NATURE 
OF CHRISTIANS. 


1. Wherefore] This word connects the 
following exhortations closely with the last 
four verses of the first chapter. Inasmuch 
as you have been regenerated by the word of 
God (i. 23), and have received it from your 
spiritual teachers (i. 25), you must in the first 
place lay aside, put away from you, all evil 
passions, especially those which are opposed 
to brotherly love. Compare Eph. iv. 22—31, 
where most of the words and all the topics 
occur which St Peter here uses, They are 
common to all, bearing equally upon Jewish 
and Gentile converts, and are pressed with 
equal force by the two Apostles. 

malice} St Peter takes this first, as the 
main cause of dissensions, whereas St Paul 
places it last, as the climax of all offences 
against brotherly love, Eph. iv. 31. The 
Greek (kakia) refers specially to malignity, 
and is best rendered by the word malice. 

all guile, &c.|] There is a connection of 
sequence between the three vices included in 
this group; guile the inward disease, hypo- 
crisy its outward manifestation, and as a 
cesult of the consciousness of evil, envy in its 
various forms, specially directed against those 
who have the peace in which the hypocrite 
knows that he is lacking, a feeling which sooner 
or later breaks out in calumnious aspersions, 
for which St Paul, Eph. iv. 31, uses the words 
clamour and evil speaking (kpavyn kat SAac- 
gnpia). The comparison with Ephesians is 
important as bearing upon the question 
whether St Peter has one class only of readers 
in mind; the evils were common to all, not 
even, as might be supposed, peculiarly preva- 
lent in the Churches of Asia Minor, but 
equally prominent at Corinth, see 1 Cor. i. 
IO—12, lil. 3, 4, and indeed in all Churches. 
The word rendered ‘laying aside” or “‘ put- 
ting off” (dmo@éuevor) is used twice by St 
Paul, Eph. iv. 22, 25, in refereace to the 
same or similar vices, and stands in antithesis 
to putting on (é€vdicaca), V. 24. Katada- 
Xia is a rare word, used by Clem. Rom. 
‘r Cor.’ xxx., and by Polycarp. 


2. As newborn babes| Referring to i. 23 
the Apostle addresses Christians as newly 
regenerate. The metaphor was not unknown 
to Hebrew writers, who call disciples ‘‘ suck- 


lings ;”’ see Targum on Job iii. 18 ; and Song 
of Sol. viii. 1. It is common in St Paul; and 
in the mind of both Apostles was undoubtedly 
associated with our Lord’s saying; cf. Matt. 
xvili. 3; Mark x. 14, 15. 

desire the sincere milk of the wor Each 
word is emphatic; desire means long for 
earnestly as a babe cares for milk and for that 
only ; it is its proper nourishment; so yours, 
as spiritual babes, is pure unadulterated doc- 
trine, which is conveyed in and by the 
Word. Our translators properly refer the 
adjective (Aoy:kov), rendered elsewhere ‘‘ rea- 
sonable,” Rom. xil. 1, to the Word, ch. i. 23; 
as “bodily” refers to the body, psychical to 
the psyche (living to life), spiritual to spirit, 
SO (Aoyixos) lit. logical, but equivalent in 
sense to ‘‘ rational,” refers to the Word, which 
is the true and proper nourishment of the 
‘“Cinner man,” ‘‘renewed,” and ‘‘created” 
after God in the holiness of truth. The 
nearest equivalent word is spiritual, which 
however could not be used here, as it would 
disguise the reference to the Word. 

sincere| Lit. ‘‘ without guile,” or deceit, in 
antithesis to the guile which must be put 
away. The Greek order of words is ‘‘ logical 
guileless milk ;” doctrine derived from the 
Word, unadulterated by any falsehood. ‘The 
Personal Word, who is the Truth, informs 
the intellect, and quickens the spirit, for in 
Him are hidden all the treasures of wisdom 
and knowledge. Whether St Peter identified 
the Son of God with the Word may be ques- 
tioned, but that he regarded Him as its source, 
and it as His perfect manifestation, is certain. 
The teaching of the early Fathers is deeply 
interesting. Irenzus, 1. IV. c. xxxviii. p. 699, 
ed. Stieren, ‘‘ And for this reason (viz. the 
incapacity of man to receive Christ in the ful- 
ness of His glory), He, who is the perfect 
Bread of the Father, gave Himself as milk, as 
to babes—that by this milky diet, being ac- 
customed to eat and drink the word of God, 
we might be enabled to retain in ourselves the 
bread of immortality which is the Spirit of 
the Father.” See also Origen ‘c. Cels.’Iv. c. 18. 

that ye may grow thereby | Lit. “therein,” in 
the Word as the element wherein the Chris- 
tian life is developed. The oldest and best 
MSS., &, A, B, C, and oldest versions, add 
‘unto salvation,” possibly an early gloss, yet 
important as indicating the true end of spiritual 
growth; cf. Rom. i. 16. ‘‘The word of God,” 
as Tertullian says, ‘‘ must be desired for the 


187 


188 


3 If so be ye have tasted that the 
Lord is gracious. 

4 To whom coming, as unto a 
living stone, disallowed indeed of 


sake of life, devoured by the hearing, rumi- 
nated by the understanding, digested by faith.” 


3. If so be ye have tasted} Rather, IF ye 
tasted; St Peter refers to the first experience 
of converts. The conjunction if, according to 
Greek usage, here implies that such a desire 
must exist in those who, as may be assumed 
in the case of Christians, have known ex- 
perimentally (for sensible apprehension pro- 
duces clearer knowledge than any mere rea- 
soning, Cecum.) the sweetness of spiritual 
food, and learned from it to appreciate the 
graciousness of the Lord. The word here 
used by St Peter (ypyords) has the special 
meaning of benignity; some have held that 
the Apostle refers to the name Christ; but 
this is hardly probable, though the two words 
chrestus and Christus were confused at a very 
early time, as in the well-known account of 
Christians by Tacitus. It has been suggested, 
but seems unlikely, that there is a reference to 
Eucharistic food, administered at that time 
immediately after baptism. The passage is 
taken verbatim from the LXX. of Ps. xxxiv. 8. 

the Lord] In the New Testament, as a 
rule, the Lord Jesus Christ ; here it represents 
the Hebrew, Jehovah: an important point in 
its bearing upon St Peter’s Christology. 


4. To whom coming, &c.| St Peter passes 
on to another and distinct metaphor in order 
to shew the necessity of perfect union with, 
and conformity to, Him from whom spiritual 
life is derived. St Paul has the same metaphor 
in Ephes. ii. 2o—22, and elsewhere. The 
Christian comes to Christ to be built up in 
the faith, and He to whom he comes is con- 
ceived of as the head corner-stone, instinct 
with life, holding together the building and 
felt as the principle of stability in every part. 
St Peter refers explicitly to our Lord’s own 
saying, Matt. xxi. 42. It should be observed 
that he omits altogether to notice the place 
in the building assigned to himself by Christ, 
Matt. xvi. 18, the whole mind and spirit of 
believers being directed exclusively to the only 
source of life. The epithet “living” points 
out, of course, the metaphorical sense of the 
expression, but it is emphatic; that stone is 
all life in itself, and the cause of life to all the 
stones that are joined to it. Christians come 
to Him as living and life-giving that they may 
ive on and by Him. 

disallowed | St Peter could not allude to 
this passage without reference to a point, not 
bearing upon his immediate argument, but 
¢onstantly preseyt to his mind, viz. that the 


LiPETERSIL 


[v. 35 


«en, but chosen of God, and pre- 
cious, 


5 Ye also, as lively stones, "are aes 


built up a spiritual house, an holy 


stone so precious in the sight of God was 
rejected and cast out by man. 

precious] Not the same word as above, 
i. 19; that (riwios) referred to intrinsic pre- 
ciousness, this (évriuos) refers to the recogni- 
tion of that preciousness by the Father. 


5. Ye also, as lively stones, are built up) 
Rather, as the grammatical structure and the 
inner sense indicate, Be ye also built up 
as living stones, Both words ‘‘coming” in 
v. 4 and ‘be built up,” or, “let yourselves 
be built up” (lit. ‘‘ be built up upon”), inti- 
mate the concurrence of an active will in all 
true converts; they are drawn to Christ, but 
follow willingly. The epithet living, not 
lively (which obscures the connection of 
thought), shews that we receive life from 
Him who hath life in Himself, and must 
therefore be fellow-workers with Him. Cf. 
Hermas V. iii. and ix. 

a spiritual house| ‘The antitype of the ma- 
terial house.of God, the temple, of which the 
glory, together with the uses which it pre- 
figured, is transferred to the Church of Christ. 
The frequent use of this metaphor by St Paul 
in epistles specially addressed to Christians of 
Gentile origin sufficiently proves that St Peter 
may have had, and makes it probable that he 
really had, such believers present to his mind, 
though not to the exclusion of Hebrews. He 
had long learned the lesson that in Christ Jesus 
there is neither Jew, nor Gentile; cf. Acts 
XV. 9. 
an holy priesthood | The best MSS., 8, A,B,C, 
and late critical editions insert the preposition 
for (eis) before these words. There can be 
little doubt as to the correctness of this read- 
ing; Christians built up in Christ are made a 
spiritual house, or temple, for a special pur- 
pose, that they may becomea holy priesthood, 
qualified and empowered to offer spiritual sacri- 
fices. The term ‘holy priesthood,” here and 
in v. 9, is not precisely the same as * holy 
priests,” but points to the great truth that 
Christians constitute a corporate unity, col- 
lectively possessing and exercising the func- 
tions of the priesthood. In reference to the 
preceding statement, St Augustine says, 
“Simul omnes unum templum, et singuli 
singula templa sumus,” ‘Ep.’ 187, § 20; so 
Christians are one priesthood collectively, and 
individually in a limited, but definite, sense 
they are priests, see Rev. xx. 6; thus too 
Barnabas, ‘ Ep.’ 4, ‘‘ Let us become spiritual, 
a perfect temple to God.” The priesthood 
of Christians does not trench on the peculia~ 
province of our one High Priest, nor on the 


v. 6, 7.] I MPEPe RE ‘TI. 189 

priesthood, to offer up spiritual sa- and he that believeth on him shall 

crifices, acceptable to God by Jesus not be confounded. 

Christ. 7 Unto you therefore which be-1 6, 9 
6 Wherefore also it is contained in lieve he is ' precious: but unto them oe 


which be disobedient, *the stone 22. Mate 


eIsai. 28 the scripture, * Behold, I lay in Sicn 
which the builders disallowed, the (coy a 


a chief corner stone, elect, precious : 


other hand does it exclude the office of a 
vicarious priesthood, representing and acting 
on behalf of the body corporate; this is 
sufficiently proved by passages in the Old 
Testament, which at once recognise the 
people as priests, and yet restrict certain 
functions to the Aaronic priesthood. Augustine 
‘de Civ. D.’ xx. c. Io, ‘*Sicut omnes Chris- 
tianos dicimus propter mysticum Chrisma, sic 
omnes sacerdotes, quoniam membra sunt unius 
Sacerdotis.” Irenzus, dwelling on the other 
point, expresses tne mind of the early Church, 
‘*Sacerdotes sunt omnes Domini Apostoli— 
qui semper altari et Deo serviunt,” ‘c. Her.’ 
Iv. c. xx. By parity of reasoning all ministers 
and stewards of the mysteries of Christ con- 
stitute a true, though vicarious and representa- 
tive, priesthood. On the whole subject see 
Waterland, ‘ Distinctions of Sacrifice,’ § xIv. 
vol. VIII. p. 341. 

by Jesus Christ] Or, through Jesus 
Christ. The spiritual sacrifices of prayer, 
praise, and all Christian works, are offered 
through Him as the One true High Priest; 
they are also acceptable to God through Him, 
by reason of His One perfect oblation of 
Himself. The construction admits of either 
sense; the former corresponds to ch. iv. 11; 
Heb. xiii. 15; Rom. i. 8, vii. 25; but it is 
probable that the expression as here used in- 
cludes the whole statement; so Didymus, 
Bede, Schott, and De Wette. 


6—10. IN THESE VERSES THE PRE= 
CEDING STATEMENTS ARE CONFIRMED, EX- 
PANDED, AND ILLUSTRATED. 


6. Wherefore also it is contained| ‘The 
meaning of the idiom here employed, which is 
somewhat peculiar, seems to be, ‘‘ with refer- 
ence to the previous statements compare the 
following passages.” N.B. The verb mepiéyer, 
lit. it contains, is held to be equivalent to 
“there is this passage” (epioyn); cf. Acts 
viii. 32, where A.V. renders the word ‘‘place.” 
A similar usage is pointed out in Josephus, 
‘Arch.’ XI. 4. 7: mepséxyer iS thus taken as 
a impersonal verb. 

Behold, &c.] This passage is quoted freely, 
still more freely by St Paul, Rom. ix. 33. 
The original text is correctly rendered in our 
Version, cf. Isai. xxviii. 16; but the Sep- 
tuagint comes very near to St Peter’s quota- 
tion; it omits ‘‘a tried stone,” a ‘sure 
foundation ” (7D}10 7D), and for ‘shall not 
make haste,” it has ‘‘ shall not be ashamed,” 


or, as A.V. here renders it, ‘‘ be confounded.” 
The last expression, however, probably ex- 
presses the true sense of the original; the 
intimate connection between the words 
“hasten,” ‘‘ fear,” and ‘‘ be ashamed,” is best 
shewn in the Arabic, in which the verb which 
exactly corresponds to the Hebrew has these 
three significations, see Pocock, ‘ Port. Mos.’ 
p. 67. It seems clear that St Peter quoted 
from the Septuagint, and that memoriter. 


7. precious! Or lit.is the honour, not 
as in the marg. az honour; i.e. that precious- 
ness, spoken of in the preceding passage, ap- 
pertains to you who believe. As living stones, 
consolidated by faith, and mystically in union 
with that corner-stone, you partake in its 
excellency. 

but unto them which be disobedient] Another 
reading, ‘‘which are unbelieving,” has the 
support of the three oldest MSS. &, B, C, and 
some versions. It agrees better with the con- 
text, in antithesis to ‘‘ you which believe,” but 
it may possibly be an early gloss. 

the stone] St Peter, as is not uncommonly 
the case in the New ‘Testament, combines 
references to two texts, Ps. cxvili. 22, and 
Isai. viii. 14; the former, cited by our Lord, 
Matt. xxi. 42, bearing upon His rejection by 
the Jews, and the completion of His work in 
building up the Church, and by St Peter 
himself, Acts iv, 11; the second predicting 
the result of that rejection to those who in- 
curred the guilt. The passage from the Psalms 
means that the persons upon whom the duty 
of completing the edifice properly devolved, 
viz. the rulers and priests of the Hebrews, 
rejected and cast out the living stone, which 
was proved by the event to be the only one 
on which the building could rest; but in con= 
sequence of that very act, by virtue of the 
sufferings which He then underwent, that 
same Christ became (A. V. is made) at once 
the very corner-stone on which and by which 
the two great divisions of mankind, Jews and 
Gentiles, were compacted into one harmoni- 
ous whole; but at the same time He, whom 
they were called upon to recognise as the 
corner-stone, became to them who rejected 
Him, as such, ‘‘a stone of stumbling,” not, 
that is, a stone at which they stumbled, being 
unwilling to acknowledge its goodness, but 
against which they came into collision; and 
‘“‘a rock of offence,” it being, as Simeon 
(Luke ii. 34) states, set for the fa// and rise 
of many in Israel. They had the option of 


190 
same is made the head of the 
corner, 
‘int & 8 «And a stone of stumbling, and 


a rock of offence, even to them 
which stumble at the word, being 


It PETER IT 


[v. 8, 9 


disobedient: whereunto also they were 
appointed. 
9 But ye are a chosen generation, 


a royal priesthood, an holy nation, 'a 40,2 
peculiar people; that ye should shew peer 





resting upon the rock, but not availing them- 
selves of that option they impinged upon it and 
were broken in pieces, to the destruction of 
their souls individually, and nationally to the 
subversion of their temple and country. 

This passage is omitted in the Syriac ver- 
sion, and rejected as an interpolation by some 
critics—wrongly for it is extant in all the best 
MSS., and the omission is easily accounted for 
by a common error of transcribers in passages 
when the same word recurs after an interval. 


8. even to them] The construction is 
more simple than might appear from this 
rendering. Lit. who being disobedient, 
that is, who by reason of their disobedience, 
or rebellious unbelief, stumble at the Word. 
Here the Word is clearly identified with 
Christ, if not with His person, yet with His 
doctrine, the truth of which He is the mani- 
festation. 

whereunto also they were appointed | i.e. to 
which result of unbelief, sc. utter overthrow, 
they were appointed. The immediate object 
of the Apostle is to shew that the rejection of 
the Jews, brought about by their disobedience, 
was not a new thing, but had been foreseen 
and predetermined. Commentators are divided, 
rather in accordance with their doctrinal 


. views than as a result of grammatical and 


critical inquiry ; some referring the words to 
the unbelief of the Jews, others to the punish- 
ment which followed justly upon their unbe- 
lief. The former view may be defensible on 
the ground that the infatuation of the Jews, 
their utter blindness to the evidences of Christ’s 
Truth, was a judicial infliction, as it is repre- 
sented in many passages of the Old and New 
Testament; but the other view, which refers 
to their punishment as a just and inevitable 
consequence of wilful unbelief, fully meets the 
requirements of the Apostle’s statement. Thus 
Wetstein concisely, ‘‘non ut peccent, sed ut 
peccantes puniantur;” so too Benson, Ham- 
mond, Glass, Grotius, Hensler, Steiger, and 
Huther. Vorstius quoted by Huther, ‘in- 
creduli sunt designati vel constituti ad hoc, 
ut pcenam sive exitium sibi accersant sua in- 
credulitate.” 


9. But ye] The ye is emphatic; but as 
for you, who in contradistinction from the un- 
believing Jews have received the Messiah, ye 
are the new generation consisting of the ‘‘ rem- 
nant of grace” among the Israelites and of all 
Gentiles who are united to the Head of the 
Body by faith. St Peter does not address or 


regard them as separate bodies, but as one 
Body in Christ. 

a chosen generation) Thus “the Lord had 
a delight in your fathers to love them, and to 
choose their seed after them,” Deut. x. 15. 
This applies in a higher sense to those ‘*‘ who 
are born again not of blood, nor of the will of 
the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God,” 
John i. 13; and who are therefore ‘‘ counted 
to the Lord for a generation;” thus again 
Isai. xilii. 20, 21, “My people, my chosen; 
this people have I formed for myself; they 
shall shew forth my praise.” 

a royal priesthood] See above on wv. 8. 
Here instead of ‘‘ holy” St Peter has “royal,” 
in reference to Exod. xix. 6, ‘* Ye shall be unto 
me a kingdom of priests.” The expression in 
Greek follows the Septuagint. Christians are 
in a peculiar sense all ‘‘ kings and priests,” or 
‘‘a kingdom of priests,” Rev. i. 6, where see 
note, and v. 10, by virtue of their mystic union 
with the One King and One Priest of the 
universe. See Augustine ‘de C, D.’ x. 1c. 
Didymus on this passage says, ‘* Wherefore 
we also are named a chosen generation, being 
the offspring of a king and priest; for since 
He who begat us hath both offices, we must 
needs also as of a king hold the kingly office, 
and as of a priest the priestly.” The term 
‘‘rcyal ” might mean either ‘‘ belonging to the 
king,” or ‘‘ having royal prerogatives ;” the 
former explanation is more probable, accord- 
ing with the other designations of Christians, 
and with the principle that all their rights and 
dignities depend upon their relation to their 
King. The Fathers dwell much upon the 
necessary connection between the royalty and 
the priesthood; cf. Irenzus, Iv. c. 20. It is 
also observable that Rabbinical writers recog- 
nise the application of the foregoing texts to 
both dispensations, the old and the new cove- 
nant. Thus ‘Tanchuma’ ap. Wetstein, in 
which treatise Num. iii. 12, xviii. 6, and Exod. 
xix. 6 are quoted, with special reference to 
the expression ‘‘unto Me” in those 

an holy nation] ‘A nation” applies to 
Christians collectively, as forming a distinct 
polity, or society. The Hebrews were a holy 
nation, as being separated from the heathen by 
moral and ceremonial law; Christians in 
virtue of spiritual association with each other, 
and of renunciation of all evil heathenish 
habits. They are sanctified by the blood 
of Christ applied to the conscience by His 
Spirit. Steiger observes that ‘‘ generation ” in 
the preceding clause refers to spiritual descent, 


 €0Or, 
virtues. 


@ Hos 2. 
83. 


v. 10.] 


forth the ' praises of him who hath 
called you out of darkness into his 
marvellous light : 

1o @ Which in time past were not 


‘nation ” to unity of customs; a possible dis- 
tinction, and involving the true thought that 
as Christians derive their life from one King- 
Priest, they must have customs and morals in 
accordance with their descent. 

a peculiar people| Lit. ‘a people of acqui- 
sition,” equivalent to a people acquired and 
possessed as a special and peculiar treasure. 
The passages to which St Peter refers are 
Deut. vii. 6, ‘‘a special” or peculiar people, 
Mal. iii. 17, where A.V. has “jewels,” a 

uliar treasure; and especially Isai. xliti. 21 
(where the Septuagint has a word equivalent 
to that which is here used by St Peter, oy 
mepiroicayny [sic]). ‘ This people which I 
have formed unto myself; they shall shew 
forth my praise.” 

N.B. The words cis wepimoinaw, mepiov- 


ctos, and nbsp, of which the first is used here, 
the second by the LXX. in rendering Exod. 
xix. 5, and by St Paul, Tit. ii. 14, and the 
third in the Hebrew of Exodus and Malachi, 
convey the same idea under different aspects ; 
all imply possession, the first as an acquisi- 
tion, the second as an excellent, the third as a 
special and peculiar, possession. The Chaldee 


use of the verb 530, acquisivit, probably de- 
termined the version here adopted by St Peter. 

The appropriation of all these epithets, in 
their fullest and most spiritual meaning to 
Christians, shews how distinctly the Apostles, 
St Peter and St Paul, who are often misrepre- 
sented as taking different positions, inculcated 
the truth that all the promises made to Israel, 
as the seed of Abraham, were fulfilled in the 
Church. Judaism was absorbed and trans- 
figured in Christianity, in which Gentiles and 
Jews became one race, one nation, and one 
body. 

should shew forth} Or, ‘‘proclaim,” tell 
out, or abroad. The Greek word does not 
occur elsewhere in the N. T., but it is clas- 
sical, and here singularly expressive. 

the praises| Lit. “the virtues” or perfec- 
tions; but the LXX., whose language is here 
adopted by St Peter, use the word (aperas) as 
equivalent to ‘‘ praises” in Isai. xlili. 21, the 
passage here quoted, and in Isai. xlii. t2, and 
Ixiii. 7. The praises are the recognition of 
the divine attributes; and the end of the 
election of Christians is to manifest by their 
lives and to celebrate by their thanksgivings the 
wisdom, power, mercy, and love of Him who 
called them, a point most distinctly brought 
out in the passage of Isaiah here referred to. 
Compare also Isai. lx. 3, where it is said of 
the multitude of the Gentiles who come to 
the glorified Jerusalem and to the /ight, and 


RYPETERS Ib 


a people, but are now the people 
of God: which had not oitained 
mercy, but now have obtained 
mercy. 


brightness of its rising, that they shall bring 
gold and incense, and shew forth the praises 
of the Lord. Here St Peter explains the 
spiritual meaning of that prophecy and shews 
its fulfilment. See however note on 2 Peter 


rege 

who hath called you out of darkness] ‘This 
applies with special force to Gentile converts 
brought out of the total night of heathenism, 
and they appear to have been more imme- 
diately present to the Apostle’s mind; not 
that reference to Jewish converts is excluded, 
of whom the best informed had been but 
partially enlightened, a veil being over their 
hearts, cf. 2 Cor. iit. 14, and of whom the 
great majority were in total darkness. It was 
a special promise that they should have /g4r 
at the coming of Christ, Isai. ix. 1 f.; cf. 
Matt. iv. 16; thus again Isai. lx. 1, ‘* Arise, 
shine, for thy /ight is come.” Cf. Clem. Rom. 
XXXVI. 2. 30. 

marvellous} As transcendent and incon- 
ceivable; the glory of Him who dwelleth in 
unapproached light, 1 Tim. vi. 16. 


10. Which in time past} No passage in 
this Epistle indicates more distinctly the 
Gentile converts as specially the objects of 
St Peter’s address. He agrees with St Paul, 
Rom, ix. 25, 26, who applies the passage of 
Hosea ii. 23-—which primarily referred to 
Israel—specially and distinctly to Gentiles; 
and he adopts the same order, transposing the 
words of the prophet. Had St Peter directed 
his Epistle specially to Jewish Christians it 
seems impossible, or to say the least highly im- 
probable, that he should have chosen this text, 
and have followed St Paul, whose Epistle was 
certainly present to his mind, both in the 
form of the quotation and in its application. 
Hilgenfeld observes that every unprejudiced 
reader must needs infer from this passage that 
St Peter addresses Gentile Christians; ‘ Einl.’ 
p- 628. 

not a people] A singularly strong expees- 
sion, implying that they who in Christ are 
one people had no real existence as such before 
their conversion. Bengel, “ne populus qui- 
dem, nedum Dei populus.” This is in a pecu- 
liar sense true of the heterogeneous mass of 
Gentiles, aliens from God and separated from 
each other by race, language, customs, and 
religion—true also of the whole body of con- 
verts, Jews and Gentiles, previously antago- 
nistic. 

which had not| The use of the Greek 
tenses marks, more accurately than is possible 
in English without a paraphrase, the distinc- 
tion between their former estate, one of une 


Iot 


192 


11 Dearly beloved, I beseech you 
as strangers and pilgrims, abstain 
from fleshly lusts, which war against 
the soul ; 


I. PETER. ‘II 


[v. 11, 22. 


12 Having your conversation ho- 
nest among the Gentiles : that, "where- 10% 
as they speak against you as evildoers, 
they may by your good works, which 


uhevein, 





pardoned sin, and that into which they were 
transferred by a single act on their conversion. 


11. This verse marks the main division of 
the Epistle. From the beginning St Peter 
has been concerned mainly with the privileges, 
blessings and dignity of believers, and with the 
general fundamental principles which follow 
as a necessary consequence from their relation 
to God: he now passes on to exhortations 
about their relative duties to each other and to 
those with whom they come into contact, 
with special reference to the circumstances of 
the times, to the temptations to which they 
were peculiarly exposed by their previous 
habits, and to the effects which their example 
would have for good or for ill upon the 
heathen. The first injunctions dwell upon 
the purity of life, which would specially 
affect the reputation of Christians and their 
influence upon Gentiles. 


11,12. EXHORTATION TO PURITY OF LIFE. 


beloved] Emphatic, a form of address used 
thrice by St Paul, x Cor. x. 14, xv. 58; 
2 Cor. vii. 1; by St John, 1. iii, 2, and by St 
James. Here it introduces the special exhor- 
tations, most fittingly, as an assurance of good 
will and affection, tempering reproaches and 
adding force to entreaties. 

I beseech you] Cf. Rom. xii. 1; Eph. iv. 1, 
where see note. 

as strangers and pilgrims| Cf. i. 17, where 
the word “sojourning” represents the condition 
of those who are here called ‘‘ strangers,” but 
more properly ‘dwellers in a strange land,” 
(maporxor). ‘‘ Pilgrims” does not exactly repre- 
sent the second word, which in i. 1 is rendered 
“strangers ;” see notes there; it denotes 
specially persons who take up their abode for 
a short time, not as settlers, but as visitors in 
a foreign city or land. The ome, the true 
country of the Christian, is heaven; where- 
ever he may be living on earth he is equally a 
stranger. All his rights, privileges, and dignity 
are derived from his citizenship (See note on 
Phil. iii. 20) which is in heaven; so that the 
very exaltation of the believer in spiritual 
things separates him the more completely from 
earthly things; because he isa citizen of heaven, 
belonging to a holy nation, he is a stranger on 
earth; because he is consecrated he must 
abstain from pollutions; because he is a 
soldier of Christ he must war against lust. 
Thus Abraham ‘‘sojourned in the land of 
promise as in a strange country,” and all the 
Patriarchs ‘‘ confessed that they were strangers 
and pilgrims (Sojourners) upon earth,” Heb, 


xi. 13. The word “pilgrim” introduces a 
different, though in itself a true, metaphor. 

Srom fleshly lusts] the fleshly lusts. Cf. 
Gal. v. 16 and Rom. vii. 23. The extent and 
limitation of this injunction are equally im- 
portant; it does not, as Calvin assumes, in- 
clude all natural desires, but all that in their 
tendency are destructive to the soul, that is, 
the principle of life, or rather the inner man, 
not as renewed by grace, but as the principle 
capable of union with the spirit, yet liable to 
assaults: by the lusts are meant, not the 
natural, but those inordinate, appetites whic 
wage an incessant war against the soul, tend- 
ing to reduce it to a state of slavery, and 
finally to destroy it everlastingly. Abstinerce 
is the first movement in the conflict ag-nst 
them, equivalent to “putting away” in the 
first verse of this chapter. The Greek word 
(capxixos) rendered ‘‘fleshly” occurs fre- 
quently in St Paul’s epistles, but net elsee 
where in the N. T. 

which war| The proper meaninj; of this 
expression is ‘‘inasmuch as,” or “#uch as 
war against it” (airwes, not at). The word 
“war” implies active aggression, not simply a 
state of antagonism. Cf. Polycarp, Ep. v. 


12. conversation honest} Conversation is 
used here as in ch. i. 15, 17, in its pro 
sense, as outward conduct, habits of life, by 
which the inner principle is manifested and 
attested. It must be ‘‘ honest,” lit. ** beauti- 
ful,” or ‘‘fair,” an expression common in 
classical Greek, such as may attract and com- 
mand admiration and esteem. 

among the Gentiles} to whom you formerly 
belonged, or among whom you lived, par- 
taking in their excesses. 

whereas] Or, wherein. ‘This expression 
elsewhere, Mark ii. 19, means ‘* at what time” 
(A.V. as long as); here it has rather the 
definite sense, ‘“‘in what,” #e. in the very 
point which now is aimed at by calumnious 
misrepresentations. So in Rom. ii. 1, where 
it is properly rendered ‘‘ wherein.” The point 
which was the object of such attacks was 
and is the special mode of life distinguishing 
Christians, as such, from men of the world, 
whether Jews or Gentiles. 

they speak against you as evildoers] Chris- 
tians were specially attacked by Gentiles, gene- 
rally at the instigation of Jews, on political 
grounds as enemies of the state (cf. Acts 
Xvii. 6, 7); on religious grounds as atheists, 
i.e. rejecting the objects of heathen worship; 
on ethical grounds as introducing unlawful 
customs, and, as it was believed, abominable 





v. 13.] 
they shall behold, glorify God in the 


day of visitation. 
13 Submit yourselves to every or- 


impurity, Acts xvi. 20, 21. These points are 
commonly alleged by opponents of Christian- 
ity, and are specially noticed by apologists in 
the first two centuries. See Athenagoras, 
‘Ap.’ p. 6; Clem. Alex. ‘Strom.’ vil. p. 701, 
and the large collection of passages by Spencer 
on Origen, ‘c. Celsum,’ I. 1, p. 319, ed. Ben. 
Justin Martyr attributes these calumnies to 
Jewish emissaries sent about for the express 
purpose of defaming Christians, see ‘ Dial. c. 
Tryph.’ c. XviI. Suetonius uses the Latin 
word malefici, which exactly corresponds to 
this, in describing Christians at the time when 
this Epistle was written. Hebrew and Gentile 
Christians were of course alike objects of such 
calumnies, but the latter were peculiarly hate- 
ful to the Gentiles as apostates from their 
own religion ; and considering the character of 
many converts before they were rescued from 
the unspeakable pollution of heathenism (cf. 
1 Cor. vi. 9, 11), it is not surprising that 
strong prejudices were entertained, and that 
calumnies invented by the deadly enemies of 
the Cross were readily believed by the Gen- 
tiles. St Peter has each point distinctly present 
to his mind in this and in the following ex- 
hortations. 

by your good works| The same word good, 
or Aonest, used above. A good conversation 
manifested in good works. 

which they shall behold| ‘The entire phrase 
implies that as a result of good works which 
Gentiles observe as spectators—the word is 
emphatic, implying careful inspection (Grimm, 
spectando observo)—they may learn to glorify 
God, to recognise His work with grateful 
admiration ‘‘in the day (rather, a day) of 
visitation.” This last expression might imply 
either a visitation of judgment, the judgment 
of the last day—a meaning, however, quite 
unsuitable to the context, for the Gentiles 
would certainly not then bring to mind the 
good works of Christians, or their own ob- 
servation of them—or as in other passages 
‘‘a visitation of grace” (so Luke xix. 44; 
Gen. |. 24; cf. Wisd. iii. 7, 13; xviii. 19; 
see also Clem. Rom. ‘1 Cor.’ L.), ie. 
when God shall visit their souls, when like 
yourselves they shall return to this Shepherd 
and Bishop, or Visitor (ézicxomos). Then 
the Gentiles would acknowledge the glory of 
God which had previously been manifested 
through the works of Christians; thus Eras- 
mus, Calovius, Calvin, Steiger, Huther. St 
Peter probably has in mind, certainly he re- 
cails to our minds, Matt. v. 16, “‘ Let your 
light...that they may see your good works 
and glorify your Father which is in heaven.” 
The omission of the article before “day” 


New Test—Vot. IV. 


IS PEPER, If. 


dinance of man for the Lord’s sake: 
whether it be to the king, as 
supreme ; 





indicates the uncertainty of the time; but its 
probable occurrence when unexpected is a 
point of extreme importance, urged con- 
stantly by Christian apologists and illustrated 
by the influence of Christian example in 
early ages. Another interpretation is defen- 
sible, but less suited to the immediate con= 
text. It takes the day of visitation to be the 
time of persecution then impending over Chris- 
tians, to which reference is made throughout 
this Epistle. See especially ch. iv, 16—18. 
It is true that conversions of Gentiles were 
common at such visitations, and effected by 
the example of Christian sufferers ; but in this 
passage St Peter is speaking of the general life 
and demeanour of believers as preparing obe 
servers for their own conversion. 


138—17. ExXHORTATIONS TO SUBMISSION 
TO CIVIL AUTHORITIES, OR MORE GENE= 
RALLY TO DUE OBSERVANCE OF THE DUTIES 
OF CITIZENS. 


From the general exhortation to good works 
St Peter passes on to special applications of 
the principle, dwelling in order upon those 
points which were most likely to affect Gen- 
tile observers in judging the tendency of Chris- 
tian doctrine. 


13. ordinance of man] Lit. ‘every human 
creation,” here taken in the sense of institution, 
or as in A.V. ordinance; i. e. every authority 
constituted or appointed by man. This mean- 
ing rests on the authority of the ablest Fathers, 
e.g. Dionys. Rom. ap. Athan. ‘de Syn. Nic.’ 
Pp. 276; Euseb. c. Marc. ap. Socrat. ‘H. E.’ 
II. 21, and is adopted by late commentators, 

for the Lords sake| Both because ‘the 
powers that be are ordained of God,” Rom. 
xiii. 1, to which St Peter certainly refers in the 
next verse; and because submission to legiti- 
mate authority is a most effectual means of 
removing obstacles to the advance of his king- 
dom ; a principle powerfully urged by Justin 
Martyr and other early apologists. 

to the king) The emperor, specially styled 
king by Greek writers; the one supreme 
authority in the lands which St Peter has in 
mind. The emperor at that time was Nero, 
not only notorious for unspeakable crimes, 
but the first persecutor of the Christians, 
the man under whom both St Peter and St 
Paul suffered a long-foreseen martyrdom. The 
precept is therefore universal, binding on the 
conscience of all Christians in their private 
capacity as subjects; the sovereign is supreme 
by the ordinance of man, as the personal 
representative of all power inherent in the 
state. 


N 


193 


194 


14 Or unto governors, as unto 
them that are sent by him for the 
punishment of evildoers, and for the 
praise of them that do well. 

15 For so is the will of God, that 
with well doing ye may put to silence 
the ignorance of foolish men : 





14. governors} The Greek word is spe- 
cially applied to provincial magistrates. 

sent by him]- The natural sequence refers 
“him” to the king, since magistrates are to 
be obeyed simply as his representatives and 
delegates, Cf. Clem. Rom. ‘1 Cor.’ XXXVIL., 
who apparently alludes to this passage. The 
reference to ‘‘the Lord” adopted by some 
commentators rests upon a great truth, and 
accords with St Paul’s argument in a passage 
very closely corresponding with this, Rom. 
xiii. r—5, but it is less obviously connected 
with the preceding words. 

Sor the punishment, &c.] This passage dis- 
tinctly recognises the twofold object of the 
magistracy—not lost sight of under heathen 
rulers—to check crimes by punishment and to 
promote good works by rewarding and pro- 
tecting the agents. Whether it referred to 
the Divine source of all authority, or to the 
supreme authority in the state, this injunction 
is a remarkable instance of the large and 
liberal principles maintained by the Apostles. 
Late writers, e.g. Boissier, Renan, have shewn 
the substantial soundness of Reman legislation, 
and the actual progress of social order, even 
under Nero at the period now under con- 
sideration, and especially in the provinces of 
Asia Minor. 


15. For so is the will of God, ae It 
is God’s will that by such conduct you should 
silence calumniators, who in their ignorance— 
a guilty because wilful ignorance (dyvacia, 
not dyvora)—of the true principles of Chris- 
tians, assume that they lead to evil deeds, not 
to good deeds; and who because of that ig- 
norance must be regarded as foolish (a strong 
word used by St Paul, r Cor. xv. 36), sense- 
less—a defect not merely of mind, but of heart. 
This applies, not to the magistrates, but to 
those who invent or disseminate false reports. 
In the Greek the definite article is here used, 
implying, it may be, that St Peter points to a 
well-known class of accusers. The word ren- 
dered “silence” is very strong, ‘‘stop their 
mouths as with a gag” (@ipody, see 1 Cor. 
ix. 9; 1 Tim. v. 18; Matt. xxii. 12). 


16. As free, and...| St Peter reminds 
the Christians that, although they are truly 
free, indeed the only truly free men—a point 
ever present to the minds of the Apostles 
—yet that freedom did not imply license to 
break the laws of men, being in fact another 


LO PETERS If 


[v. 14—16 


16 As free, and not tusing your |S, 


liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, 
but as the servants of God. 
17 'Honour all men. 
brotherhood. 
the king. 
18 Servants, be subject to your 


Love the ae 
Fear God. Honour 


word for subjection to God. What he warns 
them against most specially was making that 
liberty a pretext for saliciousness,a word which 
designates any kind of evil (equivalent in the 
LXX. to 1), most frequently malignity, 
malice, as in Rom. i. 29; Eph. iv. 31, and in 
the first verse of this chapter; here it evidently 
refers to the evil and refractory spirit shewn 
in violation of law. False teachers inculcated 
two main errors. Judaizers claimed exemp- 
tion from human law; Gentile sophists con- 
founded liberty with libertinism, and held that 
grace implied deliverance from the restraints 
and penalties of divine law. St Peter is care- 
ful, as throughout the Epistle, to reiterate and 
enforce the exhortations of St Paul, see Rom. 
vi. throughout ; Gal. v. 13 f.; and cf. Irenzus 
Iv. 16. 5. N.B. The word rendered “cloke,” 
lit. ‘a covering,” is not found elsewhere in 
the N.T., but it is used by Menander, who 
says of wealth that it is the covering of evil 
deeds. 


17. Honour all men| An universal pre- 
cept, not, as some would have it, limited to 
persons with whom Christians are brought 
into contact as citizens. It has probably a 
special reference to the narrow and exclusive 
spirit common in all ages to mere professors of 
religion, and inculcates reverence for man as 
such, bearing the impress of his divine origin. 
Honour must be taken in this natural sense, 
neither involving undue subservience nor mere 
regard to social and political distinctions. Few 
precepts have been more needed or more neg- 
lected. 

Love the brotherbood| The general honour 
must be transformed into Christian love of 
those who form one brotherhood—a word 
peculiar to St Peter, but expressing the truth 
most strongly inculcated by our Lord—being 
regenerate and children of one Father in 
Christ. The precept in this connection was 
probably suggested by the fact that false 
teachers, whether Jews or Gentiles, were con- 
spicuousfor schismatical tendencies. See 1 Cor. 
i. tof. N.B. Clem. R. has this word (adeA- 

érns) ‘1 Cor.’ 11.; so too Polycarp, Hermas, 

renzus, and many later writers. St Peter 
seems to have first used it. 

Fear God. Honour the king] The fear of 
God is urged not only as the beginning of 
wisdom, but in reference to the preceding pre- 
cepts. The distinction between submission to 
authority and fear due only to the G ver and 




















¥. 1g, 20.] 


masters with all fear; not only to 
the good and gentle, but also to the 
froward. 

1g For this zs thankworthy, if a 
man for conscience toward God en- 
dure grief, suffering wrongfully. 


Lord of life (cf. Matt. x. 28) was specially to 
be borne in mind, as exemplified by St Peter 
himself, Acts iv. 19, and by all Christian con- 
fessors and martyrs. ‘The antinomian had to 
learn the fear of God, the zealot his duty to 
the king. ‘‘Honour” in the last clause is 
emphatic, due in the highest human sense to 
the head and source of all authority. The 
ae conciseness is characteristic of St 
eter’s style. 


DUTIES OF SERVANTS; THE 
EXAMPLE OF CHRIST. 


18. Servants] Not, as in other passages, 
(Eph. vi. 5; Col. iii. 22) “slaves,” but ser- 
vants, properly domestic servants. ‘The term 
(which occurs but thrice elsewhere, Luke xvi. 
13; Acts x. 7; Rom. xiv. 4, where see note) 
is at once more general—since it includes 
‘‘ freedmen,” who formed a large part of most 
Christian churches at that time, and possibly, 
according to Greek usage, other dependent 
members of a household—and more courteous; 
for both reasons noticeable and important 
in its bearings upon practical teaching. Sla- 
very was a condition contrary to inherent 
human right, and as such doomed to pass 
away under the influence of Christianity; ser- 
vitude tempered and regulated by Christian 
principles is inseparable from social order. 
St Peter’s precept applies to both conditions; 
but at that time the temptation against which 
it warns was a peculiarly trying one. It was 
hard to reconcile temporal bondage with spi- 
ritual liberty ; hardest when masters were infi- 
dels, and as such likely to treat their slaves 
with peculiar cruelty. The difficulty may 
have been enhanced in the case of Hebrew 
converts, by the Rabbinical maxim that ‘‘a 
Jew ought not to be a servant to a heathen,” 
and on the other hand by the principle of the 
Essenes, that it is contrary to the law of 
nature to be a servant to any one. ‘The so- 
briety of apostolical teaching stands out in 
marked contrast to that of fanatics in all 
times. The gradual transformation tending 
to the final extinction of slavery is well brought 
out by P. Allard, ‘ Les esclaves chrétiens.’ 

be subject] Lit. ‘submitting yourselves.” 

to the froward| Lit. the ‘‘crooked,” but 
in the sense ‘‘ perverse,” which is exactly ex- 
pressed by ‘ froward,” Anglo-Saxon fram- 
veard, aversus, perversus; here it is in anti- 
thesis to “gentle,” or, as the word so ren- 
dered means, equitable and kindly. The duty 
is thus enforced in its fullest extent, including 


1s—al. 


HIPE GE RII: 


20 For what glory is it, if, when 
ye be buffeted for your faults, ye 
shall take it patiently? but if, when 
ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take 


it patiently, this zs "acceptable with !0r 
p Y> ptable with ; 


God. 





even ‘‘ fear” in allits legitimate working: but 
it dves not include evil compliance, such as 
was .2ld by Roman legists to be a duty on 
the part of freedmen and of zecessity on the 
part of slaves. Cf. Seneca ‘Contr.’ Iv. Pro 
and Boissier, ‘La religion romaine,’ 11. p, 
389, and see note on Rom, vii. 15. 


19. thankworthy| Lit. ‘a grace;” which 
might mean it is one effect and proof of di- 
vine grace; but here more probably ‘‘ accept- 
able to God,” as in the last clause of the fol- 
lowing verse. 

conscience toward God] Lit. ‘conscience 
of God,” an expression which probably means 
** consciousness of the presence and power of 
God;”’ cf. 1 Cor. viii. 7, where ‘‘ conscience 
of idols” means ‘a conscious belief in the 
reality of false gods.” Such consciousness in 
the Christian involves the recognition of all 
duties flowing from our relation to God. The 
word is peculiar to St Peter and St Paul, see 
Introd. to Acts, p: 342, 0.2. Our A.V. 
expresses the truth in its most practical bear- 
ings; cf. 1 Cor. x. 25, 27. 

suffering wrongfully | This may not refer 
directly to the case of Christian servants per- 
secuted for their faith; but it undoubtedly 
includes them, and was probably suggested in 
this connection by the frequency of such occur- 
rences. 


20. For what glory is it] ‘‘ Glory” here 
does not mean ‘‘cause of boasting,” a different 
word being used for that, but refers to the 
effect produced upon others by good conduct. 
They will think and say nothing of such con- 
duct if the punishment be provoked. The 
word (xAéos), common in classical writers, 
does not occur elsewhere in the N. T. 

if, when, &c.| ‘The original brings out 
the antithesis more forcibly ‘‘if sinning and 
buffeted,” ‘‘if well doing and suffering.” It 
may seem strange that the Apostle appears to 
recognise no merit in patient endurance of 
afflictions brought on by our own faults. The 
truth seems to be that although this is a pecu- 
liarly difficult work, and as such characteristic 
of Christians, it is simply a duty; whereas 
when the Apostles ‘rejoiced that they were 
counted worthy to suffer shame for His 
name,” when after cruel and illegal scourging 
‘“‘they sang praises unto God,” Acts xvi. 25, 
they won the crown of righteousness. In 
both cases the power of grace is felt, in the 
latter it is manifested to all observers and 
wins “glory.” Cf. Isidor. Pel. ‘ Ep.’ Lib. Ve 

N 2 


195 


PETES AL 


21 For even hereunto were ye 
called: because Christ also suffered 
'for us, leaving us an example, that 
ye should follow his steps : 

22 Who did no sin, neither was 
guile found in his mouth : 

23 Who, when he was reviled, 


254, ‘suffering wrongfully wins the meed of 
crowns, suffering for faults is the acquittal of 
debts.” Cf. Luke xxiii. 41. 

acceptable] The same word which above, 
v. 19, is rendered ‘‘thankworthy.” The 
meaning appears to be that such conduct im- 
plies a state of grace in reference to God; 
scarcely, as some hold, an act meriting thanks 
from God. Cf. Luke ii. 52. 


21—25. The Apostle passes on from the 
duty to the motive. Upon the lowliest Chris- 
tian he presses the highest principle; thus 
combining practical every-day work with the 
sublimest mystery of redemption. 


21. 4ereunto| Not to suffering only, 
though the kingdom of God must be entered 
“through much tribulation,” but to patience 
under suffering. 

because Christ also] Even He, your Master, 
whom ye profess to follow: but the peculiar 
force of the exhortation lies in the motive of 
gratitude. 

suffered for us| Rather, for you; so the 
oldest MSS. and early versions, both in this 
and in the next clause. St Peter has those 
whoin he addresses present to his mind. He is 
urging upon maltreated servants the most diffi- 
cult of all duties. N.B. Reiche has strong 
arguments in favour of adopting ws as the 
true reading in this clause, and you in thenext. 

leaving us an example] Or, leaving you: 
both words, ‘‘leaving” and ‘‘example,” are 
peculiarly emphatic. The word example 
means properly ‘‘a line or sketch traced by 
the teacher over which the scholar was to 
write a letter or draw a figure;” a model 
therefore not merely to be contemplated, 
but exactly copied, line for line, feature for 
feature. ‘The word is peculiar to St Peter, 
and is characteristic of his own close minute 
adherence to his Master’s teaching and imita- 
tion of his Master’s example. It is also no- 
ticeable as being adopted by early Christian 
writers, especially by Clement of Rome, a 
younger contemporary of the Apostle, fellow- 
worker with him and with St Paul. See his 
‘first Epistle to the Corinthians,’ v. 7, with Bp 
Lightfoot’s note; XVI. 17 and XXxXIII. 8. 
Thus also Polycarp, ‘ad Phil.’ vii. 2, evi- 
dently alluding to this passage, ‘‘ Let us there- 
fore imitate His patience—for He gave us this 
example (set us this pattern) in Himself.” 

follow] The Greek word so rendered occurs 


[v. 21—24. 


reviled not again; when he suffered, 


he threatened not; but ' committed 'Or 


Oe 


himself to him that judgeth right- suse — 


eously : 
24. Who his own self bare our 


? 


sins in his own body !on the tree, '0™ #4 


that we, being dead to sins, should 





but thrice elsewhere (1 Tim. v. 10, 24; Mark 
xvi. 20). It is emphatic and implies close 
and diligent following. 


22. Who did no sin] St Peter, in speaking 
of His Master, ever reverts to the utterances of 
the ‘‘ Spirit of Christ,” dwelling on the pro- 
phets, ‘‘ which declared beforehand the suffer- 
ings of Christ and the glory which shoud 
follow,” i. 11. Here he adopts the words of 
Isaiah as completely describing His acts and 
feelings, with special application to servants. 
The servant is tempted to deceit—in His lips 
was no guile: the servant is provoked to 
insolent and passionate words—when He was 
reviled and suffered He neither reviled nor 
threatened: as the Lord committed His cause 
to the one righteous Judge, so the servant has 
to look up to Him as at once his Example and 
his Judge. It has been justly remarked that 
Isaiah in that passage speaks of Him specially 
as the Servant of the Lord. 


24. Who...bare our sins| ‘The word ren- 
dered ‘‘ bare” has a singular fulness of signi- 
ficance: it is a sacrificial term, constantly used 
in the Septuagint for offering sacrifice; here 
it includes two meanings, our Lord took up 
our sins, and in His own body which He 
offered on the cross He expiated them. This 
explanation is admitted and proved by De 
Wette, Huther, Grimm, and indeed all criti- 
cal commentators. (Grimm ‘Lex N. T.’. 
tollere peccata in crucem, sc. ad ea patiendo, 
moriendoque expianda.) It must also be 
noted that when He took up our sins, He took 
them away, enabling us to be rid of them. 

on the tree} The same word, rather a 
peculiar one, is used by St Peter in the Acts, 
ch. v. 30; see Introduction to Acts, note, 
P. 340. 

that we, being dead) The word rendered 
‘‘dead,” and that very probably as the best 
equivalent, means ‘‘ having ceased to exist,” 
or to be liable to sins, our old, or besetting 
sins. The temptation may be terribly strong 
—had it not been so it would not have needed 
a dying Saviour, and had not that work been 
effectual He would not have undertaken it. 
To use the words of a living teacher, “A 
lifelong ministry of sacrifice, finished by the 
crucifixion, has bought for man freedom of 
conscience for.the past, freedom of will for 
the future.” Thomson, ‘ Bampton Lectures’ 
for 1856. : 





v. 25.] 


live unto righteousness: by whose 
stripes ye were healed. 

25 For ye were as sheep going 
astray; but are now returned unto 
the Shepherd and Bishop of your 
souls. 


should live unto righteousness | Cf. Rom. vi. 
II. 
by whose stripes] Lit. By whose bruise, 
properly, by whose wale, specially the livid 
mark left by scourging, for the severity of 
which in our Lord’s case, see note on Matt. 
xxvii. 26. The application to servants whose 
sccurging, however cruel, would fall short of 
that inflicted before crucifixion, is natural and 
obvious. 


25. as sheep going astray| Another image 
from Isai. lili. 6. Cf. Ps. cxix. at the end. 
It implies that wild and perilous courses 
might have been natural, as they were in fact 
all but universal, before converts were brought 
into the fold and placed under the guidance 
and care of the heavenly Shepherd. 

but are now returned] Or, ‘but ye turned 
back,” se. at the time of your conversion; St 
Peter refers to an act then accomplished, of 
which the effects must still continue. You 
then left all devious and perilous courses, you 
are under a sure and safe guide if you follow 
in His steps. Christ’s twofold office is here 
marked. Heis our Shepherd because He feeds, 
guides and protects us; He is our Bishop be- 
cause He inspects, exercises vigilant control 
over us and over all subordinate shepherds 
and bishops to whom for a season He commits 
the charge over Christians. It is noteworthy 
that St Peter neither here nor in any part of 
the Epistle, nor in his speeches, makes any 
reference to his own special position in the 
Church (Matt. xvi. 18, 19), or to the special 
office assigned to him by his Master, cf. John 
xxi. 17. As shepherd and bishop he has one 
work, to bring the people, whom he now 
addresses, to the One true Shepherd. 


Cuap. III. 
1—6. DuTIES OF CHRISTIAN WHVEs. 


The Apostle proceeds in his enumera- 
tion of relative duties, not from servants to 
masters. 2: might here be expected, but to 
wives. This is not to be accounted for by 
supposing that, in the district to which this 
Epistle was addressed, there were few free 
men or heads of families among the converts 
to Christianity. That argument would have 
applied equally to St Paul who, in his pastoral 
admonitions to communities in Asia Minor, 
makes special mention of masters, see Eph. vi. 


RIPE Rew WT. 


CHAPTER III. 


1 He teacheth the duty of wives and husbands 
to each other, 8 exhorting all men to unity 
and love, 14 and to suffer persecution. 19 He 
declareth also the benefits of Christ toward 
the old world. 


g; Col. iv. 1. It seems to bea natural result 
from the general plan of this Epistle: here St 
Peter’s main object is to inculcate submission, 
resignation, and avoidance of conduct which 
might exasperate or alienate persons in au- 
thority or in a position of social superiority. 
Certainly in that age and country, especially 
in Asia Minor, no persons were in more need 
of advice, encouragement and exhortation than 
married women. ‘The Greeks, in accordance 
with the views of their highest philosophers— 
see the references in Wetstein in loc, and 
Aristotle ‘Pol.’ 1. § 2—regarded a wife as 
holding an intermediate position between a 
free person and a slave; if not as a chattel, or 
mere property, yet as an absolute dependent, 
and at best, as a trusty instrument for the 
management of his household; as the mother 
but not the educator of his children, the agent 
but not the partaker of his counsels. Among 
barbarians generally, as Aristotle l.c. points 
out, the wife and the slave were in the same 
position. 

In addition to these general facts it must be 
observed that in the partially civilized districts 
in the north of Asia Minor the treatment of a 
wife was rough and unmanly ; her whole life was 
embittered by the intemperance and licentious- 
ness of her master. In northern Africa, 
where the general condition resembled that of 
Asia Minor pretty closely, and at a much 
later time, when Christianity had materially 
softened the old habits, St Augustine men- 
tions, as a singular proof of his mother’s ad- 
mirable character, that her husband did not 
beat her. But when to all other causes of 
disorder there was added that of religious 
difference, when the husband felt that his wife 
scorned the observances which he usually left 
to her care, when the wife knew that her hus- 
band’s religion was destructive of his moral 
character, it is evident that without the most 
perfect sacrifice of self, without the most pru- 
dent, as well as most virtuous conduct on 
her part, the disruption of family ties would 
have ensued upon the introduction of the 
truth ; the name of Christ would have been 
blasphemed, and a fierce persistent spirit of 
antagonism would have been aroused which, 
deriving its strength from natural feelings, 
would have imperilled the fabric of Chris- 
tianity. Hence the need of wise, precise, and 
earnest exhortations, such as are given mr et 
fully and forcibly in this passage. 


197 


198 


IKEWISE, ye wives, e in sub- 
jection to your own husbands ; 
that, if any obey not the word, they 
also may without the word be won 
hy the conversation of the wives ; 
2 While they behold your chaste 
conversation coupled with fear. 


Ut PETE iLL 


[v. 1—4- 


Whose adorning let t not be 
that outward adorning of plaiting the 
hair, and of wearing of gold, or of 
putting on of apparel ; 

4 But /et st be the hidden man of 
the heart, in that which is not cor- 
ruptible, even the ornament of a meek 





1. Likewise] Emphatic, ‘“‘in the same 
manner” as slaves are bound to submission 
so are wives. The Apostle uses the same 
word for due and orderly submission, and in 
the same form; lit. being in subjection: 
this denotes a voluntary act, or rather habit. 

that, if any obey not the word] Or, that 
even if some are disobedient to the 
word. ‘The expression implies that the Apo- 
stle expects that most husbands of believing 
wives would themselves be Christians, but 
that exceptions would be found, perhaps not 
uncommon. Women did, in point of fact, 
take the lead very frequently in conversion ; 
and the antagonism which thus sprung up 
was the immediate cause of some of the earliest 
and fiercest persecutions. See Justin Mart. 
‘Apol.’ u. §2; Eus. ‘H. E.’ 1v.17, §§ 2—13. 

the word] Equivalent to the ‘ Gospel,” 
see above, i. 23, note; and ii. 8. 

without the word] For “without” the 
Greek has two expressions: one simply de- 
notes the absence of a truth; the other, which 
is here used, implies its rejection. ‘The state- 
ment therefore means not that the husbands 
had not heard of, but that they had rejected 
Christianity. The exposition that the Apostle 
means ‘‘ without any argument,” such as might 
be adduced by a Christian wife, is certainly 
incorrect, and the inference drawn from it by 
Renan, viz. that women ought not to discuss 
such questions with their unbelieving husbands, 
has no place here. Clement of Alexandria 
lays down the true principle and rule for con- 
duct. ‘Strom.’ Iv. p. 523 C (p. 621, ed. Pott.) 
‘*¢ A discreet woman would desire in the first 
place to persuade her husband to bea partaker 
with her of those things which conduce to 
blessedness, but should this be impossible let 
her strive only for virtue, obeying her hus- 
band in all things, so as never to do anything 
without his consent, save only those things 
which are held rightly to appertain both to 
virtue and to salvation.” ‘This injunction is 
admirably illustrated by the passage in Justin 
Martyr above referred to. 

may...be won| ‘The same word used by St 
Paul, 1 Cor. ix. 19, 21, implies to gain as 
converts to Christ. Won expresses this, if 
understood in its literal and full sense. 

conversation| As above, ii. 12, the whole 
conduct, habits and demeanour; see too i. 15. 


9. While they behold] As above, ii. 12, the 
word means having observed as eye-witnesses, 


and having special opportunities for ascertain- 
ing—a metaphor from admission to sacred 
and mysterious rites. 

chaste conversation] St Peter repeats the 
word, adding two expressions which fix atten- 
tion on a special point, ‘‘ chaste” implies exe 
treme purity of heart and conduct; and fear, 
reverence for the rightful and inalienable au- 
thority of the husband, as defined by Clem. 
Alex. in the passage above quoted. The 
union of the two principles, equally difficult 
to observe in cohabitation with a heathen 
husband, characterizes the perfect Christian 
wife. 

3. Whose adorning let it not be| Or, 
whose adorning should be, not &c. 
This form of expression is a common Hebra- 
ism and implies, zot a prohibition of outward 
adorning, but a declaration of its worthless- 
ness if opposed to, or separated from, inward 
graces. 

plaiting the hair | Excessive care in wreath- 
ing the hair is constantly noted by contem- 
porary satirists; not merely as a symptom of 
vanity, but as a common occasion of cruelty 
to slaves. 

of gold| Rather, of gold ornaments, 
necklaces, &c., which are still in the East 
used to an extent beyond all proportion to a 
woman’s means. 

of apparel] Costly raiment, such as is 
reckoned among household riches by sacred 
and profane writers. All these expressions 
justify the inference that many Christian con- 
verts belonged to the middle or even opulent 
classes, as was certainly the case at a very 
early period. 


4. the hidden man] This is not quite 
synonymous with the new or regenerate man, 
the soul renewed by Divine grace, but is here 
equivalent to the soul, the inner principle of 
life, as distinguished from the outward, ma- 
terial body. Thus Athanasius, ‘ De Incarn.’ p. 
626 B, ‘‘our inner man is the soul,” and 
Clem. Alex. ‘ Ped.’ 111. 1, says, ‘the inner 
man is the rational nature which rules the 
outer man;” a passage noteworthy as being 
full of reminiscences of this part of ous 
Epistle. Here it must be observed that in the 
case of the women addressed by St Peter “‘ the 
inner man” had been renewed in conversion, 
so that the injunction specially applies to 

hristians, 


Cc 
in that which is not eorruptible] Lit. “ia 


EE 


ve 5—7-] 


and quiet spirit, which js in the sight 
of God of great price. 

5 For after this manner in the 
old time the holy women also, who 
trusted ia God, adorned themselves, 
being in subjection unto their own 
husbands : 


I. PETER. III. 


6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, 


calling him lord: whose ' daughters ',Gr. oka 


ye are, as long as ye do well, 
and are not afraid with any amaze- 
ment. 

7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell 
with them according to knowledge, 





the incorruptibility;” the expression is pecu- 
liar and emphatic, contrasting the imperish- 
able beauty of a Christian spirit with perish- 
able ornaments, cf. i. 7 

a meek and quiet spirit | Or the meek and 
quiet spirit, viz. that spirit which in the sight 
of God is the true and truly precious jewel 
becoming and characterizing the Christian 
wife. ‘The use of the article in this passage 
led Athanasius (‘ad Serap.’ 1), and probably 
Clem. Alex. (‘Pzd.’ Il. c. 10, p. 291, ed. 
Potter) to interpret ‘‘ of the gentle and quiet 
Spirit,” as referring to the Holy Spirit; but 
St Peter is evidently speaking here not of the 
source, but of the manifestation of this charac- 
teristic grace. Both words, meek and quiet, 
seem to refer to the Christian Beatitudes in 
Matt. v. 

which is in the sight of God of great price] 
St Peter is careful to notice that the Christian 
temper which wins the affection of the crea- 
ture has the infinitely higher reward of God’s 
approval. 


5. after this manner | That is, such were 
the ornaments worn by matrons of old.- To 
precept the Apostle, as usual, adds example. 

who trusted in God| Rather, who hoped 
in God, whose hope was Godwards. That 
hope in all times enabled truly religious wo- 
men to bear with humility and patience the 
yoke made cruel and grievous by human 
laws, or more especially by undisciplined and 
tyrannical passions. Hope is often noted as 
the characteristic grace of our Apostle; here 
we have its special bearing on resignation 
under a peculiarly heavy trial noted. The 
condition of the Christian wife has undergone 
a change, scarcely less complete than that of 
the Christian domestic, in each case from 
slavery, yet leaving the duty of subordination 
intact, and the Apostolic injunctions univer- 
sally applicable. 

6. calling him lord] A term that denotes 
supremacy, such as was enforced by the sen- 
tence of God; Gen. iii. 16 and xviil. 12, the 
passage to which St Peter evidently refers. 

whose daughters ye are| Rather, ‘‘ whose 
daughters ye became.” This undoubtedly 
implies that the majority of those whom St 
Peter addresses were Gentile converts, not 
Hebrews by birth. The argument stands thus, 
just as you became children of Abraham, being 
regenerate on the condition of faith, so ye 
became daughters of Sarah on the condition 


of following her example. It must be borne 
in mind that St Paul (Gal. iv. 22—31) had 
taught converts in Asia Minor that Sarah was 
a type of the true Church, which is free. The 
conditions are twofold,—activity in all good 
work; and superiority to vague, groundless 
terrors. 

amazement] ‘The expression, which is some- 
what peculiar, rightly understood gives the 
true sense of the original, which is usually 
translated ‘‘terror.” It means properly ner- 
vous terror, such as produces or indicates 
bewilderment. It occurs often in the LXX., 
corresponding to Hebrew words signifying 
terror, shuddering. The fear of the Christian 
wife must be carefully distinguished from ner- 
vous terror, the one leads to faithful discharge 
of duty, the other to misapprehension of what 
is really her duty, or to inability to dis- 
charge it. 


DUTIES OF HUSBANDS. 


This short address to husbands seems to be 
introduced, as it were, parenthetically, the 
general purport of this part of the Epistle 
being the inculcation of submission upon 
those Christians who were in a position of 
dependence or subordination. It is evidently 
so introduced in order to guard against any 
abuse of the preceding advice to wives: and 
to enforce the truth that the relation of the 
husband to the wife is not merely, or even 
essentially, one of authority but of mutual 
affection to be regulated by Christian prin- 
ciple. Hence the Apostle does not dwell upon 
the obvious duties of protecting and support- 
ing the wife, but upon those higher duties 
which devolve upon the husband spiritually in 
Christ. Compare the singularly profound and 
beautiful exhortations of St Paul, Eph. v. 
25—33- 

7. Likewise| I.e. with the same regard to 
Christian principle; or, as some explain the 
word, in the same spirit of obedience to the 
law of Christ. Possibly the word may simply 
mean, As I have exhorted wives, so now [ 
exhort husbands, 

dwell with them according to knowledge] 
The true construction of this clause seems to 
be—‘‘Living together, according to knowledge, 
with the woman as the weaker vessel,”—in 
which statement are involved certain special 
principles: “‘ according to knowledge” might 
be taken generally as an iniunction to rational} 


199 


200 


giving honour unto the wife, as unto 
the weaker vessel, and as being heirs 
together of the grace of life; that 
you~ prayers be not hindered. 


intercourse, but in this passage, which deals 
with Christians, as such, ‘* knowledge” must 
be that which is a necessary result and re- 
ward of faith (‘‘intellectus est merces fidei,” 
Augustine), and leads to clear views of all the 
bearings of relative duties. It points specially 
to the duty of forbearance and kindliness to 
the wife as weaker in body, or more generally 
in physical and mental constitution. (The 
word ‘vessel corresponds very nearly to the 
old Rabbinical word yetser, for which two 


other words mana NINID, and keli 9, signi- 
fying ves«l, are also used.) Upon the obvious 
disparity of natural powers heathenism founded 
the law of despotic power universally claimed 
for the husband; while Christianity derives 
from it a peculiar obligation to love and 
cherish. 

giving honour, &c.| Here too the words 
are properly taken in a different connection 
from that adopted in our A.V. Rendering 
honour as due to those who are also 
fellow-heirs of the grace of life. The 
word (azoveuovres) rendering, which does not 
occur elsewhere in the New Testament, and but 
once in the LXX., in a different sense, has a 
special significance. It is common in classical 
writers, always in reference to what is due 
from oneto the other party: so that the render- 
ing of Aonour is not a mere act of favour, but 
the recognition of a due. The principle is 
recognised by some Rabbinical writers, quoted 
by Wetstein; but in its full development is 
essentially Christian, founded here upon the 
perfect equality of coheirs of the kingdom of 
heaven, or, as here described, ‘‘the grace of 
life,” the spiritual and eternal life bestowed by 
grace. N.B. Weadopt the punctuation of most 
commentators, as more logical and satisfactory 
than that of our Version. The reading ovy- 
kAnpovowots, Which rests mainly on the au- 
thority of B, is accepted by Tischendorf, and 
Brickner. The received text is not unsatis- 
factory, since it implies that husbands feeling 
that they are fellow-heirs with their wives are 
bound to render them the honour due to them 
in that high relationship; but the other read- 
ing is more natural, and is held by Reiche to 
be far preferable. 

that your prayers be not hindered] As they 
would be were the true relations disturbed by 
the husband’s unchristian demeanour, or dis- 
regard of his wife’s claim to due reverence. 
Two hearts at variance with each other will 
not offer the common incense of prayer, nor 
ean husband or wife bring singly and sepa- 
rately an acceptable offering, while labouring 
under the sense of unrepented or unforgiven 


EIPETER Sa 


[v. 8 


8 Finally, de ye all of one mind, 
having compassion one of another, 


‘love as brethren, de pitiful, be cour- 1Orloring 
brethren. 


teous : 





wrong. This principle then applies to all 
the intercourse between husband and wife; 
including, but not confined to, the ebullitions 
of unseemly passions, regarded by some ancient 
and modern commentators as the point chiefly 
intimated—thus the Scholiast, ‘for disturb- 
ance in a house is a hindrance to all religious 
works ;” and Ignatius, ‘ad Phil.’ § 8, ‘* where 
there is division and wrath God dwelleth not” 
—nor on the other hand specially, if at all, 
referring to mutual abstinence during certain 
periods for devotional purposes, a view com- 
mended by CEcumenius, Jerome, ‘c. Jovinian.’ 
I., and Estius, and to a certain degree counte- 
nanced by the expression, ‘according to 
knowledge,” but having no real support in 
this or any other passage in the New Testa- 
ment. The feelings of the early Fathers on 
this point are, perhaps, best expressed by 
Clem. Alex. ‘Strom.’ II. p. 423 c. N.B. The 
MSS. vary between éx- and éyxémrea@a, the 
latter, which is represented by our A.V., is 
preferred by most commentators, but Schoett- 
gen shews that the former corresponds more 
closely to the Hebrew idiom. 


8—1l. GENERAL EXHORTATIONS. 


The Apostle passes from special injunctions 
to the great Christian principles which under- 
lie and regulate all relative duties. 


8. Finally | The word is emphatic; as the 
final end and true object of all injunctions 
attend to these principles. 

all of one mind, &c.| St Peter sets forth 
those principles in five words, which lose 
somewhat of their force in our rendering—the 
first fundamental principle is unity of thought 
and feeling. For this the Apostle has a word 
new in its application to Christians ¥ r. in 
New Testament, and not found in the LXX.), 
but common in classical writers; here deriv- 
ing its full significance from the new mina 
derived from Christ. 

having compassion one of another| Rather, 
as expressed in a single word sympathizing, 
involving interchange of fellow-feeling whether 
in joy or sorrow; so St Paul, Rom. xii. rs, 
‘* Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep 
with them that weep.” The word (cupra6eis) 
is peculiar to St Peter. 

love as brethren] Again in one word, 
*‘ brother-lovers,” i.e. lovers of brethren, that 
special feeling of brotherly love which unites 
all children of God in Christ. This word 
too is used by St Peter only, condensing in 
one pregnant expression a whole series of 
Christian admonitions. 

pitiful] Lit. “‘good-hearted,” having viscera 


© Pal, 34. 


t2, &c. 


v. 9—11.] 


9 Not rendering evil for evil, or 
railing for railing: but contrariwise 
blessing ; knowing that ye are there- 
unto called, that ye should inherit a 
blessing. 

10 For “he that will love life, and 


LiPEPER. OTL. 


see good days, let him refrain his 
tongue from evil, and his lips that 
they speak no guile: 

11 Let him eschew evil, and do 
good; let him seek peace, and en- 
sue it. 





or heart thoroughly right, full of mercy and 
love. St Paul uses this word once, Eph. iv. 
32. It occurs once in Hippocrates, in the 
technical sense, ‘‘with strong healthy viscera.” 
The noun from which it is derived is very 
common in the New Testament, and (as has 
been frequently noted) means not ‘‘the 
bowels,” as our A.V. unhappily renders it, 
but the nobler intestines, the heart, liver, 
lungs, &c., the seat of strong emotions. It is 
also used by the Greeks, but specially as the 
organ of angry vehement passions, among the 
Hebrews of tenderness and specially of pity. 

be courteous| ‘This expresses very nearly 
the common reading, and yields a true and 
very attractive meaning, which we should 
gladly retain, were it not that all the best MSS. 
and critical editions have another word, 
humble-minded—the point which St Peter, 
having his Master’s teaching ever in mind, is 
specially anxious to impress upon all Chris- 
tians, here in connection with the whole 
tenour of the Epistle. 


9. Not rendering, &c.] St Peter now 
applies the principles of Christian life to inter- 
course with those without; having more im- 
mediately in mind the temptations to which 
believers were exposed in contact with the 
heathen, at a time when persecution was near 
at hand and already making its approaches felt 
by evil acts and evil words. 

evil for evil] Cf. Rom. xii. 17. 

but contrariaise blessing] Blessing is here 
a participle; but do the very reverse, ‘‘ bless 
them that curse you,” Matt. v. 44; a word 
which St Peter of all the apostles was specially 
careful to bear in mind. 

knowing that] Or (omitting the word 
«‘knowing,” as not extant in any of the oldest 
MSS., and not required by the sense), for ye 
were called unto this, viz. to bless others in 
order that ye may yourselves inherit blessings ; 
or ye were called unto this, that is, to a state 
of blessing in order that ye may bless others. 
The argument is cogent in either case; and 
commentators are divided as to which is pre- 
ferable. In favour of the second it may be 
argued that it is rather in accordance with the 
principles of the Gospel to deduce duties from 
privileges, the duty of blessing others from the 
privilege of inheriting blessings ourselves, than 
to inculcate duties as the means of obtaining 
privileges ; and this comes nearer to the argu- 
ment in Eph. iv. 1 f., where we find the same 
Kind of Christian duties based upon the call- 
ing of Christians. Still the former construc- 


tion is more obvious, and in addressing 
persons in various stages of spiritual life, the 
Apostle may have dwelt upon what all would 
feel as a powerful inducement. This too seems 
more probable when we compare the exhorta- 
tion and promise with Matt. v. 44, 45, which 
was evidently present to the mind of St Peter, 
and consider the close connection of this ex- 
hortation with the following passage quoted 
trom the xxxivth Psalm. 


10—12. THIS CITATION ENFORCES THE 
DISCHARGE OF ALL CHRISTIAN DUTIES BY 
REFERENCE TO THE ALL-SEEING JUDGE, 
and that not merely to the future judgment, 
but to His abiding presence and constant 
dealings with the evil and the good. 


10. 4e that will love life| There is a 
singular deviation from the Septuagint (which 
throughout the rest of the quotation is fol- 
lowed closely by St Peter) in these words; 
and the rendering of the Apostle presents some 
difficulty. The LXX. have, ‘‘ he that desireth 
life and loveth to see good days,” slightly dif- 
fering from the Hebrew, ‘‘and loveth days that 
he may see good.” St Peter’s rendering gives 
the sense ‘‘ he whose will is set on loving true 
life and having good, #.e. happy and well-spent 
days.” A slight change of order would bring 
this passage into exact agreement with the 
LXX.; but the MSS. and some of the earliest 
versions agree with the received text, and 
leave no room for doubt as to its genuineness. 
We have four conditions for a happy and 
good life; the first is that on which special 
stress is laid by St James, the tongue must 
be restrained not merely from evil-speaking, 
but from all deceit and falsehood. The sup- 
pression of angry feelings stands foremost 
both in connection with the preceding clauses, 
and as presenting peculiar difficulty at that 
time and under the circumstances of the 
Christian converts. 


ll. Let him eschew] Lit. “turn away 
from” evil; the old word eschew is singularly 
expressive, implying anxious shrinking, the 
Anglo-Saxon sceoh, our “shy,” and the 
German scheu. ‘Thus the Psalmist passes on 
from the outward expression of bad feelings 
to the principles regulating the Christian life, 
renunciation of evil, active goodness, earnest- 
ness in the maintenance of peace; in cther 
words, repentance as the beginning, and chazity, 
exemplified in act and feeling, as the come 
pletion of the life which has its root in faith. 

seek...and ensue] Both words are emphatic ; 


20! 


202 


12 For the eyes of the Lord are 
over the righteous, and his ears are 
open unto their prayers: but the face 


be wfox. of the Lord is ‘against them that 


do evil. 

13 And who is he that will harm 
you, if ye be followers of that which 
is good ? 


Li PELE RIAILI. [v. 12—15. 


14 But and if ye suffer for right- 
eousness’ sake, happy are ye: and “be ? tak ® 
not afraid of their terror, neither be” 
troubled ; 

15 But sanctify the Lord God in 
your hearts: and be ready always 
to give an answer to every man 
that asketh you a reason of the hope 


the last implies earnest pursuit. The English 


form ‘‘ensue” does not occur elsewhere in 
our A.V., but the original is used nine times 
in the Pauline Epistles in the same meta- 
phorical sense. This accords with classical 
usage. 


12. In connection with outward acts the 
Psalmist has promises of temporal blessings, 
but in reference to the great Christian prin- 
ciple of charity he appeals to the highest 
spiritual motive. ‘The eyes of the Lord are 
fixed on the righteous—He hears their prayers. 

that do evil] St Peter omits the words 
that follow in the Psalm, ‘‘to cut off the 
remembrance of them from the earth,” evi- 
dently because he would fix attention exclu- 
sively upon the spiritual and eternal conse- 
quences of evil-doing. 


13. will harm you| The word is em- 
phatic, do you any real evil. Cf. Isai. 1. 9, 
where, as in many other passages, the same 
word is used in the Septuagint. It stands in 
direct antithesis to ‘‘ good.” 

that which is good Lit. ‘*the good,” which 
might mean, as our translators take it, ‘that 
which is good,” but more probably points to 
Him who is good. ‘The choice depends to 
some extent upon the other word, rendered 
‘“be ye followers.” The reading followed by 
our translators and found in most of the 
oldest MSS. means zealous in the pursuit, or 
zealous for, an expression equally applicable 
to zeal for goodness or for God; cf. Acts 
xxii. 3. Another reading, which has good 
support, sc. ‘‘ imitators,” would almost neces- 
sitate the rendering, ‘‘ of Him who is good.” 
Cf. Matt. v. 45, 48. 


14, But and if ye suffer) ‘ But” is em- 
phatic; if however it should happen that ye 
should suffer, z.e. notwithstanding the general 
promise of exemption from harm, it may 
happen, and you must expect that it will 
happen, that you will be called upon to suffer. 
The extent to which St Peter intends this as a 
warning, not merely of possible, but of pro- 
bable, and nearly impending sufferings, depends 
upon the general or special bearing of the 
Epistle. Taken, as seems by far the most 
probable view, as specially intended to pre- 
pare Christians for what the Apostle distinctly 
foresaw, we must understand this phrase as 
explained above; ‘‘but remember that al- 


though none can really harm you, yet:should 
you be, as you soon must be, called on to 
suffer,” &c. 

Sor righteousness’ sake] Either for the pro- 
fession of the Christian faith, or for the con- 
duct which becomes that profession. It must 
be remembered that the faith and the life of 
Christians were equally odious to heathens. 
Some of the fiercest and the earliest 
cutions were brought on directly by hatred 
of their purity of life. See Justin Martyr, 
‘Ap. L 

happy are ye] That lesson St Peter had 
learned from his Master, Matt. v. ro, and had 
learned it thoroughly ; see Acts v. 41. Chris- 
tians too took it thoroughly to heart. ‘ Ep. 
ad Diogn.’ c, 5, ‘‘Doing good they are 
punished as evil, being punished they rejoice 
as made to live;” Tertul.‘ad Scap.’1,‘‘magis — 
damnati, quam absoluti gaudemus.” 

be not afraid of their terror| ‘This is com- 
monly explained as the terror which their 
menaces might excite; but considering the 
undoubted reference to Isai. viii. 12, 13, it 
seems probable that St Peter means such 
terror as dismays those who do not fear God 
supremely. 


15. But sanctify the Lord God| On the 
oldest and best reading, the Lord the Christ, 
instead of God, see the Additional Note. Here 
we have to press the truth that a man who 
sets up God in his heart as the only true 
object of reverence and fear, is exempt from 
all other fear. 

and be ready’ Omit “and be,” which 
obscures the close connection with the preced- 
ing injunction. The first effect of the abiding 
sense of Christ present as the object of holy 
fear in your heart will be a constant readiness 
to meet inquirers. 

to give an answer | Lit. ‘‘ for an apology;” 
a word peculiar in the New Testament to 
St Paul and our Apostle. See Introd. to 
Acts, p. 342, 0. 2. It means a complete and 
satisfactory account, and, consequently, de- 
fence, of the principle questioned or assailed. 
It is the word afterwards formally adopted by 
those who undertook to set forth the prin- 
ciples of the Christian faith in answer to 
heathen opponents—the age immediately fol- 
lowing the Apostolic has been designated as 
the Apologetic age. —The modern usage unfor- 
tunately obscures the meaning of the word, 


Or, 


werence. 


v. 16, 17.] 


that is in you with meekness and 
' fear : 

16 Having a good conscience ; that, 
whereas they speak evil of you, as of 


I! DEE RET, 


evildoers, they may be ashamed that 
falsely accuse your good conversation 
in Christ. 

17 For it zs better, if the will of 





which is fairly expressed by our A.V. fo give 
an answer. 

to every man that asketh you a reason| The 
words “reason” and ‘‘answer” in our ver- 
sion correspond to each other more closely 
m the Greek. To any man who asks for 
an account, a rational principle, of the hope 
which is in you, you must be ready to 
give a satisfactory and rational account. To 
so much he is entitled for his own sake, 
so much you are bound to give upon de- 
mand, for the sake of the truth on which 
your hope is based. ‘The answer must be 
ready when the question is put by an in- 
quirer, as seems here to be specially im- 
plied. It may be doubted whether it applies 
to questions merely captious or put in order 
to elicit grounds for persecution. Such ques- 
tions are commonly and best met, as they 
were in our Lord’s case, by dignified and 
reverent silence. It must however be re- 
membered that it was a charge often brought 
by heathens that Christians were not able to 
adduce any rational arguments in proof of 
the truth and doctrine which they professed 
(yupSev Exew nuas eye eis amoderEw aAnetas 
THs ka nas «.T-A.. Lheophil. Ant. ‘ad Aut.’ 
Ill. 4, p. 383, ed. Bened. ‘Thus too Julian, 
Porphyry, and some of the earliest heretics, 
as Sim. M., cf. ‘Recog. Clem.’ 2, and the 
note of Lacerda on Tertullian, ‘De Res. 
Carnis,’ c. v.). This charge was sufficiently 
refuted by the great writers of the second and 
third centuries. The precept however must 
be cautiously applied. It goes very far, for it 
applies to all fair questions; it does not by 
any means imply that the Christian should 
be willing or able to deal with sophistical 
arguments, but it does imply that as he does 
not hope without a reason, that reason he 
must be ready to produce. It may be personal 
experience of the power of Christ, of the 
suitableness of His Gospel to man’s needs and 
infirmities, and as a remedy for sin; but 
whatever reason is alleged it must be a true 
and sound, and so far a sufficient reason. 

with meekness and fear| Here our A.V., 
following the received text, unfortunately omits 
the emphatic word but; of two Greek words 
so rendered the more forcible is found here 
in all the best MSS. and ancient versions, 
St Peter presses this condition most urgently ; 
of all dangers that of angry, arrogant and 
irreverent demeanour on the part of men 
closely, and often captiously, questioned, is 
the most common and subtle. Sweetness 
coupled with awe, remembering whose cause 
is defended, will commend true reasoning, and 


they will be in themselves evidences calculated 
to impress and often to win opponents, The 
word ‘“‘fear” may also include anxiety to 
avoid giving offence by inconsiderate or intem- 
perate arguments, but it certainly does not 
mean fear of magistrates. The Christian is 
bound to submit to law, but is released from 
all fear of personal consequences when put on 
his trial. Reverence is due to all lawful au- 
thority ; cf. v. 2. 


16. Having a good conscience] This clause 
is directly connected with the preceding in- 
junction—a good conscience is the only 
security for an effectual defence of the truth. 
The word rendered ‘‘ conscience” occurs very 
frequently in the Pauline Epistles, once in the 
Acts xxill. 1, where St Paul is speaking (see 
Iatrod. to Acts, p. 342, note 2), and uses the 
word precisely in the same form, a good con- 
science, and in reference to unjust accusations. 
This is one among many instances of exact 
conformity of thought, feeling, and even exe 
pression between the two Apostles. 

whereas| Or wherein, i.e. in reference 
to the point on which yeu are attacked; see 
note on ii. 12. 

they speak evil of you] Or, accord:ng to the 
reading generally adopted, ‘“‘may speak against 
you.” St Peter refers not to a certain, but a 
probable form of accusation. ‘The Christian 
may be, as was indeed often the case, arraigned 
not for his faith, but for his conduct mis- 
understood or wilfully misrepresented. The 
reading however is doubtful. ‘Tischendort 
follows B, which has “‘ ye are spoken against.” 
It is of course possible that the common read- 
ing may be derived from the corresponding 
passage, ch. ii. 12. 

they speak evil] Or, in one word, “ calum- 
niate,” or revile. St Peter has in mind our 
Lord’s words, Matt. v. 11. 

they may he ashamed] Or, ‘‘put to shame;” 
convicted of falsehood. 

good conversation| Note the repeated use af 
the words good and ‘conversation” in the 
specific sense of conduct. 

in Christ] In this expression the name 
“Christ” is always used by the Apostles. 
It denotes the divine nature in which the 
Christian, as such, moves and lives, and has 
his true being. 


17. if the will of God be so] See note on 
i. 6, and ii. 20. Here the phrase is somewhat 
different, ‘‘should the will of God so will it ;” 
thus bringing out two points prominently: 
whatever may be done will be in accordance 
with God’s will (cf. Matt. xxvi. 39, and the 


203 


204 


God be so, that ye suffer for well 
doing, than for evil doing. 

18 For Christ also hath once suf- 
fered for sins, the just for the unjust, 
that he might bring us to God, being 


parallel passages, specially St Luke xxii. 42), 
and must therefore be for the good of those 
who suffer. For the general sentiment com- 
pare the noble words of Socrates in the 
* Phedo.’ 


18 to end of chapter. THE PRECEDING 
EXHORTATIONS ARE NOW ENFORCED BY 
REFERENCE TO THE EXAMPLE OF CHRIST. 


18. For Christ] Here, as usual, in ad- 
dressing Gentile converts, St Peter uses 
“Christ” as a proper name. In passages 
intended for Hebrews the writers of the New 
Testament generally use the other form, the 
Christ ; i.e. the Messiah. 

hath once suffered| Rather, suffered 
once for all. St Peter refers to the one act 
by which pardon for sin was procured. The 
points of likeness and contrast are equally 
striking. Christ suffered not for His sins, but 
for sins in general; so must the Christian 
suffer, not for evil-doing, but remembering 
that he has been saved from sins. Some MSS. 
here add, “for you” or ‘‘ for us,” either of 
which readings expresses an apt thought, but 
was probably supplied as a gloss. Again 
instead of ‘‘ suffered” some old MSS. have 
“died ” (dmeOavev instead of éaGev), a reading 
which obscures the very distinct reference to 
the sufferings of Christ’s people. 

the just for the unjust] The omission of 
the article in Greek brings out the contrast 
more forcibly ; but it is required by English 
idiom. We should observe that the Christian, 
like his Master, must be just, but that, unlike 
his Master, he suffers not for others, but to 
discharge his own duty. Compare St Paul’s 
elaborate statement of this great doctrine, 
Rom. v. 6—8. 

that he might bring us to God] St Peter 
then states, as usual, concisely but distinctly 
the great end and effect of the atoning death 
of Christ; it gives man access to God, i.e. 
restores him to communion with God; cf. 
Rom. v. 1, 2; and, still nearer in expression, 
Eph. ii. 18, and iii. 12. Hence follow the 
duty and the power of following the ex- 
ample of Him who procured such access. 
The word “bring” is not that which is used 
in speaking of a sacrificial offering, a thought 
which might naturally occur, as it did to 
Luther. “ The Christian is here regarded not 
as a victim, but as an offender on whose 
behalf the Victim has suffered, and who there- 
by finds the way open to his Father. 

being put to death...the Spirit] The exact 
gendering of this very important text has given 


LoPETE RMT. 


[v. 18, 19. 


put to death in the flesh, but quick- 
ened by the Spirit : 

19 By which also he went 
and preached unto the spirits in 
prison ; 





occasion to much controversy, see Additional 
Note. The meaning however may be regarded 
as fully established. We have two statements: 
(1) Christ underwent death in the body, lit. in 
flesh (not the flesh), i.e. the material and 
visible form which He assumed in the Incarna- 
tion; cf. Rom. i. 2, where his bodily descent 
from David is mentioned, and note on x Cor. 
vii. 28. (2) He was quickened in the spirit, 
lit. ‘in spirit,” which certainly refers not to 
the power by which He was quickened, but 
to the higher spiritual nature which belonged 
to the integrity of His humanity, and which 
was the medium through which the lifegiving 
energy from God was communicated to that 
humanity. The best rendering would there- 
fore seem to be, ‘‘ who died in flesh and was 
quickened in spirit,” were it not that the 
English idiom requires the before flesh. 

The connection of this statement with the 
preceding exhortation appears to be this. 
Every Christian like his Master is called upon 
to die; his material body must undergo that 
process; but the spiritual principle within 
him, by virtue of which he is regenerate in 
Christ, receives a new indestructible life at 
the very moment of d»~ ‘lution. Our Lord’s 
spirit, thus endued wit. life, at once mani- 
fested its lifegiving power; so it may be 
inferred, will each Christian spirit in and by 
its suffering win converts. 


19. By which also] See Additional Note. 
The points which stand out distinctly in this 
difficult and much controverted text are these. 
1. ‘* By which” must be rendered in which, 
i.e. in which spirit, disembodied and quick- 
ened with the new undying life. 2. He went and 
preached; the word rendered ‘‘ went” is al- 
ways used in reference to a personal act, and 
specially in connection with preached ; thus in 
Matk xvi.15, Go ye and preach; both words 
the same as are here used. We must there- 
fore understand St Peter to say that after 
death our Lord in His own human spirit 
went forth and preached, i.e. proclaimed cer- 
tain tidings. 3. ‘To the spirits in prison,” 
or in custody ; ie. to certain spirits, specified 
afterwards, who when He thus came and 
preached to them were, not in bonds or penal 
durance (which would be ev decpwrnpie) as 
condemned criminals, but in custody, as pri- 
soners awaiting their doom. 

The reason why St Peter specially refers 
to the deluge was evidently because that 
catastrophe was a prelude and type of the 
general judgment, to which the Apostle would 
here direct the attention of his readers. 


v. 20—22. | 


20 Which sometime were disobe- 
dient, when once the longsuffering 
of God waited in the days of Noah, 
while the ark was a preparing, where- 
in few, that is, eight souls were saved 
by water. 

21 The like figure whereunto even 
baptism doth also now save us (not 


20. Which sometime were disobedient | Le. 
who at a former time had disobeyed, sc. the 
announcement or command then given to them. 

when once] Rather (omitting ‘‘ once,” 
which represents a word not found in any 
good MS.), when, specifying the time of that 
disobedience. 

the longsuffering of God waited] Or, was 
waiting. The word, which St Paul uses 
frequently, implies attentive and patient wait- 
ing, or expectation. The exact interval is 
further specified; it lasted while Noah was 
building the ark, a period of many years. 

while the ark] Lit. while an ark was 
being prepared. 

wherein few| This marks the extent of 
the old disobedience. None obeyed the call 
of Noah, all perished save the few, his own 
family, who entered the ark. They were saved 
by the water which destroyed the others. So 
that the persons to whom Christ went and 
preached were those who had neglected or 
rejected warnings in life uttered by a human 
prophet. They had perished in the water 
which bore those who entered the ark in perfect 
safety. Cf. Clem. Rom. ‘1 Cor.’ vil. and Ix. 


21. The like figure whereunto| This ren- 
dering expresses the general sense, but does 
not accurately represent the statement in the 
Greek. It may be rendered ‘which also 
saves you now as baptism being antitypical.” 
That is, ‘“‘ water which saved those who lis- 
tened to the preaching of Noah now in bap- 
tism, which is the antitype of that water, is 
the means or instrument of your salvation.” 
The same water, which drowned those who 
disobeyed Noah, saved those who entered into 
the ark; so also baptismal water, which 
potentially drowns and destroys the old man, 
or our sinful nature, saves all who are brought 
into, and remain in, the true ark with Christ. 

N.B. The reading 6 instead of o T. R. is 
unquestionably correct. 

not the putting away| Rather, “not a 
putting away.” This passage is parenthetical, 
inserted to guard against a possible misunder- 
standing,or rather, a probable misrepresentation 
of the nature and effect of baptism. Baptism 
saves us, not as an external operation, sc. 
the putting away uncleanness of the body; 
(for that though a sacramental symbol is dis- 
tinguishable in idea, and separable also in fact 
from the spiritual efficacy of the mystery, 


PEPER sik 


the putting away of the filth of the 
flesh, but the answer of a good con- 
science toward God,) by the resur- 
rection of Jesus Christ : 

22 Who is gone into heaven, and 
is on the right hand of God; angels 
and authorities and powers being made 
subject unto him. 


which requires certain conditions) but as an 
inward process attested by the appeal which 
the conscience, being purified, makes to God. 
See Additional Note on the whole of this 
passage. 

St Peter may of course refer, as Ch 
tom (Tom. Il. p. 228 C), Justin M. ‘c. Tryph.’ 
p. 114 D, and other expositors hold, to the 
inefficacy of the old ceremonial ablutions; but 
his meaning is clear when confined to Christian 
baptism. It is effectual spiritually; the virtus 
sacramenti is one thing, the res, i.e. the out- 
ward form, is another; both are necessary, 
but the one is common to all partakers of the 
rite; the other is confined to those who fulfil 
the conditions. 

but the answer| Or, lit. ‘‘the question” 
in the sense of a prayerful questioning, a peti- 
tion or supplication. The antithesis stands 
thus. Contrasted with ‘‘the flesh,” or omit- 
ting the article, ‘‘flesh” is ‘‘ conscience,” the 
inner man contrasted with the outer man. 
The (droéeots vrov), the putting off all bo- 
dily defilement is the act of the outer man, the 
questioning in prayer is the act of the inner 
man. The word dmoéecis is peculiar to St 
Peter, cf. 2 Pet. i. 14. N.B. Both capxos 
and guvetdjoews are the subjective, not the 
objective genitive. 

by the resurrection of Jesus Christ] The 
resurrection of Christ is thus stated to be the 
cause why baptism saves us. He was thereby 
declared to be the Son of God with power, 
Rom. i. 4, and as St Paul again says Rom. iv. 
25, ‘*He rose again for our justification.” 
Thus in the first ch. St Peter has said that we 
are regenerated by His resurrection. Both 
Apostles therefore attribute our regeneration, 
justification and salvation in a special sense to 
the Resurrection. Baptism is the instrumental 
cause, Christ’s death the meritorious cause, 
His Resurrection, brought to bear upon the 
heart by His Spirit, is the efficacious cause; of 
which the movement of the conscience in 
prayer to the Father, calling Him Abba, 
Father, is the attestation, as C2cumenius puts. 
it, “‘ the pledge, assurance, and manifestation.” 


22. Whois gone into beaven| Thesame word 
which is used above, v. 19, to denote a per- 
sonal movement; as He went to Hades, as 
His Apostles went into the world, sx in His 
human form He went up into heaven. 

and is on the right hand of God) In St 


205 


206 


Peter’s discourses and in the Petrine Gospel 
the Ascension is presented as the culminating 
point, the end and completion of Christ’s work. 
See note on Mark i. 1. 

angels and authorities and powers| As He 
declared before His ascension, Matt. xxviii. 18, 
‘“« All power is given unto Me in heaven and 
earth,” so here all the powers of heaven are 
said to have been made subject unto Him; as 
the word (vmorayévrwy) denotes, before His 
Ascension, i.e. at His Resurrection. It may be 
questioned whether in this passage reference 
is made to ‘‘the powers and principalities of 
darkness, as well as of light,” but considering 
the near resemblance of this passage to Ephes., 


PETER. iT. 


cf. i. 20—22; and corresponding statements 
in other Pauline Epistles, it seems not impro- 
bable. It is no slight consolation to know 
that not only all good spirits are wholly sub- 
servient to Christ, ministering therefore to 
those who are heirs of salvation, but that 
Satan and his powers are absolutely subject to 
Him, acting only by His permission, and even 
when inflicting punishment, doing it for the 
benefit of the church. Cf. 1 Cor. v. 5; 2 
Cor. xii, 7; and 1 Tim.i. 20. See also Rev. 


Kos 
Attention should be specially given to the 

completeness of St Peter’s Christology in this 

remarkable passage. See Introduction, § 5. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Cuap. mi. 15, 18, 19, 21. 


15. Instead of Gedy the oldest and best 
MSS., 8, A, B,C, have Xpiorov. So too all 
the best ancient versions. It seems presump- 
tuous to reject a reading so authenticated, and 
it may be added, so unlikely to have been 
introduced in what must have been regarded 
as a quotation. It is a text of great import- 
ance, since it leaves no doubt as to the identi- 
fication of the Christ, the Son of God, with 
the Lord Jehovah, manifested in the Second 
Person in the Trinity. It has been objected 
that Kvpios without the article is not used of 
our Lord in the New Testament, an obser- 
vation which, if true, would be scarcely ap- 
plicable to a quotation. The LXX. however 
have Kupiov d€ avdrov for “ Jehovah of Sa- 
baoth,” so that in any case St Peter alters their 
rendering, and in addressing Christians he urges 
the special claim which the Christ, whose name 
they profess, has to their devout and fear- 
excluding reverence. St Peter uses X prords 
twice with the article, though more commonly, 
as is usual in addressing Gentiles, without the 
article. Here it is emphatic, Kipiov, Jehovah, 
‘the Christ.” On the whole the oldest and 
best supported reading should certainly be 
retained. 


18. The only various reading, ro mvev- 
watt, Which is unfortunately that of the 
received text, followed by our A.V., has no: 
support in the Uncial MSS. It imports an 
alien thought into the statement. St Peter 
does not say that Christ was quickened by 
the Spirit, which is implied in that reading, 
and by the capital letter in our A.V.; but 
that as He died in body, so He was quick- 
ened, endued with new life, in spirit, i.e. as 
explained above, in His spiritual nature, the 
true inner man, which after God is renewed 
unto true holiness. Both capxi and rvevpare 
must be constructed as the casus modalis, 
indicating the mode and principle in which 
the several processes of life and death are 
accomplished. The mvedya in speaking of 
Christ is called by St Paul rvedpa ayiwovrns, 
mot ro m., and as here is directly connected 


with restoration to life after or in death. See 
Additional Note on Rom. i. 4. 


19. Most of the questions raised by theo- 
logians and commentators are disposed of by 
adherence to the literal meaning of each clause, 
as given in the footnote. Our A. V. leaves 
the whole construction obscure and ambigu- 
ous; but while differing materially in the 
inferences drawn from the statement, com- 
mentators are now all but unanimous as to its 
literal import. 

*Ev @ was formerly explained away, either as 
meaning in which, or by the agency of which 
Holy Spirit, taken personally according to the 
old reading 7G Mvevpar ; but it certainly means 
‘*in which.” “* He went” undoubtedly implies 
a personal advent or going forth, as shewn 
specially by the passage above quoted from 
Mark xvi. 15, and by John xiv. 3. "Ev gu- 
Aaky certainly means ‘‘in custody,” as in 
Rev. xx, 7: not necessarily as a place of 
suffering, but as a place where, according to 
their several demerits, evil angels (see 2 Pet. 
ii. 4; Jude 6) or sinful men are kept awaiting 
the final judgment. 

He preached. The word is invariably used 
in the New Testament of a public announce- 
ment, a heraldic proclamation, so to speak, and 
specially of the Gospel tidings. St Peter says 
nothing as to the subject-matter or effects of 
such an announcement, but the natural infer- 
ence is that it was not simply and exclusively 
a denunciation, for which another word, not 
hallowed like this by associations of merciful 
tidings, would probably have been employed. 
It should, however, be noticed that Clement 
of Rome, ‘1 Cor.’ c. VII., says that Nde éx7- 
pu&e petavoray Kal oi vraxovcavtes eow@Oncar, 
which seems a reminiscence of this passage: 
see also a similar statement in c. ix. Josephus, 
‘Arch,’ I. 4, gives the old Hebrew tradition; 
and it is quite possible that Clement might 
have had that tradition present to his mind, 
rather than our passage, which would have 
suggested other considerations. ‘Ameé@noacl 
more, ore; this distinctly marks the long past 


Li PE EER “HIT. 


fime when the sin of disobedience had been 
incurred. 

If in such a passage as this, where the literal 
statement presents a clear, though in its bear- 
ings a mysterious sense, it were necessary to 
go further, we should turn in the first place to 
the early Greek Fathers, who were most un- 
likely to misunderstand the words, and had 
ample means of knowing in what sense they 
were received by the hearers and followers of 
the Apostles. It is certain that with one 
consent they held that St Peter here speaks of 
the descent into Hades, recognised by the 
Apostles’ Creed and universally taught by the 
Church. The passages bearing on this are col- 
lected by Cotelier ‘ Patt. Ap.’ Tom. I. p. 117. 
As to the objects of that descent they differed 
widely. Clement of Alexandria, as usual, going 
farthest in that direction, held that this preach- 
ing extended to all the Gentiles who had lived 
righteously before our Lord’s coming, cf. 
‘Strom.’ II. p. 379. Most of the early Fathers 
considered that it was limited to those who 


had believed in His future advent; thus 
Irenzus III. 23; IV. 29, 45; V. 31; Justin 
M., Origen, Hippolytus, Greg. Naz.; or 


more strictly to the souls of the patriarchs, 
Tertullian ‘de Anima,’ p. 260 c. Some few 
believed that He offered salvation to all who 
would receive Him, an opinion stated and not 
altogether rejected by Augustine, who in the 
164th Epistle, § 11, 12, discusses the question 
with great care, and as usual with great 
ability, and acknowledges his uncertainty as 
to the true meaning at the time, A.D. 415, 
when he wrote that Epistle. But whatever 
they taught or conjectured as to the persons 
to whora the proclamation was addressed, all 
agreed that it was an announcement to spirits 
of the departed, and moreover that it was an 
announcement of deliverance to the penitent. 
One of the strongest statements is found in 
Athanasius, ‘c, Apollinar.’ 1. § 14—a passage 
which, although somewhat obscure, distinctly 
asserts our Lord’s personal presence in Hades. 

This interpretation was first contested by 
Augustine, who in the Epistle to Evodius, 
above quoted, gives an explanation, which 
was afterwards generally adopted by medizval 
writers of the Western Church, sc. Bede, 
Thomas Aquinas, N. de Lyra, and by many 
divines after the Reformation, e.g. Beza, 
Scaliger, Hammond. As stated by Augustine, 
l.c., it stands thus. The spirits shut up in 
prison are the unbelievers who lived in the 
times of Noe, whose spirits, i.e. whose souls 
were shut up, as it were in prison, in the flesh 
and in the darkness of ignorance. Christ 
preached to them not in the flesh, for He was 
not yet incarnate, but in spirit, ze. in His 
divine nature, ‘‘ secundum divinitatem.” This 
appears to have been the view taken _by our 
English translators. It is obviously irrecone- 
cileable with the Greek. Beza’s modification, 
‘¢who now in prison are suffring due punish- 


ment,” meets one objection only, and that but 
partially. As was shewn the sense thus given 
to the words is forced and arbitrary. 

The preaching of Noah certainly cannot 
mean a personal act of the Spirit of Christ, 
even supposing that the word Spirit here refers 
to the Divine Word, which is, to say the 
least, wholly improbable. The expression éy 
pudaxj certainly does not mean ‘‘in the prison 
of ignorance,” but a state of durance. The 
Greek drrec6noaox necessarily refers to a period 
antecedent to the announcement, and éxnpvée 
indicates a single act, not a series of admoni- 
tions. 

Hence all modern commentators concur in 
the exposition given in the footnote; differing 
only in the inferences drawn from it, though 
not necessarily involved init. It is clear that 
it tells us nothing of the effects of the announce- 
ment, and affords no ground for speculation as 
to the present or future condition of those who 
now await their judgmentin the intermediate 
state, having rejected or not having known 
the Gospel of Christ. All orthodox writers 
agree that the text cannot apply to spirits 
already condemned to eternal punishment. The 
expression ‘‘in prison,” or more exactly, in 
custody, does not imply or suggest a state of 
purgatorial torment; though that doctrine, 
when once introduced, first, as seems pro- 
bable, by Augustine, was supported, in the 
absence of direct authority, by reference to 
passages which by reason of their incomplete- 
ness or obscurity, might be open to speculative 
interpretations. 

It must be borne in mind that the whole 
passage forms part of a general statement of 
the result of the sufferings of Christ. He 
died for sins, the just for the unjust. By that 
death He opened access for us Christians to 
God; after that death in the body He 
preached to the captives in His spirit, and by 
the baptism which He instituted He assured 
salvation to all who should fulfil the condi- 
tions: an institution followed by His Resur- 
rection and Ascension. 


21. The rendering follows two readings 
found in all the best MSS., 6, which ; referring 
to udep, not @, rendered in the A. V. ‘‘where- 
unto;” ev idently a gloss, intended to facilitate 
the construction, which presents some diffi- 
culty, and is scarcely capable of exact repro- 
duction. Again, juas with &, A, B, instead or 
jas, which has fair support. It must be ob- 
served that the word avtiruzor is an adjective, 
rendered in German ‘“ gegenbildlich,” which, 
being either adjectival or adverbial, evades the 
difficulty to some extent. The Vulgate is 
happy in its rendering, Quod et vos nunc similis 
forme salvos facit baptisma. 

In the questions on the Parables of Scripture 
attributed, but wrongly, to Athanasius, the 
Flood is called the first Baptism for the extire 
pation of sin, ‘Opp.’ 11. p. 426; Tertullian calls 


207 


205 


it the Baptism of the world; and Origen, ‘c. 
Cels.’ vi. 58, says “The destruction of men 
in the flood is the purification of the earth,” 
and refers to an old saying of the Greeks to 
the same effect. 

As to the rendering of the A.V., the answer 
of a good conscience, it must be remarked 
that émepdérnua means in classical usage a 

uestion or questioning. The passages quoted 
fom Herodotus and Thucydides are clear 
and decisive. ‘The verb from which it is 
derived érepwraw occurs frequently in the 
New Testament and in the LXX., first in the 
sense of simply asking a question, then spe- 
cially of consulting God, as in Isai. Ixv. 1, 
quoted Rom. x. 20, and still more commonly of 
addressing a petition, asking in prayer, a mean- 
ing derived from the Hebrew ?XY, to which 
it corresponds in many passages: see Tromm. 
‘Concord.’ Thus too the simpler form ¢pwrae 
means to pray, to seck in prayer, a sense, which, 
as Grimm, s.v. observes, is unknown to classi- 
cal writers. The single passage in which the 
word érep@rnya Occurs in the Septuagint, viz. 
Dan. iv. 14, identifies it in meaning with 


xnbxvi, which Rédiger in Ges. ‘Thes.’ explains 
“‘decretum,” but which our A.V., in common 
with most expositors, renders by the word ‘‘de- 
mand.” See Kranichen iz /oc. This render- 
ing of the word has therefore a primary claim 
for acceptance. The Vulgate adopts it ‘‘ Con- 
scientie bone interrogatio in Deum.” ‘Thus 
the Vulg. has interrogavit in Domino and in 
Deo repeatedly, for the Septuagint éreperaw 
and the Hebrew ?NW: so that the natural 
rendering of the word as used by and to per- 
sons conversant with the LX X. would be “the 
petition, prayer, or prayerful address of a 
good conscience to God.” Thus Bengel, ‘Gn.’ 
Salvat ergo nos rogatio bone conscientiz. ‘The 
objection (Meyer) that this is too vague is 
scarcely valid. The object of the prayer ad- 
dressed by a conscience, pure under the influ- 
ence of the Holy Spirit, the efficient cause of 
conversion, must needs be salvation, including 


CHAPTER IV. 


1 He exhorteth them to cease from sin by 
the example of Christ, and the considera- 


PETER. HL 


its conditions and ultimate result. There may 
also be reference to the spiritual washing. See 
Ps. li. 2. Grimm, ‘Lex. N.T.,’ proposes 
another rendering, viz. the demand or entreaty 
for a good conscience. This is scarcely ad- 
missible. 

2. The exposition of the old Scholiast in 
(Ecumenius comes near the true meaning; 
émepoTnua, appaBay, evéyupov, anddekis, i€ 
baptism is an act in inal the conscience 
being pure pledges itself to God. It is how- 
ever not easy to shew the connection of the 
word with the meaning thus assigned to it. 

3. The meaning ‘‘stipulatio” is advocated 
by Bishop Bull, ‘Apol. p. Harm.’ p. 23, 
“Stipulatio idem significat quod gvy«arabects 
ap. Basil. ‘ De Spir. S.’ c. 11. nimirum in Bap- 
tismo interrogabat Episcopus droracon 1@ 
Zarava ; respondebat baptizandus droragco- 
pa.” The objection that this refers to a later 
form has not much weight; the form was 
simply the expression of an old truth: but no 
valid authority for this sense of émepdrnua can 
be adduced. 

4. Insome inscriptions referred to the begin- 
ning of the second century a formula occurs 
not unfrequently, which might suggest a plau- 
sible explanation of this passage; sc. xara ro 
emepw@tnua Tis ceuvotatns BovA‘s, ‘according 
to the decision of the Senate.” This implies 
that after careful questioning and examination 
a decisive answer has been given. Thus in 
baptism the conscience is questioned, consi- 
ders the question and deliberately pledges 
itself, without the admixture of impure motive, 
to the fulfilment of the universal conditions, 
repentance and faith. This process corre= 
sponds with the external act by which the man 
cleanses himself from outward pollution. It 
scarcely seems a reasonable objection that the 
use of the word is not demonstrable in the 
time of St Peter; it isa common and legitimate 
use at a period not far distant, and seems to 
express his thought not inadequately. Upon 
the whole, however, the explanation given 
above, no. 1, is decidedly to be preferred. 


tion of the general end that now approach- 
eth: 12 and comforteth them against per- 
nN. 


secutto. 





Cuap. IV. 1—11. St Peter resumes the 
argument from wv. 18 in the preceding chapter, 
after the important digression which there 
followed the general statement. From the 
fact there stated and here repeated, viz. that 
Christ suffered in the flesh, i.e. in the body, 
he now deduces practical inferences, shewing 
that He suffered not only to bring us into a 
state of reconciliation, but also into a state of 
holiness. His death at once represented and 
effected a complete conquest over sin. He 


died in the flesh to save us from the penalty 
due to sin, and at the same time by that 
death He represented and potentially ef- 
fected the mortification of our carnal nature, 
This line of argument is followed by St 
Paul in the Epistles to the Romans and 
Colossians, see following notes. Hence St 
Peter enforces the duty of eschewing all old 
heathenish habits, with special reference to 
the judgment which awaits the quick and the 
dead. 


— a, 


v. I—3.] 


ORASMUCH then as Christ 

hath suffered for us in the flesh, 

arm yourselves likewise with the 

same mind: for he that hath suffered 
in the flesh hath ceased from sin ; 

2 That he no longer should live 


li TPE RERTIV. 


the rest of 4zs time in the flesh to the 
lusts of men, but to the will of God. 

3 For the time past of our life 
may suffice us to have wrought the 
will of the Gentiles, when we walked 


in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, 





1. for us| These words are omitted in 
the oldest MSS. and versions. The state- 
ment though true, does not bear upou the 
immediate object of the Apostle, who is draw- 
ing out the practical and spiritual inferences 
from Christ’s death. Observe the correspond- 
ence with the expressions used above, ch. iii. 
18, and ii. 21, 24. 

arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: 
for] Ormore probably, do you also (em- 
phatic) arm yourselves with the same 
thought; the word refers to the thought 
which was in the mind of Christ, viz. that 
death, met and undergone in the same spirit 
which actuated Him, puts an end to contact 
with sin, in His case with the sins of others, 
which were then blotted out, expiated, and done 
away with, but in the case of those who are 
baptized into His death, to contact with per- 
sonal sins; here St Peter adopts the argument 
developed by St Paul in Rom. vi. 6, 7, which 
was undoubtedly present to his mind and 
would be remembered by his readers. 

The word rendered “mind” A.V., or 
more properly ‘‘thought” or way of think- 
ing, occurs but once elsewhere in the New Tes- 
tament, Heb. iv. 12, where it is used in the 
plural. The classical usage is uncontested. 
The injunction reminds Christians that they 
have to wage battle against ‘ fleshly lusts that 
war against the soul,” ii. 11; they must therefore 
put on as the only perfect armour of defence 
that principle which was exemplified in the 
death undergone by the Saviour, and is spi- 
ritually shared by the true believer. It is, as 
usual with St Peter, a condensed and preg- 
nant summary of Pauline exhortations, most 
fully developed in Eph. vi. 

Sor he that, &c.| Or, ‘that he who hath.” 
This is the more obvious construction, but 
that which is adopted by our A. V. is well 
supported, and is probably correct. 

Lath ceased from sin] Christ having suffered 
for sin, abolished sin, had no more to do with 
it in the way of atonement; the Christian 
must follow that example, see the following 
note, 


2. That be no longer] This is closely con- 
nected in structure with the preceding clause, 
“hath ceased from sin,” to the effect that 
being dead to sin the Christian must live the 
rest of his life in the flesh, not as heretofore 
following the lusts of men, but the will of God. 
“In the flesh” in this clause refers simply to 
our bodily life. The word rendered “live” 


New Test—Vot. IV. 


has a somewhat emphatic meaning, being never 
used of animals; henceforth the life must be 
a true life, such as befits man. 


3. For the time past] The words “of 
our life” and ‘“‘us” after “suffice” are not 
found in the oldest MSS. and should be omit- 
ted. St Peter certainly does not identify himself 
with those who had lived in the abominations 
of heathendom, specially pointed at in the 
following words. Another reading, “you” 
for ‘‘ us,” has some support in old MSS. and 
versions (cf. 1 Cor. vi. 11), but is not to be 
adopted. St Peter leaves to his readers the 
application of his statement. 

the will of the Gentiles] This implies that 
the mass of St Peter’s hearers had formerly 
lived as Gentiles; Gentiles among Gentiles, 
The statement would be but partially ap- 
plicable to converts from Judaism. The evil 
habits enumerated were prevalent among all 
Gentiles, and especially in the eastern provinces 
of the Empire, to an extent hardly to be 
realized by Christians, and certainly not 
shared by Jews. 

when we walked| The pronoun ‘‘ we” 
must be omitted ; ‘‘ having walked” is better; 
our English idiom almost requires a pronoun, 
but none can be used without modifying the 
Apostle’s statement, 

in lasciviousness, Kc.] St Peter gives here 
an enumeration strikingly characteristic of his 
style, remarkable for fulness and condensa- 
tion ; see Introduction, § 5. Six forms of gross 
sensuality are pointed out. Of these three 
are personal, applying to individuals as such: 
each denoted by a word accurately discrimi- 
nating the principle and character of the sin: 
first, ‘* lasciviousness,” or more exactly, lasci- 
vious actions or habits, such as fill the pages 
of satirists and licentious poets of that age; 
secondly, ‘‘lusts,” the inner principles of 
licentiousness; thirdly, ‘‘ excess of wine,” a 
strong word, occurring here only in the 
New Testament, but not uncommon in class- 
ical writers, indicating crapulousness, drunken- 
ness. Whether solitary or not these three sins 
are personal. The three following are social 
evils, (1) ‘ revellings,” a word which has the 
special sense of riotous processions of wild 
youths such as were common in all Greek cities 
at that time; (2) “‘banquetings” or “‘drinking 
bouts,” often prolonged through the night, 
and noticed not without commendation by 
the most thoughtful heathen. Cf. Plato, 
‘Symp.’ ch. XIII., XXXI. and xxxIx. Lastly 


oO 


209 


210 


revellings, banquetings, and abomina- 
ble idolatries : 

4 Wherein they think it strange 
that ye run not with them to the 
same excess of riot, speaking evil of 
you: 





U/ (PETER “Tv. 


[v. 4—®. 


5 Who shall give account to him 
that is ready to judge the quick and 
the dead. 

6 For for this cause was the 
gospel preached also to them that 
are dead, that they might be judg- 





(3), abominable idolatries, lit. illicit idolatries, 
not as contrary to human law, but to the 
eternal principle of right (a@éuros). After the 
persecution of Nero Christianity itself was an 
iliicita religio. Here it is evident that St Peter 
Specially refers to the general, all but universal 
connection of the grossest sensuality with 
idolatrous practices, such as all his Gentile 
readers must have shared, but from which the 
Jew recoiled. This passage, among many 
others, is decisive as to the nationality of his 
readers. 


4. Wherein} This refers to the former 
course of life now abandoned by Christian 
converts. 

they think it strange] The Gentiles, not 
regarding any or all the sins so abjured as 
unnatural, or harmful, felt and expressed the 
utmost surprise at the abstention of Christians, 
and looked upon them as morose, superstitious 
bigots, misanthropists, equally opposed to the 
enjoyments of man and to the worship of their 
own Gods. This feature is constantly alluded 
to by Christian apologists. 

that ye run not with them] implies more 
than mere compliance, an eager pursuit of the 
same object. 

excess of riot] Both words are emphatic ; 
the former used here only means an overflow- 
ing, a surging up, or outburst; the second, 
common in classical writers, expresses utter 
dissoluteness, ruinous profligacy. It occurs 
in Eph. v. 18, where see note. 

speaking evil of you] Lit. blaspheming; 
a word which ought to be kept, omitting the 
words ‘“‘of you,” as including evilespeaking 
not only against the persons, but the religion 
of Christians. 


6. The interpretation of this verse depends 
upon that of the passage, wv. 19, 20, in the 
preceding chapter, with which it corresponds 
substantially. According to the most ancient, 
and now most generally received, view of that 
passage, the sense of this verse must be that 
the Gospel, i.e. the glad tidings of the triumph 
over death by our Lord’s death and resurrec- 
tion, was preached to the dead—a term which 
certainly extends further than to those who 
perished in the Deluge, and possibly to all 
past generations—with the intent and object of 
teaching them that although they should have 
vecn judged according to the law of nature and 
of God to suffer death in the body, they might 
be quickened, according to a special putting 
forth of Divine grace, in the spirit, and stand 


with spiritualized bodies before the judgment- 
seat of Christ. Cf. Rom. viii. ro. If this 
interpretation is correct it is evident that we 
must take the verse in connection with the 
first verse of the chapter; it shews that the 
law there laid down is universal; no one can 
be admitted into the kingdom who has not 
suffered in the flesh, undergoing the penalty 
for sin, and who has not also been spiritually 
quickened. This view does not imply that 
those to whom the announcement was made 
were transferred into a different state from 
that in which they had died, but that the 
meaning and effect of their punishment was 
made known to them, and the access to God, 
which Christ’s death opened to all, was of- 
fered to them. ‘This is connected also with 
the preceding verse as shewing the univer- 
sality of the Final Judgment. 

Points of exceeding importance are thus 
drawn out: 1, The death of Christ affects 
all, not excluding those who died before His 
coming ; 2, All must share His death in order 
to be made partakers of His life. 

was the gospel preached| ‘This necessarily 
refers to a definite and past act, not to a con- 
tinued preaching. It corresponds to the word 
‘“ preached” in ch. iii. 19, but differs from it; 
that word meant simply ‘‘ He proclaimed ;” 
this explains the nature and bearing of the 
proclamation; it was evangelical, a message 
of glad tidings. For the statement see Justin 
M. ‘Dial.’ Lx x11. and Otto’s note; Irenzus, Iv. 
33, and Vv. 31. 

them that are dead| ‘This does not give the 
exact sense of the Greek, which rather implies 
“to them that were dead when the Gospel 
reached them.” We may assume as certain 
that the word refers to physical, not, as some 
have held, to spiritual death. The announce- 
ment was made not to the quick but to the 
dead ; those dwellers in Hades who, whether 
as “prisoners of hope,” or, so to speak, 
prisoners of fear, awaited the coming of 
Christ. 

that they might be judged| The construc- 
tion presents some difficulty, increased in our 
version by the omission of the word indeed. 
The Greek makes a distinction between the 
two propositions; the former does not apply 
to the effect of the tidings, but to the con- 
dition of those who were addressed; they 
were to learn that they had, as a natural law, 
to undergo death, the wages of their sin; the 
next proposition, Sut /ive, tells us what was 
the ultimate and perfect effect upon those 


v. 7—9-] 


ed according to men in the flesh, 
but live according to God in the 
spirit. 

7 But the end of all things is at 
hand: be ye therefore sober, and 
watch unto prayer. 


IVPETER. IV. 


8 And above all things have fer- 
vent charity among yourselves: for 


charity 'shall cover the multitude of! Or, wa 


sins. 
g Use hospitality one to another 
without grudging. 





who were prepared to receive it. According to 
God, as above explained, according to the 
divine law of grace and life. The literal ren- 
dering is that they may be judged: but the 
term is evidently used with reference to their 
previous state, not to the time of the an- 
nouncement. , 
It must be borne in mind that St Peter’s 
great object is to shew the universality and 
absolute character of the principles with which 
he is here specially concerned. It might have 
been objected that physical death and the 
option of spiritual life could scarcely be 
universal, if all past generations were exempted 
from the law. ‘That objection he meets, not 
to lead us into speculative inquiry, but to 
vindicate the righteousness of God and take 
away every pretext for misrepresentation. 


7—11. PRACTICAL EXHORTATIONS CON=- 
NECTED WITH IMPENDING JUDGMENT. 


7. But the end of all things] ‘The order 
of the Greek words is emphatic, Of all how- 
ever the end is near; all might apply both to 
men and things, here probably to both, for 
our ‘‘own end” is the main point in warning. 
The words stand out in striking contrast to 
the preceding verse; we are not to be drawn 
aside from contemplating our own respon- 
sibility by speculating about the lot of others ; 
we and they have the ultimate and complete 
judgment to look for, and that without delay. 

at hand| Lit. has drawn near. It is the 
word constantly used in reference to the 
coming of Christ and His kingdom. We 
have to understand it either as referring to the 
very brief period which must intervene before 
we are called individually to give account for 
the things done in the body—a view which 
however is rather an application than a proper 
explanation,—or to the great judgment cer- 
tainly then impending over the Hebrew and 
Gentile world, to which expressions resem- 
bling this very closely must be referred; or 
literally and properly to the day which will 
usher in eternity. To this last the only 
possible objection is that the Apostle’s stute- 
ments are held to be incompatible with the 
vast interval which has already elapsed. But 
the last day is spoke of as near, not with 
reference to our chronology, but to the de- 
velopment of God’s purposes in His various 
dispensations. We live in the last times, 
under a dispensation which is final in the 
history of humanity, and will have its termi- 


nation at the coming of Christ. That termi- 
nation has drawn near (iyyixe), SO near that 
there is absolutely nothing between it and us. 

be ye therefore sober| Rather, ‘‘be ye there- 
fore sober-minded;” referring to a general 
state of wise and sober mind. The Greek 
(cadpoveiy) is explicitly opposed to all ill- 
regulated and unwise thoughts and feelings. 

and watch unto prayer | ‘The word rendered 
watch (vyare) implies sober, thoughtful, ab- 
stinence, giving the mind in a calm composed 
state to the great duty of prayer. A different 
word is used in the exhortation which natu- 
rally presents itself to our minds; see Mark 
xiii. 37. St Peter had in mind the special 
temptations of a people and time addicted to 
excess in habits and emotions. 


8. above all] Lit. before all things. 
Omit the conjunction ‘‘and,” which rather 
obscures the earnestness of St Peter’s style. 
Charity must not only be supreme, but it 
must precede all acts which manifest the 
Christian life. It is scarcely needful to point 
out that ‘‘ charity” is the Christian grace of 
love, and that the word was adopted here and 
elsewhere in our A.V., partly because it is 
a new and exclusively Christian name for a 
Christian grace, corresponding closely to the 
Greek, partly because it was familiar to the 
Christian mind as the equivalent and represen- 
tative of the Vulgate ‘‘ caritas.” 

have fervent charity| The Greek is even 
stronger, ‘‘ having or keeping your charity in- 
tense ;” the charity they must needs have as 
Christians; they are bound to keep it in a 
state of energy or intensity. 

shall cover| Or, covers. This reading 
has far better support than shal] cover ; and is 
important as meaning that earnest charity 
casts a cloke over many offences, refuses to 
see or to expose them. The future tense might 
rather imply that it will be a protection or 
defence in the day of judgment, a thought 
alien to the Apostle’s mind. In the original 
passage, Prov. x. 12, the former is the un- 
doubted meaning. Here the injunction and 
the motive have a special significance; the 
preservation of peace being the best and indeed 
the only effectual preparation for impending 
trials and the final judgment. See note on 
James v. 20. 


9. hospitality] ‘The word must be taken 
in its proper sense, not directly referring to 
friendly intercourse among equals—a social 

O2 


2rr 


212 


10 As every man hath received the 
gift, even so minister the same one to 
another, as good stewards of the ma- 
nifold grace of God. 

11 If any man speak, let him speak 
as the oracles of God; if any man 
minister, /et him do it as of the 


I. PETER.{TV. 


[v. 10—12, 


ability which God giveth: that God 
in all things may be glorified through 
Jesus Christ, to whom be praise 
and dominion for ever and ever. 
Amen. 

12 Beloved, think it not strange 
concerning the fiery trial which is to 





and temporal duty having its own immediate 
and temporal reward—but specially to the 
kindly reception of strangers (cf. Matt. xxv. 
35) and of all who need comfort and help. 
Such hospitality involved considerable expense 
in an age when no regular provision was made 
for the destitute, great and sudden vicissitudes 
from opulence to poverty were common, and 
wayfarers bearing commendatory letters from 
Christian pastors frequently presented them- 
selves at the houses of the rich. Hence the 
repeated exhortations of St Paul and our 
Apostle. 

grudging] Or ‘‘ murmuring,” impatient 
outbursts. The word indicates the common- 
ness of the temptation and the necessity of a 
special caution. Cf. 2 Cor. ix. 7. 


10. the gift] Or, agift. From temporal 
the Apostle now passes to spiritual duties ; the 
word rendered ‘gift’ means specially a 
spiritual endowment, whether miraculous or 
ordinary, whether personal or ministerial. 
This exactly corresponds to St Paul’s exhor- 
tations, 1 Cor. xli. 7; see also xiv. 12. Com- 
pare Clem. Rom. ‘1 Cor.’ XxXXVIII. 

as good stewards| The proper office of 
the steward, as understood by the readers of 

’ St Peter, was rightly to administer and dis- 
pense his master’s goods, providing for the due 
maintenance of all the household. ‘The word 
“manifold” in Greek specially refers to the 
great variety of gifts and graces of which each 
Christian recipient is bound to be a liberal 
dispenser. 


ll. If any man speak] Or, “If any man 
speaks ;” i.e. When any one speaks. It is not 
implied that some may not have to speak. Here 
St Peter refers to two kinds only of the mani- 
fold gifts, but they include all that is needed 
for the edification and organization of the 
Church. Speaking includes all kinds of in- 
struction given by Christians to each other, 
whether ordinary, extraordinary, or official. 
A man who speaks thus must speak not as 
using his own natural uninspired utterances, 
but as being a bearer of divine utterances. 

the oracles] Not ‘‘the oracles,” an expres- 
sion which would imply in conformity with 
the Scriptures, but as oracles, being them- 
selves entrusted with such utterances. The 
exhortation is singularly impressive, implying 
a complete surrender of the speaker’s self to 
the movements of the Holy Spirit, as in 
our Lord’s exhortation, Mark xin. rr. The 


ministering officers of the Church are to 
depend entirely on the strength given them 
by God. ‘Thus all the glory of the success 
of exhortations or of ministrations will be re- 
ferred to God through Jesus Christ, by whose 
effectual working the speaker and minister are 
enabled to do their duty. 

minister| This does not refer to ministra- 
tions in the Church, but to the distribution of 
gifts spoken of in the preceding verse. 

to whom] The question, whether this refers 
to God the Father or to the Lord Jesus 
Christ, is differently answered by commenta- 
tors. On the one hand, it is said truly that 
all glory is ascribed to the Father as the 
primal source of grace, and in this passage 
the great subject of the sentence; on the other, 
it may be pointed out that the most natural 
construction connects the words with those 
immediately preceding it, and that the ascrip- 
tion of glory and power to the Son is 
thoroughly in accordance with the principles 
and the style both of St Peter and St Paul. 
Clem. Rom. § xx. applies the ascription in- 
discriminately to the Father and, as here, to 
the Son. See the note of Lipsius on that 
passage in the edition of Gebhardt and Har- 
nack. That doxology refers specially to the 
grace and goodness of God manifested through 
Christ to the Church. 


12—19. St Peter now recurs to the train 
of thought which marks the beginning of his 
Epistle, i. 3—9; and points to the certain 
hope of glory which awaits those who are 
partakers of Christ’s sufferings. ‘The expres- 
sions employed throughout imply that severe 
persecution is imminent, to be looked for as. 
immediately to come, if not already begun. 


12. think it not strange] ‘The word, as. 
here used, is peculiar to St Peter, who uses 
it twice, here and above, v. 4. The feeling 
deprecated is that of strangeness, as though 
suffering was not the home-portion, so to 
speak, of a Christian. Gentiles felt unable to- 
understand the feelings of Christians, and were 
therefore estranged from them, Christians. 
must not feel themselves unable to realize 
their position as sufferers. They are to be 
at home in suffering. 

concerning...to try you] ‘This may be more: 
exactly rendered, ‘‘at the fiery affliction 
which is taking place among you for @. 
trial.’ The word (mip@ors) is emphatic; 
it is used in the LXX. as equivalent to ‘ fur- 


v. 13—16.] 


try you, as though some strange thing 
happened unto you: 

13 But rejoice, inasmuch as ye 
are partakers of Christ’s sufferings ; 
that, when his glory shall be reveal- 
ed, ye may be glad also with exceed- 
ing Joy. 

14 If ye be reproached for the 
name of Christ, happy are ye; for 


nace;” and certainly refers to ch.i. 7. ‘The 
A. V. is ambiguous and may be understood 
to speak of a future trial; the Greek decisively 
shews that it is already going on among 
Christians. 

some strange thing| This refers to the verb, 
rendered ‘ think it not strange.” The follow- 
ing verse shews that such sufferings cannot be 
strange to Christ’s followers. 


18. But rejoice, inasmuch] The word ‘in- 
asmuch ” must be understood in its full and 
proper sense, ‘‘to the extent in which.” So 
far as the Christian’s sufferings are of the 
same kind, proceeding from the same causes, 
as those undergone by his Master, he is called 
upon to rejoice, for that present participation 
in suffering secures future participation in His 
glory. See again ch. i. 7. 

that) This refers to the rejoicing in suffer- 
ing which is a pledge of future rejoicing in 
glory. 

14. If ye be reproached| Rather, If (or 
‘“‘twhen”) ye are reviled. The Greek does 
not imply a contingency, but asserts a fact. 

for the name of Christ] Lit. ‘‘in Christ’s 
name,” i.e. simply because you confess Christ 
as your Lord. Thus in the Epistle of the 
Churches of Vienne and Lyons, ‘“ they were 
imprisoned as Christians, no other charge 
whatever being brought against them.” 

for the spirit] Hence the blessedness of 
the Christian who when suffering has a special 
sense of the abiding presence of the Spirit of 
God, bringing with It the assurance of future 
glory, and of actual favour with God. The 
word rendered ‘‘ resteth” has a special signi- 
ficance, being used in the LXX. of the abid- 
ing presence of the Spirit of the Lord, Isai. 
xi. 2. 

on their part...glorifed| This clause is 
omitted in all the best MSS. and ancient ver- 
sions. It was probably a gloss, a very correct 
gne, in the margin of an early MS., and taken 
mto the text by a transcriber. The oldest 
MS. which has it is of the ninth century, but 
it is found in some very old versions, the 
Sahidic and Italic. It contrasts the blas- 
phemies (for evil spoken of should be rendered 
blasphemed) with the glory attributed and 
proved by its effects on suffering Christians. 


15. But] Read “for.” St Peter touches 


LA PETER: Tv. 


the spirit of glory and of God rest- 
eth upon you: on their part he is 
evil spoken of, but on your part he is 
glorified. 

15 But let none of you suffer as 
a murderer, or as a thief, or as an 
evildoer, or as a busybody in other 
men’s matters. 

16 Yet if any man suffer as a 


evidently upon charges often brought falsely 
and maliciously by persecutors. 

a-murderer| ‘This probably stands first, 
not as a charge likely to be made, but as 
standing first in the decalogue, in dealing with 
duty to man. Possibly the heathens might 
found such a charge upon the reception of 
criminals into the Church upon their repent- 
ance. 

or as a thief| A special sin of slaves, 
against which we find unusually explicit 
warning in Eph. iv. 28, where see note. 

an evildoer| A legal term, equivalent to 
‘‘malefactor” or criminal; a word summing 
up all offences against the law. It is a word 
common in classical writers, but in the New 
Testament used only by St Peter, ii. 12, 14, 
iii. 16, and St John xviii. 30. 

a busybody in other men’s matters] This 
expresses a single word in the Greek, one 
which does not occur elsewhere in the New 
Testament, and twice only in later Christian 
writers. The exact meaning is ‘tone who 
usurps authority in matters not within his 
province.” St Peter gives a special point to 
this injunction; it stands apart, as differing 
in kind from other offences. The question 
is whether he alludes to the propensity to 
interfere with other persons, specially with 
heathens, in religious matters, as a warning 
against indiscreet zeal on the part of Christians, 
a view taken by Renan, ‘Antech.’ p. 42; or 
whether, as the form of the Greek word cer- 
tainly implies, his object is to warn Chris- 
tians against assuming authority in purely 
secular matters alien to their calling. Ps, 
Dionys. Areop. uses it in the sense of one who 
intrudes upon an alien office. The word of 
which it is compounded ‘“episcopos” with 
its derivatives in the LXX. always refers to 
official duties or works, specially to the work 
of inspection. It certainly does not bear upon 
missionary undertakings. But were Christians 
likely to incur the charge of taking undue part 
in secular matters with which they were not 
personally concerned? The answer must be, 
Very probably they were. We read of an 
application to our Lord Himself to take upon 
Him the office of a secular Judge, and His 
indignant refusal, Luke xii. 13, 14. In 
we have instances of Christians having a wide 
spread reputation for equity and discernment 


213 


214 


Christian, let him not be ashamed ; 
but let him glorify God on this 
behalf. 

17 For the time is come that judg- 
ment must begin at the house of God: 
and if it first begin at us, what shall 
the end be of them that obey not the 
gospel of God? 


L;PETERUIY. 


[v. 17—1 


18 And if the righteous scarcely be 
saved, where shall the ungodly and 
the sinner appear? 

19 Wherefore let them that suf- 
fer according to the will of God 
commit the keeping of their souls to 
him in well doing, as unto a faithful 
Creator. 





among their unbelieving neighbours, and on 
that account being appealed to to settle diffi- 
cult cases, i.e. to act as overseers or arbitra- 
tors in external matters. Thus in a Talmudic 
notice of the second Gamaliel we read that he 
with his sister applied to a Christian for a 
decision in a question of contested rights of 
property. (See ‘Tract. Shabbath,’ f. 116, 
quoted in the ‘Expositor,’ April, 1879, and 
by Hilgenfeld on the ‘Evang. Heb.’ p. 21, 
22.) Such a position, whether rightly or 
wrongly used, would expose Christians to 
misrepresentation, and be a pretext for perse- 
cution. This seems to be the true meaning 
of the warning. It agrees with, but is more 
precise than the explanation of C£cumenius, 
or of Cyprian, who renders it ‘‘alienas curas 
gerens,” ‘Ep.’ rv. 6. Plato has a correspond- 
ing word, addorpiompaypoovyn, ‘Rep.’ Iv. 
Hilgenfeld takes the word to mean de/ator, an 
interpretation certainly incorrect, and evidently 
adopted in order to support his view as to the 
late date of the Epistle; see his ‘Einl.’ p. 652. 


16. on this behalf | This rendering follows 
the old and common reading; but the best 
MSS. have in this name, which may be 
explained as an idiom not differing in meaning 
from the one adopted in our A. V.; but which 
more probably has a distinct and definite bear- 
ing upon the charge brought, as the real sub- 
stantial charge against Christians, that of pro- 
fessing the Name of Christ. It need not be 
inferred that St Peter alludes to the name 
‘¢ Christian,” but since it was first given at 
Antioch, long before this Epistle was written, 
and must haye been well known to the 
Apostle, the reference is, to say the least, 
highly probable. Thus Clem. Alex. ‘Quis 
D. S.’ ch. 36, ‘worthy of the name which 
they wear as a kingly diadem.” 


17. For the time is come] Lit. For it isa 
season; the critical time is now come when 
the judgment, which impends on all, must 
have a beginning, and that beginning must 
take place in God’s house. The cleansing of 
the sanctuary, #.e. the Church of Christ, must 
be the very first act in the process of judg- 
ment. All its severe trials therefore are to be 
regarded as intimations and preludes to the 
general judgment. The sifting involves a 
separation of the sound from the unsound, 
which must needs bring suffering to all, and 
Tuin to those who do not endure to the end. 


__ that obey not the gospel of God| Cf, Rom. 
legis 

18. the righteous] This word is rarely 
applied to Christians, but St Peter is quoting 
from the Septuagint version of Prov. xi. 31, 
and retains the word as specially applicable to 
the occasion. The Christian, as such, is clear 
from the guilt which incurs condemnation ; 
but if he being righteous is saved only on 
the condition of passing through affliction so 
terrible, affecting life, property, character, 
what must be the position of a wilful offender 
against God and His law? 

the ungodly] Or, impious, a term specially 
applying to false worship rather than to denial 
of God. 

sinner | in the special sense of transgressor, 
for ‘“‘sin is the transgression of the law.” 
Rabbinical writers quoted by Wetstein ob- 
serve as a general law of divine chastisements 
that ‘‘they do not come upon the world un- 
less there be impious persons in it, yet that 
they always begin with the righteous—when 
power is given to the destroyer he makes 
no distinction between the righteous and the 
wicked, and not that only, but he begins with 
the righteous,” 

N.B. The LXX. render the Hebrew of 
Proverbs inaccurately ; our version gives the 
true meaning. It is evident that St Peter 
addresses persons who were not acquainted 
with the Hebrew. He would regard the 
truth of his statement rather than its verbal 
agreement with a passage which he adduces 
without indicating its source. 


19. Wherefore] Lit. ‘*So let them also 
who suffer,” &c. St Peter sums up the are 
gument with singular power. What the 
Christian has to remember throughout is that 
he suffers according to God’s will, and there- 
fore necessarily for a wise and loving purpose. 


_ What he has to do is simply to commit his 


soul to his Creator, trusting nt only in His 
power, but in His faithfulness. The word 
‘as’ before ‘‘ unto a faithful Creator,” must 
be omitted, being found only in later MSS. 
St Peter certainly refers to our Lord’s own 
words, Luke xxiii. 46 (where all the best 
MSS. have maparidepa). He is careful te 
add ‘‘in well doing;” in order to have and to 
justify that absolute reliance on God’s faith- 
fulness, Christians must have good and holy 
works to offer as proofs of their faith. ‘* Their 


v. 1, 2.) 


CHAPTER V. 

1 He exhorteth the elders to feed their flocks, 
5 the younger to obey, 8 and all to be sober, 
watch{ui, and constant in the faith: 9 to 
resist the cruel adversary the devil. 


. elders which are among you 


I exhort, who am also an elder, 


works do follow them,” Rev. xiv.13. The good 
works are not the effectual or meritorious 
cause of acceptance, but they afford the only 
assurance that believers are accepted. The 
word, as it stands in this passage, is peculiar 
to St Peter ; it accords with his style to con- 
dense a whole series of injunctions into a single 
pregnant word ; see note on ch. iii. 8. 


Cuap. V. 1—4. EXHORTATIONS TO 
THE OFFICIAL HEADS AND LEADERS OF 
THE Cuurcu. These exhortations are strictly 
confined to the discharge of their special 
duties. 


1. The elders} The word therefore is in- 
troduced here on good MSS. authority; but 
it seems unnecessary and scarcely in accord~ 
ance with the course of St Peter’s argument, 
unless it be understood asa special application 
of the word which in the Greek immediately 
precedes it, viz. “‘in doing good works.” The 
elders here addressed unquestionably represent 
the highest authorities in the Churches. The 
term includes those who afterwards, within a 
few years, were formally designated as Bishops. 
They exercise all the functions of that office, 
which are included in the word inadequately 
rendered by ‘‘ feed” in the next verse, where 
see note. On the New Testament usage see 
notes on Acts and Philippians. The use of 
the word in this place is one among many 
conclusive proofs of the early date of the 
Epistle, which must have been written before 
the organization of the Churches in Asia 
Minor was substantially completed under the 
government of St John. 

I exhort] This text has been misused as a 
proof of St Peter’s supremacy, but it is com- 
monly used not only by Apostles (as by St 
Paul most frequently), but by all Christians 
exhorting their fellows in the faith. In fact 
the word though often used for admonition 
and even command never loses its primary 
and most common sense, that of persuasion. 
St Peter gives three reasons to enforce, we 
might almost say to excuse, the earnestness of 
the exhortation; (1) community of office, 
(2) the fact that he was a witness of the suffer- 
ings of Christ, (3) that he shared with them 
the hope of glory. The first and third reasons 
are studiously put forward so as, it might 
seem, to avoid the appearance of such claims 
as were afterwards advanced in his name; the 
second gives a peculiar pathos to his exhorta- 


HET ERE Y. 


and a witness of the sufferings of 
Christ, and also a partaker of the 
glory that shall be revealed : 


2 Feed the flock of God ! which ! Or, as 
is among you, taking the oversight papa 


thereof, not by constraint, but will- 





tion to tend the flock of God ‘‘ which He 
bought with His own blood,” Acts xx. 28. 

There is, as might be expected, a striking 
resemblance between his arguments and those 
used by St Paul in the great discourse recorded 
in Acts xx. 18—35. 

a witness| In the special sense of one called 
to bear witness of what he had seen. 

@ partaker of the glory that shall be ecained 
This refers to ch. 1. 7. The word rendere 
‘‘ shall be” implies certainty, but not an im- 
mediate manifestation. 


2. Feed the fiock| ‘The word rendered 
‘‘ feed,” rather tend, includes all the duties 
of a shepherd, specially those of tending, 
guiding, and bringing to good pastures. It 
was a word deeply impressed upon St Peter’s 
consciousness, being the special duty imposed 
upon him as a proof of love, John xxi. 16, 
where the A.V. improperly, as here, renders 
the word (oivawe) ‘‘feed,” for which a 
totally different word (Bécke) is twice used 
in the rsth and 17th verses. It is important 
to observe that neither here nor elsewhere in 
this Epistle, or in the speeches of the Acts, 
does St Peter allude to that or to the still 
higher distinction conferred upon him by our 
Lord. Cf. Matt. xvi. 17—19. 

the flock of God| ‘Thus all the best MSS. 
A various reading ‘‘of Christ” or of “the 
Lord” is scarcely deserving of notice, except 
as bearing upon the similar passage in Acts 
xx. 28. The Church is the flock of God the 
Father as the maker and possessor; of God 
the Son as the purchaser and restorer; of God 
the Holy Ghost as the feeder and guide. 

which is among you | Equivalent to “under 
your care,” or in your province. The exprese 
sion is somewhat peculiar, and certainly repre- 
sents a close inward union. 

taking the oversight thereof| The word 
(€mickorodvres) thus paraphrased is omitted 
by the two oldest MSS., but it is found in the 
great majority of MSS., and in all the oldest 
versions, There is no sufficient reason for 
following those two MSS., 8, B, which are 
conspicuous for such omissions. The word 
is important, for it means “‘ acting as overseers 
or Bishops,” an expression which at a very 
early period was appropriated to the actual 
governors of the Church, and which soon 
became their formal official designation. 

not by constraint} Not only or chiefly 
because it is a bounden duty, involving a heavy 


215 


216 


ingy ; not for filthy lucre, but of a 
ready mind ; 


1Or ower 3 Neither as 'being lords over 


God’s heritage, but being ensamples to 
the flock. 


L PETER. 9. 


[v. 3-5: 


4 And when the chief Shepherd 
shall appear, ye shall receive a crown 
of glory that fadeth not away. 

5 Likewise, ye younger, submit 
yourselves unto the elder. 


Yea, all 





penalty if neglected, but with a willing spirit, 
moved not by fear but love. Cf. x Cor. ix. 
16, 17. The word here used in the Greek 
does not occur elsewhere. 

not for filthy lucre| Not with a disgraceful 
view to profit. ‘There seems evidently a refer- 
ence to St Paul’s words in the verse imme- 
diately following those referred to in the pre- 
ceding note, What is my reward then? the 
answer being that the only reward for which 
he cared is to preach the Gospel without 
charge. It must be observed that the warn- 
ing implies a right to maintenance which 
might be abused. At a very early age, and 
indeed throughout the history of the Church, 
neglect of this warning led to the worst schisms 
and usurpations. 

of a ready mind| ‘The word is emphatic, 
implying not merely willingness, but earnest 
desire. 


8. Neither as being lords| Rather, ‘‘act- 
ing as lords,” lording it over. The 
word implies that the Presbyter-bishops had 
real authority, but warns them against an 
arrogant domineering spirit in its exercise. It 
is obvious that abuses in this direction would 
arise at a very early period; see a singularly 
strong instance in the third Epistle of St John, 
v. 9. The very existence of a governing 

- power has been denied by writers resting on 
the misapplication of this text, an opinion 
which might seem to be countenanced even by 
St Bernard, ‘‘ Planum est, Apostolis interdici- 
tur dominium,” ‘De Consideratione,’ 1.6: but 
dominium implies more than constitutional 
authority. Compare Clem. R. ‘1 Cor.’ XvI. 

God's heritage] Lit. ‘‘ heritages,” an ex- 
pression which occurs only in this passage, 
and presents some difficulty. Some under- 
stand it as referring to the clergy, an early 
usage of the word, but not resting on scrip- 
tural authority. The more probable and 
generally accepted meaning is that the several 
churches under the charge of the presb»ters 
addressed by St Paul are spoken of. Thus 
Grimm ‘Lex. N. T.’ s.v. «Ajpos, and Hil- 
genfeld. ‘Thus too Bengel and Estius. Cy- 
ptian’s view agrees with this, ‘The Church 
of God is one, the separate portions of which 
are governed each by its own Bishop as a 
common inheritance.” Ritschl, ‘Die Enst. d. 
A. K. Kirche,’ p. 192, holds the word to 
mean the orders of which the flock consists. 
The word God’s ought not to have been in- 
eerted in our A. V. 

ensamples| Lit. types in the special sense of 


examples, for which St Peter uses two words, 
one taken from the art of painting (droypap- 
pos, See above, ii. 21), the other from the sister 
art of sculpture. Each head of the flock must 
stand out as a distinct representative of the 
unseen Master to whom he and his people 
must be conformed. Thus Greg. Naz. says 
of his own father, ‘‘ He humanized the man- 
ners of his wild people, both by words of 
pastoral wisdom, and by setting forth himself 
an example, so to speak a spiritual image, exe 
quisitely finished so as to exemplify the beauty 
of every good work,” ‘Or.’ XVIII. c. 16, p. 
341 A. Tom. I. ed. Ben. 


4. the chief Shepherd] St Peter thus 
points out the true and only origin of all 
authority in the Church, Presbyters or 
Bishops are true shepherds, but only as dele- 
gates of our chief Shepherd, cf. ii. 25. This 
great word is used by St Peter only; the last 
thing he could have dreamed of as possible 
would be its misapplication to himself or his 
so-called successors. It is here to be observed 
that the words ‘‘shepherd” and ‘ tend” are 
peculiar to St Peter and to St John, who 
stand in a peculiarly near relation to each 
other and to the Church. 

a crown of glory that fadeth not away] Lit. 
‘‘the unfading crown of the glory.” A similar 
but not exactly the same word is used above, 
i. 4. It means zot liable to wither, a meta- 
phor suggested by the wreaths of flowers in 
common use, and specially awarded as crowns 
to victors in public games. Cf. James i. 12; 
1 Cor. ix. 25; Wisd. v.16. In 2 Tim. iv. 8 
we are told that the crown of righteousness 
will be given not only to Apostles, but to all 
who love His appearing. 


5. EXHORTATION TO YOUNGER 
MINISTERS. 

5. Likewise, ye younger] The younger thus 
spoken of would seem to be the subordinate 
ministers of the Church; for the word ‘‘like- 
wise” implies a certain analogy or corre- 
spondence, so that as the elders were certainly 
officials, the younger were in all probability 
their subordinates. Whether the term includes 
‘¢deacons” may be questioned, but it seems 
improbable that the Apostle should omit all 
notice of an order, first established under the 
authority of the Twelve, see Acts vi. 2—6; 
and this was the natural place for addressing 
them. It is certain however that at a very early 
time and in those districts subordinate offices 
were called into existence, and Polycarp ‘ Ep. 


v. 6—8.] 


of you be subject one to another, and 
clothed with humility: for God 
resisteth the proud, and giveth grace 
to the humble. 

6 Humble yourselves therefore 
under the mighty hand of God, 


Ephes.’ c. VIII. specially distinguishes ‘the 
younger” from the deacons, to whom as well 
as to the elder he exhorts them to be obedient. 
‘We may understand by the term all subordi- 
date ministers of the Church, as distinguished 
from the members who are generally addressed 
in the next clause. The due relation between 
the young, and the elders, is often dwelt upon 
by Clem. R. in language which seems adopted 
from St Peter. 

Yea, all of you be subject} The last word 
rendered ‘‘ be subject” is omitted in the oldest 
MSS., and seems to be transferred from ch. ii. 
18. If it be a gloss it is a very good one, and 
should not hastily-be dismissed, especially as 
it is almost necessary for the grammatical 
construction with the following words ‘ one 
to another,” which are retained in all MSS. 

be clothed| ‘The expression in the Greek, 
which occurs nowhere else in the New Testa- 
ment, has a singular force. It means to be 
clothed as with a white scarf worn by slaves, 
and in a manner which intimates promptitude 
in the discharge of menial duties. The word 
is admirably illustrated by Fritzsche, see 
Grimm, ‘ Lex. N. T.’ (S.v. éyxopBoopa). So 
that the words may be paraphrased, Put on 
humility as a garb of slaves indicating the 
mutual subjection of all true Christians. No- 
thing is more remarkable in the accounts of 
early Christians than their willingness to adopt 
the once odious name and acts of slaves. See 
especially P. Allard, ‘ Les esclaves chrétiens,’ 
Pp. 239 f 

for God resisteth] ‘This passage, quoted 
also by St James, iv. 6, is taken from the 
Septuagint version of Prov. iii. 34. The 
Hebrew has in the first clause, ‘‘surely he 
scometh the scorners.” ‘The subject ‘ God’ 
in our Epistle, and ‘Lord’ in the LXX.., is 
supplied in the translation. 


@6—9. FINAL EXHORTATION TO HUMILITY, 
PATIENCE AND WATCHFULNESS. 


6. Humble yourselves...under the mighty 
fand| The words “mighty hand” refer 
specially to a putting forth of power in the 
form of chastisement. The Christian yields 
humbly and submissively, with a certainty 
that every visitation is intended for his good, 
and must therefore be followed by a great 
deliverance and exaltation. St Peter doubtless 
refers to our Lord’s saying, ‘‘He that 
fumbleth himself shall be exalted,” (cf. also 
Matt. xviii..4,) but he has in mind specially 


LI PEBER. V. 


that in due 
time: 

7 Casting all your care upon him; 
for he careth for you. 

8 Be sober, be vigilant; because 


your adversary the devil, as a roaring 


he may exalt you 


_— 


such submission as was shewn by our Lord in 
Gethsemane. 

in due time| ‘This follows the version ot 
Erasmus, and accords with classical usage; 
but here the word evidently refers to the time 
when our Lord at His second coming will 
give a crown of glory to the humble. 


7. Casting all your care...he careth| ‘Two 
very different words are used here in reference 
to man’s care—which involves anxiety, and 
is to be suppressed or thrown off—and God's 
care which is loving and providential. The 
expression rendered, casting all your care, 
should therefore be understood, ‘ casting all 
your anxiety upon him,” though the render- 
ing of the A.V. may be preserved. St Peter 
refers to Ps. lv. 22, but he does not quote 
exactly either the Hebrew (which has a 
peculiar and difficult word for ‘‘care,” see 
note in /oc.), or the LXX., which in the 
second clause follows the Hebrew, whereas 
our Apostle introduces a new and very affect- 
ing thought, indicating the fulness of Divine 
sympathy. Such references are not to be re- 
garded either as direct quotations, or as im- 
perfect reminiscences, but as expressions of 
thought worked out in Christian conscious- 
ness. 

for] Omit this word, which is not found 
in the oldest MSS. 


8. Be sober, be vigilant] ‘The sobriety of 
mind and spirit is here indicated, without 
which watchfulness would degenerate into 
anxiety. ‘* Watch” is the last word in the 
last general exhortation of our Lord before 
His Passion, Mark xiii. 37. 

your adversary the devil| The two words 
point to the special forms in which the 
Christian must look for trial. ‘The adver- 
sary’ is the maintainer of the opposite side in 
a trial for life or death; ‘the devil,’ taken in 
its proper sense, means calumniator, one who 
knowingly advances false charges; the most 
formidable designation of Satan, exactly ex- 
pressing the Hebrew name. 

The expression, ‘‘goeth about,” is peculiarly 
graphic, describing the evil one as ‘‘ prowling 
about, not daring to enter the fold, but ready 
to seize any wanderer and to devour him.” 
The craft as well as the ferocity of Satan is 
distinctly set before us. ‘The word rendered 
‘‘roaring” is specially used to indicate the 
howl of the lion or wolf in fierce hunger (cf. 
Hesychius, xupias émi Ap f} AdKov  Aecwm 


217° 


218 


lion, walketh about, seeking whom he 
may devour : 

g Whom resist stedfast in the faith, 
knowing that the same afflictions are 
accomplished in your brethren that 
are in the world. 

10 But the God of all grace, who 


l) PETER V: 


[v. 9—12. 


hath called us unto his eternal 
by Christ Jesus, after that ye have 
suffered a while, make you perfect, 
stablish, strengthen, settle you. 

11 To him de glory and dominion 
for ever and ever. Amen. 


12 By Silvanus, a faithful brother 





rwv), and it nas the effect of utterly prostrat- 
ing the animal energies of those whom it does 
not rouse to exertion. Under this most strik- 
ing image the Apostle describes the tempta- 
tions which ever beset the Christian, and most 
specially in times of persecution. The roaring 
of the lion finds its counterpart in the menaces 
and writings of fanatic Jews and heathens, 
and Wetstein, who quotes a passage from the 
Talmud, ‘ Aboth’ 36, to the effect that evil 
angels run to and fro from one end of the 
world to the other, takes it here as referring 
specially to calumnious accusations before 
heathen magistrates. This however but par- 
tially represents the meaning. The exhorta- 
tion applies to all times and all classes of 
Christians. 


9. Whom resist stedfast in the faith| With- 
out dwelling upon the metaphor, so com- 
pletely wrought out by St Paul, Eph. vi. 13 f., 
our Apostle evidently has it present to his 
mind. The one great point however, on which 
the ‘‘rock-man” Peter concentrates attention, 
is the firmness, solid, rock-like stedfastness, 
which has its root and sustenance in faith. 
He well knew the effects of the presence and 
of the loss or failure of that central principle. 

noiel This implies that persecutions 
were already breaking out in all parts of the 
Roman empire; but the word, ‘“‘ are accom- 
plished,” requires attention. It means not 
that the afflictions have been accomplished, or 
more properly “ fulfilled,” but that they were, 
at the time when St Peter wrote, in process of 
fulfilment. The word fulfilment refers espe- 
cially to the sufferings as in accordance with 
the Divine purpose, a thought of which an 
echo is heard in the beginning of the ‘ Iliad.’ 

your brethren that are in the world| Lit. 
‘‘your brotherhood (a word used in the 
New Testament only by St Peter, cf. ch. ii. 
17), in the world,” z.e. in different parts of 
the world, whether extending beyond the 
Roman empire is uncertain: but there are no 
records of persecutions at that time save with- 
in the dominions of Nero. 


10, 11. END OF THE EPISTLE; sum- 
ming up its whole purport in a prayer singular 
for its completeness, and followed by an 
ascription of glory due to God. 


10. But the God...called us| Or, according 
to ail the best MSS., “* who called (om. hath) 
you.” The God of all grace, to Him the origin 


and perpetual source of all grace, the calling 
of Christians is invariably attributed in the 
New Testament. 

by Christ Jesus] More literally, in Christ 
(the two oldest MSS. omit ‘ Jesus,” which 
however stands on good authority, and would 
hardly have been left out by our Apostle in 
this great prayer). The word im includes, 
but extends farther than 4y. Christ is the life, 
head, and very principle of all existence to the 
Christian. 

after that ye have suffered a whtle| This 
rendering obscures the reference to the begin- 
ning of the Epistle, i. 6, in which the short- 
ness and comparative lightness of the sufferings 
of Christians are spoken of. The word ren- 
dered ‘‘a while,” lit. ‘‘a little,” includes 
both the brevity of the time and the com- 
parative lightness of the sufferings. 

make you perfect...settle you| Or, ‘will make 
you,” &c. The MSS. vary between the future 
and the optative. Good reason may be alleged 
for either, the former expresses a certain con- 
viction, the latter a strong desire and trust. 
The former however seems preferable; cf. 
2 Cor. ix. 10; Phil. iv. 19, where the future 
is used, though some MSS. have the same 
variant as here. 

Here we have another instance of St Peter’s 
habit of condensing a whole series of lofty 
thoughts in a few pregnant words. Each of 
the four words which he, uses has a distinct 
sense; the first rendered make you perfect 
is properly applied to a thorough process of 
amendment, bringing for instance a damaged 
net into perfect order, the occupation of the 
fishermen when our Lord called them, Matt, 
iv.21; Marki. 19. Stadlish, elsewhere ren- 
dered confirm, is the second step in the pro- 
cess of conversion, used to denote the object 
of Apostles in a second missionary journey ; 
strengthen (the Greek word is used only by 
St Peter) refers to the imparting of spiritual 
strength, cf. Eph. iii. 16; settle (cf. Ephes. 
ili. 17, where it is rendered ‘‘ grounded”) is 
an emphatic word: looking upon the Christian 
as corrected, confirmed, strengthened, St Peter 
sums up all in the one great thought that he 
must be “ founded on the rock,” Matt. vii. 
25, where the same word is used. N.B. Here 
the word is omitted in two old MSS., but 
is to be retained as in accordance with St 
Peter’s style and with the context. 


11. be glory and dominion] This ascription 


v. 13.] 


unto you, as I suppose, I have writ- 
ten briefly, exhorting, and testifying 
that this is the true grace of God 
wherein ye stand, 


L iPETER V. 


13 The church that is at Ba- 
bylon, elected together with you, 
saluteth you; and so doth Marcus 
my son. 





seems to have undergone a slight interpolation, 
not unnatural, as common in other passages, 
but here somewhat obscuring the connection 
of thought. Read to Him be the might, 
The prominent feeling in St Peter’s mind is 
that all the power and might, in virtue of 
which the Christian can alone maintain his 
integrity, belongs to God, and is derived from 
Him only. 


12—14. SALUTATIONS, as usual, after the 
proper close of the Epistle, follow and com- 
plete St Peter’s object. 


12. By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto 
you, as I suppose, I have written] For the 
correct rendering see the following note. This 
notice is of extreme importance, but two 
points require attention in considering the 
precise meaning of the words. 

as I suppose] scarcely represents the mind of 
St Peter; his word (Aoyifoua) implies no 
Mere conjecture, or opinion, but an estimate 
resting on rational and sure grounds. Cf. 
Rom. viii. 18. He gives this expression of 
well-grounded confidence in order to satisfy 
all his readers that the Silvanus whom they 
knew well as the companion of St Paul, 
was equally esteemed and trusted by him- 
self; a point never lost sight of in this 
Epistle is the existence of perfect harmony 
of principle and feeling between himself and 
St Paul. The words unto you are referred 
in our version to the opinion or feelings 
of the Churches to whom Silvanus bore the 
Epistle; but it is far more reasonable to 
connect it with the verb J have written; St 
Peter was not concerned to tell his readers 
that Silvanus was well known and trusted 
by them; he was concerned to tell them 
that in his deliberate opinion Silvanus was a 
true, faithful brother in Christ. This con- 
nection comes out distinctly if we adopt the 
rendering, By Silvanus, the (not a as in 
A.V.) faithful brother, as I judge, I 
write unto youinfew words. ‘I write,’ 
not ‘I have written,’ lit. Z qwrore; in accord- 
ance with Greek usage St Peter uses what 
is called the epistolary aorist, lit. I wrote, 
i.e. when I penned the Epistle. He is careful 
to call attention to three points; that he writes 
using Silvanus as his messenger, that Silvanus 
is wel known to his readers, and enjoys his 
perfect confidence; and that his Epistle, com- 
pared probably with the great doctrinal 
Epistles to the Romans and Corinthians, is 
studiously short, not so much expounding or 
discussing, as stating concisely the funda- 


mental principles of all Christian teaching— 
hence the special force of the next clause. 

exhorting, and testifying, &c.] Both words 
have special force, the first implies an earnest 
and persuasive form of address, see note above 
on v. 1; the next a strong attestation. St Peter 
has in mind the necessity above all things of 
attesting the completeness and soundness of the 
faith as already received by them. This is 
the true grace of God—that is the grace 
which they had been taught by St Paul. It 
is as forcible and convincing as St Paul’s own 
emphatic declaration in Gal. i. 11, 12; and 
coming from St Peter it carries with it the 
whole weight of Apostolic authority. 

wherein ye stand) ‘The oldest MSS. here 
havein which stand. St Peter changes his 
tone, as it were involuntarily and uncone 
sciously passing from attestation to a vigorous 
admonition. ‘This is the true grace of God, 
see to it that ye do not fall from it. The 
common reading yields a sound and true sense, 
the grace in which ye now stand is the true 
grace; but the transition is singularly effec- 
tive. It is probable that St Peter refers to 
St Paul’s own words, 1 Cor. xv. 1; enforcing 
his statement by the change from the indica- 
tive to the imperative mood. 


13. The church that is at Babylon] Lit. 
‘‘the co-elect in Babylon.” ‘These few words 
present considerable difficulties. The word 
‘‘church” is not in the Greek, but is accepted 
by nearly all commentators ancient and mo- 
dern as the true meaning.—The church in 
Babvlon elect together with the churches to 
which the Epistle is addressed. But for the 
consent of old and modern interpreters the 
word /ady or woman would naturally be 
supplied; and the elect lady of 2 John 1 
comes nearest to the expression. There how- 
ever the Jady probably means the Church ad- 
dressed by St John. In either case therefore 
the sense would remain substantially the same, 
but it must be noticed as a mystical or sym- 
bolical expression, and as such bearing upon 
the interpretation of the next word. 

at Babylon] See Introduction, § 4. We have 
here to remark (1) that the city of Babylon at 
that time was certainly not the seat of a Chris 
tian community ; (2) that no ancient record 
has the slightest trace of St Peter’s presence of 
work in Chaldza; (3) that all ancient authori- 
ties are unanimous in the assertion that the 
later year or years of his life were passed in 
the west of the Roman empire. On the other 
hand, Babylon was well known in Asia Minor 
during the lifetime of St John as the syme 


219 


220 


14 Greet ye one another with 
a kiss of charity. Peace be with 


‘bolical designation of Rome, and, as was 
before pointed out, the whole phrase has a 
symbolical form or tone. Accordingly we 
find an absolute consensus of ancient inter- 
preters that here Babylon must be understood 
as equivalent to Rome. ‘There was good 
reason why such a name should be here given 
to it. All the persecutions then impending, in 
fact already in progress, came from the city, 
which succeeded Babylon as the type and 
centre of antichristian forces. The Church 
elect together with other Churches suggested 
the remarkable contrast ; from that little com- 
mumity, faithful and loved by all, came the 
salutation of peace in antithesis to the howl- 
ings of persecution. We adopt without the 
least misgiving this explanation of the word 
as alone according with the mind of the 
Apostle, and with the testimony of the early 
Church. So also Thiersch, Ewald, and Hil- 
genfeld very positively, ‘ Einl.’ p. 683. 

Marcus my son| It is generally, all but 
universally, admitted that ‘John whose sur- 
name was Mark’ is here meant. He was 
probably converted by St Peter, who was on 
terms of affectionate and close intercourse with 
Mary his mother; and at the latter time af 


I. PETER. V. 


= 


[v. 14. 


you all that are in Christ Jesus. 
Amen. 


the Apostle’s life he was employed by him as 
his amanuensis, so the oldest tradition asserts. 
This mention adds somewhat to the form of 
the preceding arguments, which identify Baby- 
lon with Rome, there being ample proof that 
St Mark wrote his Gospel in that city. The 
salutation would have a ial interest con- 
sidering the early relations een Mark and 
the Churches of the East. For instances of the 
very common idiom ‘son’=pupil or disciple, 
see Potter on Clem, Alex. ‘Str.’ I. p. 317. 


14. with a kiss of charity] Cf. Rom. xvi. 
16, and notice the connection between this 
oe the reiterated exhortations to brotherly 
ove, 

Peace...Christ Jesus] Or, Peace to you 
all who are in Christ. The name Jesus 
stands on fair authority, but is omitted in 
the oldest MSS. Who are in Christ does not 
imply a suggestion that some only of those 
whom St Peter addresses are true Christians, 
a thought which, however true, was not pro- 
bably in the mind of the Apostle, who em- 
braced all in loving trust, prayed for the 
pare all who bore the name of Christ and 

been baptized inte Him. 


’ 


| cone 14 a ad od 


INTRODUCTION. 
PAGE PAGE: 
Genu:neness and authenticity . 221 Time and place of Writing . . - 234 
(a) External Evidence Language .. Odio Ode mai 8b. 
(6) Internal Evidence Conclusion . ° Ba noe ue 
Argument of the Epistle. . . . . . 233 


dealing with this Epistle it will be 

most convenient to notice (1) The 
external evidence which relates to it; 
(2) The internal marks of its genuine- 
ness and authenticity. 

The former of these enquiries will be 
very brief, for though included among 
the Canonical Books of the New Testa- 
ment at the Council of Laodicea’, the 
second Epistle ascribed to St Peter was 
not generally accepted in the early 
Church as a part of Canonical Scripture, 
neither are allusions to it nor quotations 
from it of frequent occurrence in the 
early Christian writings. Eusebius pro- 
bably represents the sense of a large 
part of the Christian Church of his time, 
when at the beginning of the fourth 
century he writes*, “One Epistle of 
Peter called his first is generally accepted, 
and this the presbyters of old have 
quoted in their writings as undoubtedly 
genuine ; but that which is circulated as 
his second we have received to be not 
canonical; nevertheless as it appeared 
useful to many it has been diligently 
studied along with the other Scriptures.” 
And later on*, when he divides the 
books of Scripture into three classes, 
those undoubtedly accepted ; those not 
canonical, but disputed ; and those that 


1 a. D. 366. Canon LIx. 

2‘H.E.’ 111. 3. It is worth while to quote 
the Greek of the latter part of the sentence ovx 
dvdtaOnkov pev elvat maperdy payer" Opws dé Trod- 
Rois Xpnowos paveioa pera Tay GAdwy éorovddcOn 


ypapur. 
SOHO E.: Il, 25. 


are spurious; he places the Second: 
Epistle of St Peter among the disputed 
books. 

For though the Epistle undoubtedly 
was in circulation long before the time 
of Eusebius it was not widely known, as. 
far as we can find, nor much quoted. 
The earliest coincidence with its lan- 
guage is found in the first Epistle of 
Clement of Rome to the Corinthians, a 
work written about the close of the first 
century. In chapter xxiii. of that Epistle 
we read, “We have heard these things. 
even in the days of our fathers, and 
behold we have grown old and none of 
these things has happened unto us.” 
The same statement is quoted also in 
the second Epistle of Clement, written 
perhaps in the middle of the second 
century’, but with some modifications. 
There we find “ We have heard all these 
things even in the days of our fathers, 
but though we have expected day by. 
day, we have seen none of them*.” 
These words are very like 2 Pet. ili. 4 5 
and when we see how the two passages. 
vary in expression we can understand 
how a writer giving, as was the custom 
with the early Christian Fathers, the 
substance rather than the precise lan- 
guage of the older Epistle might bring. 
St Peter’s words into the forms in which 
they here appear, yet we cannot be cer- 
tain that the quotation is made from our 


1 See Westcott, ‘On the Canon,’ p. 161 (3rd 


it. ). 
3 *2 Clem. ad Cor.’ cap. XI. 


222 


Epistle’. Of like juncertainty is the lan- 
guage of Polycarp’, where he says, “nei- 
ther I nor any other like me can follow 
the wisdom of the blessed and glorious 
Paul,” words which may be an echo of 
2 Pet. iii. 15, but about which it is im- 
possible to speak surely. So too with 
the words® of Melito, bishop of Sardis 
(A.D. 170): “There was once a flood 
and chosen men were destroyed by a 
mighty north wind...... so also it will be 
at the last time: there shall be a flood 
of fire, and the earth shall be burnt up 
together with its mountains and men 
shall be burnt up together with their 
idols...... and the sea “together with its 
isles shall be burnt; and the just shall 
be delivered from the fury like their 
fellows in the ark from the waters of the 
deluge.” This passage may have been 
suggested by the language of 2 Pet. ii. 
5—7, but it is not possible to affirm that 
it was So. 

Next in order of time comes Theo- 
philus, bishop of Antioch (a.p. 168— 
180), who writes* thus: “The ordinance 
of God is this, His word, shining like a 
lamp in a house which encloses it, illu- 
mines the whole world under heaven.” 
Here we have a comparison which St 
Peter employs (2 Pet. i. rg), but the lan- 
guage of the Apostle in that passage is 
so striking and unique that it is hard to 
believe Theophilus is drawing from him, 
with so little imitation of his precise 
words, a simile that he might have found 
in many places besides. There is how- 
ever another sentence in the same trea- 
tise® which has the look of a paraphrase 
of 2 Pet. i. 20, 21: ‘* Men of God moved 
by the Holy Ghost, and becoming pro- 
phets inspired and made wise by God 
Himself, became taught of God ;” and 
the occurrence of this passage, in which 
the original words® bespeak, more than 

1 The two passages are interesting in connec- 
tion with St Peter’s second Epistle for another 
reason. In the latter, the quotation is prefaced 
by Aévet yap Kal 6 mpogyriKkds NoYos... (cf. 2 Pet. 
i, 19), while in the first Epistle it is termed 
7 yeagn avrn Omov Neyer... 

2 ¢Ep. ad Phil.’ ut. Polycarp was martyred 
A.D. 156. See Introd. to ist Peter § 6 and notes. 

3 Cureton, “Spicilegium Syriacum,’ p. 48. 

4 “Ad Autolycum,’ II. 13, p. 92 (ed. Colon). 

SeAd Autolycum,’ II. 9, p. 87. 

© ‘The mvevuaropdpor rvevmaros aylou of Theo- 
philus seems to be drawn from the U6 rvevuaros 


aylov pepduevor of the Epistle, while the expres- 
sion ol tov Qcov ovPpwro is not unlike the 


INTRODUCTION TO 


the English can be made to do, an ac 
quaintance with St Peter’s Epistles, gives 
us fair ground for believing that Thev- 
philus was acquainted with this second 
Epistle. 

When however we come to Clement 
of Alexandria (A.D. 165—220), we seem 
to gain some sure evidence of the exist- 
ence of our Epistle. It is true that in 
the extant works of that Father we have 
no reference to it, but Eusebius has pre- 
served for us' a notice of his labours 
which seems conclusive for his know- 
ledge of the Second Epistle of St Peter. 
The words are “In his Outlines, to speak 
briefly, Clement has given concise expla- 
nations of all the Canonical Scriptures, 
not omitting the disputed books (avr 
Aeyouevas), I mean the Epistle of Jude 
and the remaining Catholic Epistles, 
also the Epistle of Barnabas and the so- 
called Apocalypse of Peter.” Now as 
Eusebius elsewhere (111. 25) gives us a 
list of these disputed books, using the 
same word to designate them, and in- 
cludes among them the Second Epistle 
of St Peter, there can be little doubt 
that he intended it to be included here 
under the phrase ‘“‘the remaining Catholic 
Epistles.” We seem therefore to be safe 
in concluding that our Epistle was known 
to, and had a short exposition written on 
it by, the Bishop of Alexandria. 

In the writings of Hippolytus, bishop 
of Portus (A.D. 220), we find allusions to 
the Second Epistle of St Peter. Thus’: 
‘these fathers (the prophets) were fur 
nished with the Spirit and largely 
honoured by the Word Himself......and 
when moved by Him they announced 
what God willed. For they spake not 
of their own power (let me not lead you 
wrong), neither did they declare what 
pleased themselves, but first of all they 
were rightly gifted with wisdom by the 
Word, and then were duly instructed 
about the future by visions. So when 
convinced they spake those things which 
God had revealed to them alone.” These 
words may almost certainly be taken as 
an expansion of 2 Pet. i. 21. 

Further in a letter? of Firmilian, bp. 


Apostle s phrase, at least according to some MSS. 
CHB? vie r4: 
2 ‘De Antichristo,’ 2 o Pe 
3 The letter is ee those of Cyprian, 
Ep. 75, Oxf. edit. 


THE SECOND) EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER. 


of Czsarea in Cappadocia, to Cyprian, 
bishop of Carthage, we have an undoubt- 
ed reference to 2 Peter. The writer 
is speaking of Stephen, bishop of Rome, 
and says that in breaking the peace of 
the Church he is “defaming Peter and 
Paul, the blessed Apostles, as if the very 
men delivered this rule, who in their 
Epistles execrated heretics and warned 
us to avoid them.” There is no sentence 
in St Peter’s fitst Epistle to which these 
words would apply, they must therefore 
be referred to the exhortations against 
false teachers, of which the second 
Epistle is full. 

It is also clear that Origen, who died 
A.D. 253, knew of both St Peter’s Epistles, 
for we have first his statement preserved 
for us by Eusebius’: ‘Peter, on whom 
Christ’s Church is built, against which the 
gates of hell shall not prevail, has left 
one Epistle generally accepted. Grant 
also a second, for it is a matter of ques- 
tion.” And in the Latin version (which 
alone is preserved to us) of a Homily on 
Joshua’, he says “Peter moreover sounds 
loudly on the twofold trumpet of his 
Epistles.” And in another Homily* he is 
represented, by his translator, as writing 
“Peter says, Ye have been made par- 
takers of the Divine nature.” Beyond 
this amount of recognition we have no 
external evidence concerning the second 
Epistle before its acceptance into the 
Canon at the Council of Laodicea. For 
the supposed allusions in Justin Martyr‘, 
Athenagoras®, and Methodius*®, bishop 
of Tyre, are not certainly to be cited as 
drawn from this Epistle, nor can hardly 
be called citations in any proper sense. 

Yet even this small amount of evidence 
testifies to a wide circulation of the 
Epistle. In the far separated districts 
of Alexandria, Palestine, Cappadocia, 
Proconsular Asia, Italy and Carthage, 
were Christians into whose hands the 
Epistle had come, and they shew by their 
allusions that they supposed those for 
whom they were writing to be able to 
appreciate citations drawn from it and 
therefore to have seen and read it. We 


BSH EV i.025% 

® “Hom. IV. in Josh.’ 

3 ‘Hom. Iv. in Levit.’ 

“ ‘Dialogue with Trypho,’ c. 89. 
5 *Legatio pro Christianis,’ p. 9. 
© “Apud Epiph. Her.’ Lx1v. 31. 


223 


shall not then be wrong in assuming 
that much more evidence than we now 
possess was laid before the Fathers at 
Laodicea when they admitted this second 
Epistle into the Canon in spite of the 
doubts which in certain quarters had been 
cast upon it; and its acceptance, after 
having been classed ainong the disputed 
books so distinctly, is the best possible 
assurance that there was satisfactory proof 
then existing that the Epistle was what it 
professes to be. 

In the absence of any more externa. 
evidence we must turn to the Epistle it- 
self, and see what testimony can be de- 
duced from its own language. And 
we may with advantage take the points 
to be considered in the following order: 


(1) The author’s statements concern- 
ing himself, and the manner in which 
these are made. 


(2) The persons for whom the Epistle 
professes to be written. 


(3) The sentiments contained in it 
compared with those of the First Epistle 
of St Peter. 


(4) The style and language of this 
Epistle as compared with 


(a) St Peter’s first Epistle. 

(6) The language ascribed to St 
Peter in the Acts of the Apostles. 

(c) Such traces of St Peter’s language 
and manner as can be gathered 
from the Gospels. 


(5) A comparison of the language with 
the New Testament diction generally. 


(6) Other internal evidence of genu- 
ineness and authenticity. 


(1) The author of our Epistle calls him- 
self Symeon [Simon] Peter and claims to 
be an Apostle of Jesus Christ (i. 1, ill. 2). 
He further states that he has already 
written an Epistle to those whom he 
is now addressing (ill. 1). He speaks 
as an old man, whose death is near 
at hand (i. 14), and claims on this 
ground the right of calling to the re- 
membrance of those to whom he writes 
the solemn lessons which they had 
learnt both from the Old Testament 
prophecies, and from those who had 
spoken to them in the name of Jesus 
Christ (iii. 2). The whole of the Epistle, 


224 


in its illustrations and quotations bears 
evidence that the writer wasa Jew. But 
the most solemn portion of the letter is 
that wherein he asserts that he was one 
of those who had been present at the 
Transfiguration. For the naturalness of 
the manner in which he introduces this 
personal notice, and the tokens of truth- 
fulness which the statement contains, see 
the notes on i. 14—19. It is difficult 
to believe that any one could have made 
the declarations which there appear, in 
an Epistle specially directed against false 
teachers, if he were merely writing in an 
assumed character, and using a name of 
repute to gain currency for a letter which 
under his own name might have been less 
acceptable. 

When such are the claims of the writer, 
made in such solemn manner, we cannot 
reject what he says without comparing 
the Epistle with everything else which 
may bear upon it, and enquiring whether 
the character of the writing will allow us 
to receive it for what it claims to be. 
And especially should we compare it in 
every particular with the first Epistle, 
which is on all hands accepted as a verit- 
able letter of St Peter. 

(2) If St Peter wrote this second letter, 
it is addressed to the same persons to 
whom he sent the first. Now this Epistle 
is written to Christians of whom a large 
portion had been converted from Ju- 
daism* but who appear to be living amid 
non-Jewish populations (ii. 18). That 
they had many of them been Jews either 
by birth or as proselytes and were known 
to be familiar with the writings of the 
Old Testament is clear from the use 
which the writer makes of the Scrip- 
tures of the older Covenant to illus- 
trate and enforce all that he has to 
say. Even allusions to Jewish tradi- 
tion (ii. 4) are presumed to be quite un- 
derstood by these converts, and they 
have access to the same prophecies as 
the Apostle himself, and have been taught 
by them, and also to value them most 
highly. But they were also acquainted 


1 On this point see Introduction to 1 Peter § 3. 
There can be no doubt that the Second Epistle 
was equally general with the First, and though 
we may suppose St Peter by birth more attached 
to the Jews, there can be no question that our 
Epistle is intended for both Jews and Gentiles. 
There was no faction among those to whom it 
was addressed. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


with St Paul’s Eristles (iii. 15), and to 
some of those here addressed that A- 
postle had written. They knew too 
that St Paul’s Epistles were numerous. 
The affectionate terms in which the writer 
speaks to them, calling them brethren 
(i. 10), employing language which betrays 
marked personal interest (i. 12, 13), and 
repeatedly using the epithet “beloved” 
(iil. 1, 8, 14,17), bespeak great affection 
on the part of the author; while some of 
his words (i. 18) can hardly mean any- 
thing but that he himself had preached 
and laboured among those to whom he 
now sends his second letter of exhorta- 
tion in his old age. Throughout the 
whole Epistle he appears to be well ac- 
quainted with their spiritual condition 
(i. I—4, 12, ili. 14, 17) and knows that 
they are still stedfast in the faith, and 
writes only to remind them that danger 
is near, and to bid them be watchful 
against it. 

As far as all this is concerned the re- 
cipients of the second Epistle may very 
well have been the same persons as 
those to whom the first was sent. For 
among these latter were also many Jews 
dispersed in the lands of the Gentiles 
(zaperidnuor Siacropas, 1 Pet. i. 1) in 
the districts of Pontus, Galatia, Cappa- 
docia, Proconsular Asia and Bithynia. 
They also can be appealed to by the 
writings of the prophets (1 Pet. i. 10), 
and the Apostle can illustrate his teach- ~ 
ing to them from the Old Testament 
Scriptures (i. 16, ii 6, 10, ili. 6, 20) with 
full assurance that he will be understood, 
and he writes to them as to men who 
had received traditions from which they 
needed to be redeemed (i. 18), while the 
minute exhortations given throughout 
the whole letter not only to the Christian 
congregations in general, but to citizens 
on their duty as such (ii. 13—17), to 
servants (ii. 18), to wives (iii. 1—8), to 
husbands (iii. 7), to elders (v. 1—4), to 


1 On this point see Canon Cook’s instructive 
notes on 1 Pet. i. 1. I should agree with all 
that is there advanced to shew that there was no. 
opposition between the two Apostles, or among the 
converts to whom they wrote, for both had alike 
written to these Christian congregations; but 
the addition of the names of districts in the 
opening verse of the first Epistle makes it appear 
to me more probable that a literal rather than a 
figurative sense should be given there to the word. 
diac7ropa. 


THE SECOND EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER. 225 


the young (v. 5), betray an intimate per- 
sonal acquaintance with the condition of 
those to whom the Epistle is sent, which 
without any express statement would leave 
the impression that St Peter had visited 
and preached among those for whom he 
is so minutely anxious. And he ad- 
dresses them in the like affectionate tone 
used in the second Epistle (ii. 11, iv. 12), 
while we may be sure that those who 
received a letter by the hands of Silvanus, 
and were greeted by Mark, could not fail 
to be acquainted with what St Paul had 
both written and taught. Judging there- 
fore from the contents of the Epistles 
there is no reason why the latter should 
not have been sent to the same people 
as the former. 

(3) And while from internal evidence 
we may allow both the Epistles to have 
been directed to the same readers, we can 
see also from their contents that they 
breathe the same spirit, and convey the 
same teaching. The writer of both ex- 
pected that the end of the world was 
near. Cf. 1 Pet. i 5, of the “salvation 
ready to be revealed in the last time,” and 
1 Pet. iv. 7, “The end of all things is at 
hand,” with 2 Pet. iii. 3, 10, “There shall 
come in the last days scoffers,” and the 
times of the scoffers were close at hand; 
and “‘the day of the Lord will come as a 
thief in the night.” In both Epistles the 
writer teaches that prophecy does not 
bear with it its own interpretation (cf. 
1 Pet. i. ro, 11 and 2 Pet. i 20). Both 
alike dwell on the small number who 
were saved at the Flood (1 Pet. iii. 20 
and 2 Pet. ii. 5, ili. 6); both have the 
same sentiments on the nature and nght 
use of Christian liberty (1 Pet. ii. 16; 2 
Pet. ii. 19) and dwell with equal emphasis 
on the value of prophecy (1 Pet. i. ro— 
12; 2 Pet. i. 19, iii. 2). Both alike at- 
tribute apery to God (1 Pet. ii. 9; 2 Pet. 
i. 3), and herein employ the word as it is 
nowhere else used in the New Testament. 
Hence we gather some additional indica- 
tions that the Epistle may be accepted 
for what it claims to be, the work of him 
who wrote the first Epistle. 

(4a) But it is when we compare the 


_actual words of both Epistles minutely 


that the evidence that they were both 
from the same hand becomes strongest. 
They are both alike full of graphic ex- 
pressions, words which call up a picture 


New Test —Vot. IV. 


to the mind as we read them. Thus in 
1 Peter we have zapaxtvwat (i. 12), “to 
stoop down that a good view of anything 
may be obtained ;” avafwoapevor (i. 13), of 
the ‘‘girding up” the loins of the mind; 
pumodr (iil. 15), properly “to muzzle,” of 
putting men to silence; émixdAvuma (il. 
16), for “a veil,” not a material one, but 
of maliciousness; oxoAws (ii. 18), “crook- 
ed, twisted,” used of the froward in tem- 
per; xoAadifopevor (ii. 20), “slapped with 
the hand,” of men buffeted for faults; 
omAicacGe(iv. 1), “put on armour,” though 
it is used of mental resolution; éyxouBu- 
cacGe (v. 5), a word which indicates the 
putting on of a tight robe well rolled up, 
such as a slave would wear for hard work, 
is used to indicate the way in which 
humility is to be the everyday wear of 
the true Christian; while wpvoperos (v. 8) 
is a most picturesque word to express 
the fierce howling of a hungry lion to 
which Satan’s conduct is compared. 

The same picturesqueness of diction 
is equally abundant in the second Epistle. 
Thus (2 Pet. 1. 9) puwrafwr, “one whocan- 
not see afar off,” is literally “one who 
has his eyes tight closed, either from in- 
tention or weakness of sight;” oxjvepa (i. 
13, 14), of the body, as the tabernacle of 
the soul; dwogdpos (i. 19), the light- 
bringer, for “the day-star;” tAacrds (ii. 3), 
that can be moulded or bent in any way, 
plastic, of “feigned” words; woragetr (Ii. 
3), “to slumber,” literally “to nod in 
sleep ;” tedpwcas (ii. 6), “turning into 
ashes;” Bacavi€ew (11. 8), “to vex,” lite- 
rally “‘to put to torture;” pofyddr (ili. 10), 
“with a great noise,” but the word im- 
plies the hurtling of weapons or the plash 
of many waters; o7peBAovr (iil 16), “to 
wrest,” really ‘‘to put on the rack.” 

Again, if we compare the two Epistles 
in the matter of araé Aeyoweva and rare 
words we shall find a like correspondence 
in their diction. The list in the first 
Epistle comprises avaxvots (iv. 4), dvayev- 
vaw (i. 3), aapavtwos (v. 4), audpavros 
(i. 4), dvexAdAyros (i. 8), Tatpomapadoros 
(i. 18), éxtevys (iv. 8), aptryévvytos (i. 2), 
ddohos (ii. 2), ¢ lepdreypa (i. 5> 9), vroAtu- 
mave (ii. 21); Uroypappos (ii. 21), pore 
(ii. 24), éromreve (il. ie ill. 2), €uwAoxy 
(iil. 3), €vdvers (ili. 3), otvopAvyia (iv. 3), 
aAXorpioemioxoros (iv. 15), apxurotuny (v. 
4), ouvek\extos (v. 13). Now many of 
these words are specimens of that strong 


P 


226 


figurative diction whichis notunfrequently 
found among unlearned but still vigorous 
and thoughtful men. Had it been an 
imitator who had set about writing the 
second Epistle we may be confident that 
a close study of the language of the first 
would have made him aware of this cha- 
racteristic of St Peter’s diction, and we 
should have been sure to find some of 
the unusual words of the first letter re- 
produced in the second. A writer who 
meant to pass his work off as St Peter’s 
composition must have set such a stamp 
upon his writing. But the actual case is 
not of that nature. The second Epistle 
abounds like the first with unusual or 
unique words, but there are none among 
them which connect it with the previous 
letter. The peculiarity of style is as 
prominent as ever, but it is developed in 
entirely new materials. The unique words 
of the second Epistle are mainly these : 
icdotysos (i. I), puwmalw (i. 9), éromrys 
(i. 16), avdxpnpds (i. 19), Stavyalw (i. 19), 
gwoddpos (i. 19), ewidvars (i. 20), Taxwes 
(i. 14, il, 1), Taprapow (ii. 4), tAactos 
(il. 3), ExmaAau (ii. 3, ill. 5), wetpa (ii. 4), 
Breupa (il. 8), pdpmos (il. 13), evtpypaw 
(ii. 13), akatamavoros (ii. 14), tapadpovia 
(ii. 16), e€€papa (il. 22), KvAcocpa (il. 22), 
potydev (ili. 10), Kavodw (ili. 10, 12), 
Svowontos (iii. 16), aorypiKtos (ii. 14, ill. 
16), ornpvypos (ill. 17). 

It will be seen that many of these 
words are of the same character in every 
respect as those used in the first Epistle, 
words which would be employed by a 
writer who had a very graphic manner 
of expression, and gave word-pictures in 
all that he said or wrote, but they are 
not those which an imitator of the first 
Epistle would have chosen that he might 
impress the reader with the notion that 
the author of one letter was the author 
of the other. 

(4 4) If we turn now to the language 
which is ascribed to St Peter in the Acts 
of the Apostles, we shall find that there 
are many indications that the speaker 
was the same person, to judge from his 
words, as the writer of the Second 
Epistle. In 2 Pet. i 1 we have Aayxa- 
vew used of those “who have obtained 
the like faith.’ The word is found in 
the same sense Acts i. 17, where Peter 
speaks of Judas having “ obtained part of 
this ministry.” But in this sense the 


INTRODUCTION TO 


4 


word is found nowhere else in the New 
Testament. So evocBea, holiness (A.V. 
godliness), is used 2 Pet. i. 7 of a poten- 
tiality in exercise, which will make its 
possessor fruitful in good works, just as 
St Peter says (Acts ili. 12), “ Why look 
ye on us as though by our own power or 
holiness we had made this man to walk.” 
In like manner the use of avoyos (unlawful) 
concerning things and not persons is con- 
fined to St Peter in the Acts and to the 
writer of this Epistle (cp. 2 Pet. ii. 8 with 
Acts ii. 23). Everywhere else in the New 
Testament the word is used of persons. 
In 2 Pet. ii. 9 we have evoeBys of godly 
persons. In the Acts (x. 2, 7), in a de 

scription which can hardly have come in 
the first instance from any other than 
St Peter, we find the same word em 

ployed twice over in describing Corne- 
lius. The word occurs nowhere else in 
the New Testament, for in Acts xxii. 12 
the best MSS. and editions read evAaBys. 
Of the same kind is the writer’s use 
(2 Pet. i. 16, 18) of POéyyopa:, a very 
unusual verb for fo speak. It is found 
(Acts iv. 18) in the report of the injunc- 
tion given to St Peter and his com- 
panions “not /o speak nor teach in the 
name of Jesus,” but nowhere else, and this 
report was most likely to be gathered 
first of all from the spokesman of the 
Apostles. So yuépa xvupiov, the day of 
the Lord, is found only in Acts ii. 20 and 
2 Pet. ili. 10, and once in St Paul’s Epistles 
(r Thess. v. 2), but the whole passage in 
St Peter’s second Epistle should be read 
along with the quotation in the Acts, 
and the thoughts will be seen to run in 
one and the same channel. A further 
and most remarkable instance of the use 
of the same words is found in Acts i. 18 
compared with 2 Pet. ii. 13,15. In the 
first passage St Peter is speaking of Judas 
buying a piece of ground with the wages 
of iniquity (u.cOds 7H. addixias), and in the 
Epistle the same expression is used of 
Balaam and of the sinners whom the 
writer compares with him: while the 
words are to be found nowhere else. 
These instances do not exhaust the points 
of similarity in diction, for AaAeiv (Acts 
ill. 21 compared with 2 Pet. i. 21) is 
used in both books in the same way for 
God’s message spoken to man, and éra- 
yew of 2 Pet. ii. 5 is like the use of the 
word in Acts v. 28. So too xodAdlerOas 


THE SECOND EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER. 


of Acts iv. 21, compared with the use of 
the same verb 2 Pet. ii. 9, and in no 
other passages. All these examples in 
the Acts occur either in St Peter's own 
speeches, or in narratives in which he 
appears as principal actor, and of which 
he must have been the first relater, and 
when brought together and compared 
with our Epistle they furnish a large 
amount of evidence such as could hardly 
be derived from any writings except 
those drawn from the same source. 

(4c) If we turn now to the Gospels 
we find some indications of a like nature. 
Tradition describes St Mark as the épy7y- 
veurns of St Peter. If this be true, we 
should expect in the second Gospel to 
find points of language which resemble 
our Epistle. Of such we have the verb 
dwpéowar used Mark xv. 45 and nowhere 
else in the New Testament, except 2 Pet. 
i. 3. So too Bacavilw in the same figura- 
tive sense in 2 Pet. il. 7, 8, and Mark vi. 
48. Inthe same way both these writers 
employ tpéuew, a word uncommon in the 
New Testament (cf. Mark v. 33 with 2 
Pet. ii. 10). Again, nowhere else is the 
word (AaiAay) tempest used. Storms and 
tempests are often enough spoken of in 
the Gospels, but only in Mark iv. 37 
and 2 Pet. ii. 17 does this word appear. 

There are also several instances of 
close resemblance between the other 
Gospels and this Epistle. Thus the 
swine and dogs are spoken of together 
(ii. 22) exactly in the same way as in 
Matt. vi. 6. The day of the Lord is 
compared to a thief in the night (iii. 10) 
as in Matt. xxiv. 43. The way in which 
St Peter alludes to the Flood and to 
Sodom and Gomorrah recalls the mention 
of them by Christ (Matt. xxiv. 37; Luke 
xvii. 26—30), while in the xoAalopévous 
of 2 Pet. il. 9 we have the echo of 
the xéAaovs in Matt. xxv. 46; and the 
same may be said of 2 Pet. ii. 20, ‘“‘ the 
latter end (ra écxata) has become worse 
than the beginning (rév purwv),” which 
is drawn from our Lord’s words, Matt. 
xii. 45. But perhaps the most striking 
passage of this kind in the whole Epistle 
is the allusion (i. 17, 18) to the narra- 
tives of the Transfiguration. Closely 
joined with these verses we have two 
words in the Apostle’s letter which revive 
the story of that great manifestation of 
Christ’s glory. In v. 13 we read “as long 


227 


as I am in this ¢abernacle.’” Now it was 
St Peter who at the Transfiguration had 
said, “Let us make three ‘fabernacles.” 
Then in v. 15, alluding to his own death, 
he writes, “after my departure” (€fodor), 
and at the Transfiguration Moses and 
Elias talked with Jesus of his ‘‘decease ” 
(also é€odov), which he should accomplish 
at Jerusalem. The two words seem to 
have revived the memory of the past, 
and immediately the writer passes to the 
mention of the vision of Chnist’s glory 
in the Holy Mount. Such a train of 
thought is natural in St Peter, but would 
be marvellous in any other than one who 
had been a witness of the Transfigura- 
tion. 

(5) In comparing the Second Epistle 
of St Peter with the other New Testa- 
ment writings, the most important to 
be noticed are the Epistles of St Paul. 
We maintain that our Epistle is directed 
to congregations of Jews and Gentiles, 
among whom the latter had first minis- 
tered, but among whom St Peter also 
had laboured. Of course the employ- 
ment of the same words and phrases in 
their letters is not conclusive in respect 
of their joint interest in the persons ad- 
dressed, but it is of great importance as 
evidence that St Peter's Epistle is not 
a composition of late date and of the 
second century. At that time the cir- 
cumstances of the Christian Churches 
had entirely changed, errors which in 
St Paul’s day were only just raising their 
heads had then grown into magnitude, 
and topics of discussion had become 
prominent of which the Apostolic age 
knew little or nothing. If St Peter’s 
Epistle therefore deals with the same 
subjects and in exactly the same spirit 
as those of his fellow Apostle, it is only 
just to suppose that the letter which has 
come down to us was written under the 
same circumstances and at the same time 
as St Paul’s. Now St Peter (2 Pet. 1. 2) 
speaks of “ever growing knowledge” 
(ériyvwors) exactly as St Paul does in 
Rom. i. 28, ill. 20, and in many other 
places which have been alluded to in 
the notes. In a like tone does he deal 
(i. 16) with the “ fables” (wi0or) of which 
St Paul speaks 1 Tim. 1. 4 and iv. 7. 
The same covetousness (m)eoveéia) cha- 
racterizes the false teachers in the ex- 
perience of one Apostle and of the other 


P2 


228 


(cf. 2 Pet. ii. 3 with 1 Tim. vi. 5; Titus 
L 11): they make the same large pro- 
mises of liberty to those whom they 
desire to mislead (cf. 2 Pet. ii. 19 with 
1 Cor. x. 29 and Gal. v. 13). ‘Fhe long- 
suffering of God and the end for which 
it was displayed St Peter (iii. 15) speaks 
of in words which seem to be derived 
from Rom. ii. 4, and with them also 
may be compared Rom. ix. 22. The 
“false brethren unawares brought in who 
came in privily to spy out our liberty” 
(Gal. ii. 4) have their counterpart in 
those who “privily bring in heresies of 
destruction”’ (2 Pet. i. 1), and indeed 
the whole position assumed by St Peter 
in reference to heretical teaching is very 
exactly that which is set before us in 
St Paul’s Epistles. The errors are of 
the same kind, their development is in 
the same stage, the artifices of their 
propounders are alike, and the whole 
pictures have so much in common that 
it seems unreasonable to place them at 
different periods of the Church’s history. 
Those who have studied the fertile 
growth of various phases of false teach- 
ing in the Ecclesiastical history of the 
second century, will find it difficult to 
believe that by a writer of that period, 
in a letter devoted in the main to a 
warning against errors of doctrine, so 
little should have been said of other 
forms of false teaching which then existed, 
and no hint given of any thing more 
than the earliest stages of Gnostic errors 
in teaching and in practice. 

It is worth while also to notice that 
the seducing teachers have no name in 
St Peter’s Epistle, whereas the same 
persons in the Revelation (ii. 14, 15) 
are called Nicolaitanes. The offenders 
there, as here, are those that hold 
the doctrine or follow the errors of 
Balaam the son of Beor, but by the date 
of the Revelation they had further gained 
a more definite appellation. “Thou 
also, as well as Israel of old,” it is said 
to the Church of Pergamos, “hast such 
teachers that hold the doctrines of the 
Nicolaitanes.””’ Now whatever date is 
assigned to the Revelation, it was written 
long before the time at which those 
who dispute the authenticity of 2 Peter 
would fix its production. Yet it is strange 
that the definite title of these teachers 
does not appear in it, but only their 


INTRODUCTION TO 


description in connexion with the name 
of the false prophet in whose steps they 
were treading. For this reason 

others we should place 2 Peter be- 
fore the Apocalypse, and as the date 
of the Apocalypse is most likely before 
A.D. 70, this suits well with the genuine- 
ness and authenticity of the second 
Epistle of St Peter. 

(6) But beside these points of resem- 
blance in the language of the second 
Epistle both to the other writings of 
the New Testament, and to the acknow- 
ledged words of St Peter, there is a fea- 
ture of likeness between the first and 
second Epistles which deserves to be 
specially noted, and which contributes 
much to the evidence that they are both 
by the same hand. The mind of the 
writer in both letters continually becomes 
retrospective, and his recollections fashion 
the language which he uses. In the first 
Epistle we have this characteristic exem- 
plified in several instances. In chap. v. 
5 he writes, “be clothed with humility.” 
But no mere translation can give the 
force of the verb there used. It signifies 
“to wrap tight round you a kind of over- 
dress which servants used when engaged 
in rough or dirty labour.” Now in the 
use of this word the writer seems to be 
carried back in mind to that occasion 
(John xiii. 4) when Jesus “laid aside his 
garments and took a towel and girded 
himself” and washed his disciples’ feet. 
The words of the Apostle are in an er 
hortation which begins “ All of you ve 
subject one to another,” and his thoughts 
appear to revert to the way in which 
Christ had taught the same lesson, and 
he frames his language by a single word 
to point back to that scene, “ Wrap your 
humility tight about you, as a robe for 
work and wear,” and so follow the ex- 
ample of Jesus when he washed the feet 
of his disciples. 

Exactly in the same way does he seem 
to look back to words of Jesus (Luke 
xii. 35), ‘Let your loins be girded and 
your lamps burning,’ when he says (i. 
13), “Gird up the loins of your mind.” 
So too when he gives his exhortation to 
the elders (v. 2), “‘ Feed the flock of God 
which is among you,” he is mindful of 
that interview of his with Christ which is 
related John xxi. 15, 16, where a like 
charge was given to himself, and he fulfils 





THE SECOND EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER. 


to the best of his power the command 
(Luke xxii. 32), “when thou art con- 
verted strengthen thy brethren.” In i. 
17 too we have recalled most clearly 
St Peter’s own picture of the life of 
Cornelius (Acts x. 2) when we read, “If 
ye call on the Father, who without re- 
spect of persons judgeth according to every 
man’s work, pass the time of your 
sojourning here zz fear.” We may trace 
too a remembrance of his own inability 
to watch even a short time with his 
Master, when ‘the hour” of his enemies 
and “the power of darkness” arrived, in 
those earnest exhortations to watchful- 
ness (v. 8) which he gives against the 
attacks of the devil. 

But most of all does he dwell on the 
sufferings and resurrection of Jesus. His 
great claim to be heard is (v. 1) that he 
is ‘‘a witness of the sufferings of Christ.” 
He remembers the last prayer, “‘ Father, 
into thy hands I commend my spirit,” 
so he exhorts those who have to suffer 
(iv. 19) to “ commit the keeping of their 
souls to God in well-doing as unto a 
faithful Creator.” And he makes special 
and constant allusion to the Passion. 
The whole scene of Christ’s trial is before 
his eyes as he writes the words (il. 19— 
' 24), “‘What glory is it, if when ye be 
buffeted for your faults ye shall take it 
patiently?” The Greek word means 
“smitten with the palm of the hand” 
as Christ was smitten. And the one 
word recalls the whole scene, and he 
applies it at once for the purpose of his 
exhortation. ‘‘ Christ,” he continues, 
“suffered for us, leaving us an example 
that ye should follow His steps: who did 
no sin, neither was guile found in His 
mouth, who when He was reviled, reviled 
not again, when He suffered He threat- 
ened not, but committed Himself to 
Him that judgeth righteously ; who His 
own self bare our sins in His own body 
on the tree, that we being dead to sins 
should live unto righteousness, by whose 
stripes ye were healed.” These words 
shew as we read them that all the terrible 
events of that sad day were minutely 
revived. The mockery and the blows, 
the scorn of the High-priest and his col- 
leagues, the submissive silent Jesus, are 
all depicted in his graphic words. He 
uses too for “tree’”’ ({vAov) an unusual 
word, which he also employs in like 


229 


manner in two of his addresses in the 
Acts (v. 303 x. 39), while in the word 
for stripes (uwAwy) we have the eye- 
witness clearly presented to us. It means 
properly ‘a wale or bruise” rising under 
the skin after a severe blow, and as we 
read. the passage with this in mind, we 
can see that the wniter’s thoughts were 
on that mangled form which the hard 
blows had made to seem like a single 
bruise. 

Such is St Peter’s way of thought and 
writing in the first Epistle. Of like kind 
in our second Epistle we may note the 
use of (deAcalew) to catch with a bait, only 
employed here (ii. 14, 18) and by St 
James (i. 14) of the alluring of sinners 
unto evil ways, but in which the thought 
goes back to the fisherman’s life on the 
Lake of Galilee. We can see too how 
he recurs, when he speaks of false 
teachers, to those words which only he 
and three others appear to have heard 
from Jesus (cf. Matt. xxiv. 3 with Mark 
xiii, 3), “‘ Many false prophets shall rise 
and shall deceive many, and because 
iniquity shall abound, the love of many 
shall wax cold.” Peter had seen, yea 
been part of, such a turning away; and 
now when men are arising again “to 
deny the Master who bought them,” he 
almost uses Christ’s own words for the 
warning of his readers. Also he has 
strong in his mind the terms of that 
same discourse (Matt. xxiv. xxv.) when 
he writes (iii. 3, 4) that “in the last days 
there shall come scoffers walking after 
their own lusts, and saying, ‘ Where is 
the promise of his coming?’” while 
Christ’s solemn words on the same oc- 
casion, ‘“‘ Immediately after the tribula- 
tion of those days shall the sun be 
darkened, and the moon shall not give 
her light, and the stars shall fall from 
heaven and the powers of heaven shall 
be shaken, and then shall appear the 
sign of the Son of Man in heaven,” are 
echoed in the exhortation (iii. 10) of the 
Epistle, where the words also look back 
to St Peter’s Pentecostal sermon, ‘“‘ The 
day of the Lord will come as a thief in 
the night, when the elements shall melt 
with fervent heat, the earth also and the 
works that are therein shall be burned 
u ty 
Euatiiar he seems ever to have in his 
mind the charge (Luke xxii. 32), 


230 


“ Strengthen (srqpifov) thy brethren.” 
No version can give the force of the 
original, but the Apostle reproduces the 
thought when he says (i. 12), “I will 
not be negligent to put you always in 
remembrance of these things though ye 
know them and be established (é€ornpty- 
pevovs) in the present truth.” He had 
fulfilled his Apostolic duty and strength- 
ened them, but he would not through any 
neglect let them fall back into weakness. 
Once more, those who wrest the Scrip- 
tures (ill. 16) are “unlearned and wz- 
stable” (aorypixtot), having no strength 
or firmness of hold on the truth, while 
the better condition to which the Apostle 
hopes to have brought his hearers is 
noticed again by a form from the same 
word (iii. 17), “ Beware lest ye...fall from 
your own stedfastness” (ornpvypov). 

This feature of resemblance between 
the two Epistles has been dwelt on at 
more length because it is what an imita- 
tor would be most unlikely to reproduce. 
Such a writer may carefully study and 
imitate the external marks of style in the 
author whom he intends to copy, but to 
enter into the man’s mind, to look back 
with the vision of another over a life of 
which he has had no experience, and to 
reproduce touches the same in kind but 
different in particulars, yet such as would 
have been natural to the thought of the 
true writer, this is beyond imitator’s 
work. 

And there are not wanting other indi- 
cations that our writer was not a forger. 
A forger would never have written 
“* Symeon Peter” (i. 1), nor have varied 
from the terms of the heavenly message, 
at least as reported in some of the 
Gospels, when he was describing the 
Transfiguration. He would also hardly 
have ventured to claim so solemnly for 
himself a share in that scere, while he is 
writing against teachers of falsehood, if 
his words had not been true, nor would 
he have glided so naturally from the 
singular number to the plural in that 
narrative, just where the change is most 
suitable, nor would he have allowed, as 
he does, any testimony of prophecy to 
be counted of more certainty than the 
vision from heaven which he was pro- 
fessing to have seen. A second century 
imitator would hardly have spoken as 
our Epistle speaks (iii, 15) of “our 


INTRODUCTION TO 


beloved brother Paul,” but would have 
used terms of greater honour and re- 
spect, such as were common in writers 
of that date’, nor would he have 
failed to conclude his Epistle with a 
solemn ascription and Doxology as is 
done in the close of the first Epistle. 
Once more, the very difference of tone 
on some points in the two Epistles 
seems to mark them both as genuine. 
For example, in the first, where the ob- 
ject is to give comfort under trial, and 
to exhort unto patience “those who 
are being kept by the power of God unto 
salvation,” the second coming of Christ 
may fitly be spoken of as a Revelation 
(aroxdAvyis, 1 Pet. i. 5), for they were 
preparing to welcome his appearing with 
the cry of the writer of the Apocalypse, 
“Even so, come, Lord Jesus.” But 
when false teachers are abroad it is a 
time for Christ’s coming to be set forth 
in another light. To those who fall 
away it will be a (xapovoia) coming, ‘a 
presence, but not one to which they have 
looked with joy. To them it will be 
“the great and terrible day of the Lord” 
and the “‘ day of judgment” (iii. 7). 

We can see too why Christ is so often 
called Saviour (cwryp) in the second 
Epistle from the same consideration. 
He had bought, redeemed His people, 
this constituted Him their Saviour, this 
was the great claim He had upon their 
love, and this is the reason why by the 
name which he so delights to apply to 
the Lord, the writer of the second Epistle 
gives emphasis to the work of Christ in 
man’s redemption, and to His claim on 
man’s love. 

Then our Lord’s sufferings are much 
dwelt on in the First Epistle, hardly at 
all in the Second. But is there not good 
cause for the change of tone? It was 
not the time to urge on men to imitate 
Christ in His humility and patience when 
they were being persuaded to deny Him 
altogether. The different circumstances 
sufficiently explain the difference of the 
language. 

Combining all these points of internal 
evidence we seem to have many good 
grounds for accepting the second Epistle 
as the work of the same writer who com- 
posed the first. The tone of the two 


1 For an instance, see supra, Pp. 332. 


THE SECOND EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER. 


letters is the same on a great many 
points, and where there are variations, 
these can be sufficiently accounted for 
by the times in which, and the objects 
for which, each was composed. The 
language of the two letters exhibits in 
large abundance the same peculiarities 
which differ entirely from those which 
an imitator of the first would have endea- 
voured to introduce into the second. 
The language also of the second Epistle 
has many points of resemblance to words 
which must have come from St Peter 
in the Acts, and to some which most 
likely did so in the Gospels, while the 
mental characteristics of the writer of 
2 Peter so completely agree with those ex- 
hibited in the earlier Epistle, that to 
suppose them different persons is very 
difficult. There are at the same time 
many things to be found in the second 
Epistle which we can hardly conceive an 
imitator introducing or allowing to ap- 
pear. If both letters be by St Peter all 
that we find in them may be expiained 
naturally, to ascribe the second to an 
imitator raises difficulties which seem to 
pass solution. For these reasons, not 
indeed amounting to proof, but when 
combined with the decision of the Lao- 
dicean Council affording most strong 
presumption, it seems right to accept the 
verdict of antiquity and to receive our 
Epistle for St Peter's. 

There are a few other points in con- 
nexion with the Epistle which need to 
be noticed, and foremost among them is 
its relation to the Epistle of St Jude. 
In several places in the notes occasion 
has been taken to remark on such forms 
and expressions as seem to shew that 
St Peters Epistle was the first written. 
But it will be well to set the whole case 
before the reader here. 

In the first place comes the grammati- 
cal evidence. St Peter (ii. 1) says: 
“There shall also be false teachers among 
you, who shail privily bring in heresies 
of destruction...and many shall follow 
their lasciviousnesses, by reason of whom 
the way of truth shall be blasphemed, and 
in covetousness shall they with feigned 
words make merchandise of you.” Here 
the future aspect of the coming heresies 
seems most strongly emphasized. The 
writer proceeds to describe the judgment 
of these sinners as being prefigured by 


231 


examples in the Old Testament, and in 
so doing completely identifies the false 
teachers who shall come hereafter with 
those who have been their types in the 
past. Thus he says, “ they are not afraid 
to speak evil of dignities,” “‘ they speak 
evil of the things which they understand 
not,” and other like sentences in the 
present or aorist tenses, but this is just 
what a writer would do who was figuring 
at the moment the future from a con- 
sideration of the past. And when he 
comes to conclude his admonition (iii. 
I—4) on this subject, and to turn to 
things as they are, he shews again that 
the inroads of error are only dreaded in 
the time to come. For he writes, “7 
stir up your pure minds by way of re- 
membrance: that ye may be mindful of 
the words which were spoken before by 
the holy prophets...knowing this first 
that in the last days scoffers shall come 
in their scoffing.” The whole position 
assumed here is that of one addressing 
Christians who were still free from ad- 
mixture with error, and who only needed 
to be put in mind of what they had 
heard, to keep safe from the danger 
which the Apostle saw was growing up 
around them. 

In St Jude’s Epistle the language 
refers to a different time. The writer 
there says, “There ave certain men crept 
im unawares,” as though these were al- 
ready carrying on the mischievous de- 
signs among the Christian community. 
They are ‘‘spots”” now existing “in the 
feasts of charity,” they “feast” among 
the brethren “without fear” and “ pas- 
ture themselves.” All this is in a differ- 
ent tone from St Peter’s more predictive 
language. And when we come to verses 
17 and 18 we have what appears to be 
a direct allusion to St Peters words: 
“Remember ye the words which were 
spoken before of the Apostles of our 
Lord Jesus Christ; how that they told 
you there should be mockers (eyzaixra) 
in the last time.” This word for mockers 
is found nowhere else in the New Testa- 
ment except 2 Pet. iii. 3, and the whole 
passage in St Jude wears the appearance 
of a quotation from that verse. And in 
St Peter the sentence is the Apostle’s 
own language. He has said, “‘I stir up 
your minds...that ye may be mindful of 
the words which were spoken before by 


232 INTRODUCIION 10 


the holy prophets and of the command- 
ment of your Apostles...as ye know this 
first that in the last days mockers shall 
come.” So that the portion quoted by 
St Juce is a direct utterance of St Peter, 
and not a quotation from any other 
source which might have been equally 
accessible to another writer. On the 
score of language therefore the second 
Epistle of St Peter appears to have been 
written before that of St Jude. 

And when we look at the characters 
portrayed in the two Epistles this posi- 
tion is strengthened. St Peter speaks 
of those against whom he writes as 
“teachers,” men, that is, who by the 
lessons which they gave were likely to 
induce others to accept their opinions, 
and in consequence to follow their 
practices. They bring in “heresies of 
destruction,” “with feigned words they 
make merchandise of” their hearers, 
“they beguile unstable souls,” “they 
make promises of liberty while they 
themselves are the servants of corrup- 
tion.” But in St Jude’s Epistle the 
picture is much darker, the mischief has 
grown apace. There is no more men- 
tion of the offenders as teachers or 
setters forth of any doctrine. They are 
simply degraded in their life by wicked 
lusts. “They turn the grace of God into 
lasciviousness,” “these men dreaming 
defile the flesh.” “What they know 
naturally, as brute beasts, in those things 
they corrupt themselves.” ‘‘They are 
spots in your feasts of charity” (he con- 
tinues), “feasting with you without fear, 
pasturing themselves,” “they walk after 
their own lusts,” “they are sensual, they 
have not the Spirit.” They are such 
that it is only with fear and trembling 
that men may try to save them, their 
deeds are to be loathed as a defiled gar- 
ment. 

Here then we have another indication 
that St Jude wrote after St Peter. None 
will doubt that they are both addressing 
their exhortations against the same evil, 
and that one writer knew of the other's 
Epistle ; and granting this, there can be 
little doubt that the letter of St Jude was 
composed when the evil teaching had 
found its natural consequence in evil 
doing, and that bad practices were en- 
couraged without much outward show of 
a party of teachers in the Church. 


Once more, when we look at the form 


of the sentences in the two Epistles, we” 


seem able to trace St Jude’s expansions, 
and in some cases to judge of the reason 
for them. This will be best seen if we 
place side by side a few of those verses 
which seem to bear out the view that St 
Jude takes his text from St Peter, but 
uses it as seems most fitting for his need. 
Comparing 2 Peter ii. 4 with Jude 6 we 
find 


2 Pet. ii. 4. For if Jude 6. And the 


God spared not angels 
when they sinned, but 
cast them into Tartarus, 
and delivered them into 
chains [pits] of darkness 
to be reserved unto 
judgment... 


angels that kept not 
their first estate, but 
left their own habita- 
tion, he hath reserved 
in everlasting chains 
under darkness unto 
the judgment of the 


great day. 


Here is a manifest comment upon 
“the angels that sinned,” and it suits 
exactly with the relative position of the 
two Epistles as we think them to have 
been written. St Jude wishes to speak 
strongly of those who had utterly fallen 
away from Christian living, and therefore 
he charges the picture more deeply, and 
speaks of the angels as keeping not their 





first estate, but leaving their own habita- 


tion. So again, 


2 Pet. ii. 6. Turning 
the cities of Sodom and 
Gomorrah into ashes 
condemned them with 
an overthrow, making 
them an ensample to 
those that after should 
live ungodly. 


Jude 7. Even as 
Sodom and Gomorrah, 
and the cities about 
them in like manner, 
giving themselves over 
to fornication, and go- 
ing after strange flesh, 
are set forth for an 
example, suffering the 
Mire of eternal 

re. 


Here too St Jude has a scene of 


grosser character in his mind, and he 
uses the example which St Peter had 
employed, but gives it a stamp which 
fits it for the more corrupted days in 
which he is writing. 

And we have another example of 
expansion, 


2 Pet. ii.1r. Where- Jude g. Yet Michael 
as angels, which are the archangel, when 
greater in power and contending with the 


might, bring not rail- devil he disputed about 


ing accusation against the body of Moses, 
them before the Lord. durst not bring against 
him a railing accusa- 
tion, but said, The Lord 
~ rebuke thee. 7 








THE SECOND EPISTLE 


Both these passages are meant to il- 
lustrate the inconsistency of those sinners 
in the Christian communities who “rail 
against dignities.” St Jude wishes, as we 
believe, to make his illustration even 
stronger than St Peters, for the times 
were grown more evil. The latter had 
said, “Angels bring not railing judg- 
ment against evil persons.” St Jude 
goes further with a concrete instance, 
and says, ‘“‘ Michael, the greatest of angels, 
did not bring a railing judgment even 
against Satan himself, the prince of 
evil.” 


So too if we set side by side 


2 Pet. ii. 17. These 
are wells without water, 
and mists driven about 
by a whirlwind, to 
whom the blackness of 
darkness is reserved. 


Jude 12. « louds they 
are without water, car- 
ried about of winds; 
autumn withering trees, 
without fruit, twice 
dead, plucked up by 
the roots ; raging waves 
of the sea, foaming out 
their own shame; wan- 
dering stars, to whom is 
reserved the blackness 
of darkness for ever. 


Here as before we recognize the darker 
condition of those against whom St Jude 
is giving his warnings. These sinners 
now gloried in their shame and minded 
only earthly things. They cast their 
shame forth to the public gaze with no feel- 
ing of regret for the better state which 
they had lost. But perhaps the strongest 
phrase is that which speaks of them as 
trees doubly dead: there has been no 
mere blasting in their case of one year’s 
promise, leaving hope that in another 
they may bloom again. All hope of 
such men is past, and it is “for ever” 
that for them the blackness of darkness 
is reserved. 

These are not all the instances of such 
treatment which could be produced, but 
these examples are enough to illustrate 
the Midrash-like exposition which St 
Jude seems to have given to St Peter’s 
text. The contrary process, viz. St Peter 
abbreviating St Jude’s letter, is not easy 
to conceive, especially in view of the 
existence of those graver evils which are 
clearly indicated and spoken against in 
the latter Epistle, and which of them- 
selves imply some time, if not a long 
time, since the false teachers of St Peter 
seemed near at hand. 


GENERAL OF PETER. 233 


ARGUMENT OF THE EPISTLE. 


This may be summarized as follows : 


Cuap. I. It is addressed to those 
who hold the like precious faith with 
the writer (1, 2), who are urged because 
of God’s gracious gifts unto them, to 
labour with all diligence for a steady 
advance in holiness (3—7). The graces 
to be cherished increase men’s know- 
ledge of our Lord Jesus Christ, and 
those who do not thus grow are blind, 
and lose the memory of former spiritual 
blessing (8, 9). Therefore be ye dili- 
gent (he continues) and I will not be 
negligent to keep you in mind of these 
things. For I shall soon be taken away, 
and I desire that after my death you may 
recall what I have said (1o—15). For 
we have good warrant for our teaching, 
since we saw the Lord in His glory at 
the Transfiguration (16—18). And there 
is beside the word of prophecy, which is 
to other men more sure than our vision. 
Take heed to this and follow its light, 
for the words of the prophets are God's 
own words, for these men spake from 
Him, being moved by the Holy Ghost 
(19—21). 

Cuap. II. But of old there were false 
prophets, and there shall rise false 
teachers among you, and shall lead 
many astray, and cause the truth to be 
evil spoken of (1, 2). But their judg- 
ment has been foreshewn long ago, for 
they shall no more be spared than were 
angels when they sinned, or than the 
world before the Flood or the cities of 
the plain. ‘The destruction of these was 
a type of the end of the false teachers, 
just as the deliverance of Noah and of 
Lot teaches us that God can deliver his 
servants out of their trials (3—9). The 
marks by which the false guides both in 
past times and in times to come can be 
discerned are these: they walk after the 
flesh and despise dominion and are self- 
willed ; they speak evil of glories, blas- 
pheming things which they cannot under- 
stand, and while they destroy others 
they shall be destroyed (to—12). They 
delight to revel in the day time, and are 
blemishes among your company; they 
beguile the unstable, and in their covet- 
ousness follow the example of Balaam 
of old (13—16). They give promise but 


234 INTRODUCTION TO 


perform nothing, like fountains without 
water, and clouds without rain. They 
allure by their fine speeches, and promise 
liberty to their followers, but themselves 
are slaves of corruption (17—19). They 
have once known the right way, but have 
fallen back into evil, so their latter end 
is worse than their beginning. They 
fulfil the proverbs of the dog and the 
swine by returning to the evil from which 
they had been cleansed (2z0o—zz). 

Cuap. III. I write this second Epistle 
to put you in remembrance of what you 
have been taught, for the times of danger 
spoken of both by prophets and apostles 
are near. The scoffers will come with 
their scoffings, and ask, Where is the 
promise of his coming (1—4)? These 
men wilfully forget that the earth has 
been destroyed, and its future destruc- 
tion is pronounced. Do not you be like 
them, and count God slack because he 
does not strike sinners at once. He is 
long-suffering that men may repent (5— 
10). But the day will come when men 
look not for it, and those portents shall 
be seen which Christ foretold. Men 
ought therefore to walk in all holy con- 
versation and godliness, that they may 
always be ready (11—13). We Christians 
look for new heavens and new earth, 
wherein dwelleth righteousness; we then 
should labour that we may be fit to dwell 
there and be found ourselves without 
spot (14). Think that God’s long-suffer- 
ing is meant for man’s salvation. St 
Paul teaches us this, but there are por- 
tions of that Apostle’s words which the 
unstedfast wrest to their own destruction 
(15, 16). But as ye are warned and 
instructed take heed that ye fall not 
away, but grow in grace and in the 
knowledge of Christ, to whom be all 


glory (17, 18). 
TIME AND PLACE OF WRITING. 


On these two points little can be said. 
St Peter was expecting his death soon 
to come, but we have no certain evi- 
dence in what year he suffered martyr- 
dom. The traditions on which most 
reliance can be placed make it very 
probable that he died in Rome, and 
that his: death was after a.D. 63 and 
before A.D. 70. Further than this we 
cannot go, nor need we, because there is 


no allusion to the destruction of Jerus 
salem in his Epistle, necessarily conclude 
that he died before it was destroyed. 
It seems almost certain that by “ Baby- 
lon” in the first Epistle (v. 13) Rome is 
intended’, and if this be so, we can 
hardly conclude otherwise than that he 
was in the same city when he wrote the 
second letter. It was not written so 
long after the first as to make the former 
out of mind, and as tradition places the 
death of the Apostle in Rome, it seems 
likely that he laboured there during his 
last years on earth, as one of the greatest 
centres of life, and so a place whence 
his influence would be most widely 
spread. 


LANGUAGE. 


Some attempts have from time to 
time been made to demonstrate that 
Second Peter and Jude were both origi- 
nally written in Hebrew, and that the 
supposition of such Aramaic originals 
will explain many of the difficulties which 
meet us in the comparison of the two 
texts. But though highly interesting, no 
such speculations have yet been made 
convincing. One of the most recent of 
these discussions is by the Rey. E. G. 
King’. But though Mr King’s remarks 
support strongly the position that St 
Jude wrote after St Peter, and was, as it 
were, an expounder or commentator on 
part of his text, yet the fact that both 
writers were Hebrews writing in Greek, 
and so, sure to give their thoughts a 
Hebrew turn, seems enough to account 
for the greater portion of the instances 
which are there brought forward. 


CONCLUSION. 


From all that has been here said it 
will be seen that, looking at the external 
evidence alone, we cannot arrive at cer- 
tainty concerning the authorship of this 
Epistle. The internal evidence has been 
shewn to point very clearly to St Peter 
as the author. But there rises the ques- 
tion: What shall we say concerning its 


1 See Introduction to the First Epistle, pp. 


160 se 
JU “Did St Peter write in Greek? Thoughts 
aaa criticisms tending to prove the Aramaic 
of the Second Epistle of St Peter and the 
Epistle of Jude.’ Cambridge, 1871. i 


" 


THE SECOND EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER. 


non-acceptance in the earliest days of 
Christianity? The Epistle was known 
in many quarters among the early Chris- 
tians, and they could see, as we do, that 
it claimed to be the work of the chief 
among the Apostles. It will be said, 
‘Had they believed it to be really a 
writing of St Peter, could they ever have 
regarded it as uncanonical?’ Yet hold- 
ing it for uncanonical, many, as we see 
from the words of Eusebius, still con- 
sidered it of value, and our only reply 
must be, that the circumstances of the 
time and the conditions under which 
writings came before the world in those 
early times were such as made it pos- 
sible for works to be circulated and 
obtain only a doubtful acceptance with- 
out any suspicion of what we in modern 
days call literary forgery. We know 
from the preface to St Luke’s Gospel 
that many Christian writings, and of 
varied value, came into circulation during 
the infancy of the Church, and it is not 
difficult to understand that our Epistle, 
sent probably from Rome to Asia, may 
have remained for a good while in par- 
tial obscurity, and when it began to be 
more widely known the circumstances 
under which it was first sent may have 
been in some degree hard to discover. 
Thus the Epistle would come to be 
classed with a multitude of other works 
about whose origin some uncertainty 
prevailed. But time brought it into its 
proper estimation. It was first found 
useful, and when the day of closer en- 
quiry arrived it was accepted as canon- 
ical by the Laodicean Council. And 


235 


when we remember what works were 
rejected from the Canon, and by what 
names they were known, names which in 
Canonical Scripture were highly distin- 
guished, if not so highly as St Peter, we 
may rest sure that the evidence adduced 
before the Fathers of Laodicea was such 
as to make the external testimony bear 
out the claims made in the text of the 
Epistle. 

It may therefore suffice us concerning 
this second Epistle, claiming to be St 
Peter’s, to know, even though we have 
not all the evidence preserved to us, that 
in old time there was warrant found for 
accepting it as what it claims to be. We 
ourselves can see that it accords in sen- 
timent with the teaching of the Gospels 
and the Epistles concerning which we 
have no doubt; that its view of the 
Christian Church is in agreement with 
that of other writings of the Apostolic 
age, that it fits in, in short, in its place 
among the Canonical Scriptures. We 
have seen that the internal evidence which 
would incline us to accept the Epistle as 
St Peter’s is very strong, while the diffi- 
culty of finding a theory on which all the 
features that mark this letter could have 
been exhibited in the work of any imitator 
is well-nigh insurmountable. Therefore 
we receive it as St Peter’s writing in 
spite of the doubts of the early Church, 
for we feel confident that they were 
cleared away before the book was in- 
cluded in the Canon. But above all we 
take it as part of our Christian Scriptures 
because of its harmony with what Christ 
taught. It bears its witness in itself. 


THE SECOND EPISTLE GENERAL OF 


Pb fore 


CHAPTER I. 


1 ens them in hope of the increase of 
God’s graces, 5 he exhorteth them, by faith, 
and good works, to make their calling sure: 
12 whereof he is careful to remember them, 
knowing that his death ts at hand: 16 and 
warneth them to be constant in the faith of 


Christ, who ts the true Son of God, by the 
eyewitness of the apostles beholding his ma- 
jesty, and by the testimony of the Father, and 
the prophets. : 


IMON Peter, a servant and an 
apostle of Jesus Christ, to them 





TITLE. 


The title of the Epistle as given in the A.V. 
is only found in some late MSS. It is that 
which is given by Stephens, while the Textus 
Receptus adds ‘“‘the Apostle” after ‘‘ Peter.” 
The MSS. of greatest authority (S, A, B) and 
most recent editors give merely ‘* Of Peter ii.” 


Cuap. J. 1—11. The apostolic salutation 
and prayer for a blessing on those for whom 
he writes, followed by an earnest exhortation. 
Seeing that God has granted unto you all 
things which pertain to a godly life, take good 
heed that ye provide with all diligence such 
graces as may prove you to be not un- 
fruitful, for thereby shall be provided for 
you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of 
Christ. 


1. Simon Peter] In the first Epistle we 
have only the one name Peter given. Without 
admitting in any sense that there was a Petrine 
and a Pauline party in the early church, it may 
be gathered from what St Paul says (Gal. ii. 
7) of the ‘‘ Gospel of the circumcision being 
committed unto Peter,” that while both Apo- 
stles laboured in the same spirit and walked 
in the same steps, the son of Jonas was recog- 
nized most completely by the Christians who 
belonged to his own nation. Among them we 
can understand that he would be known by his 
Jewish as well as by his Greek name. Writing 
to churches of mixed Jews and Gentiles he 
combines both names and calls himself Simon 
Peter. The union is a token that Jew and 
Greek were rapidly being made one in Christ. 

The best supported orthography of the name 
in this verse is Syzzon. This is a strong mark 
of a Jewish hand. It is the form which the 
LXX. always gives for the name of the patri- 
arch Simeon (Gen. xxix. 33, &c.), and which in 
the New Testament is written (Rev. vii. 7) as 
the name of the tribe called after him, It is also 
found as the name of the son of Harim (Ezra 
X. 31), though there the A.V. has Shimeon, 


In the Apocrypha the name of the Maccabean 
prince is written Siuev (1 Mace. v. 17, &c.), 
though on his coins it stands with the same 
orthography as the name of the son of Jacob 
(see Gesenius, s,v.). In the New Testament 
Supedr is found (Luke ii. 25, 34) as the name 
of that aged man who received our Lord in 
the Temple, also of a son of Juda in St Luke’s 
genealogy (iii. 30), and of Simeon called Niger 
(Acts xili. 1). Itis also given as the form of 
St Peter’s name in the account of that pecu- 
liarly Jewish assemblage, the council held (Acts 
Xv. 14) concerning the circumcision of Gen- 
tiles converted to Christianity. From this it 
would seem that among Jews themselves the 
fuller form Syseon was most used, and would 
be the name written on religious occasions and 
for solemn purposes, while Simon was the 
form most current in their intercourse with 
non-Jews, and would be employed in the 
ordinary transactions of life. Whether we 
ascribe the use of this form of the name to the 
Apostle himself or to an amanuensis, its oc- 
currence suits well with what we may conceive 
to have been the surroundings of St Peter in his 
later life. We know from Gal. ii. 11 how he 
was inclined to cling to everything which was 
Jewish. In his ministry to the converts from 
his own nation he would be likely to call him- 
self, and to be called of others, by that form of 
his name which was familiar from their ancient 
Scriptures, and which occupied a place in their 
national history. Yet this would only be the 
case for a little while, until the Gospel narra- 
tives had come into circulation, After that 
time any writer, who might have undertaken 
to put forth this Epistle under St Peter’s name, 
would have had the best chance of gaining 
acceptance for it, if he had made use of those 
forms which the Evangelists employ exclu- 
sively. A forger would assuredly have made 
his form of the name accord with that em- 
ployed in the first Epistle, and would never 
have departed from the orthography found ia 
the Gospels 


v. 2.] 


that have obtained like precious faith 


TAPE BEAR.! 1. 


2 Grace and peace be multiplied 


with us through the righteousness of unto you through the knowledge of 


God and our Saviour Jesus Christ: 


God, and of Jesus our Lord, 





Thus this first word of the Epistle seems 
to be an indication that the letter is not the 
work of any forger. Where so little is known 
of the history of the Epistle from external 
evidence, the accumulation of such points of 
internal testimony seems the best, perhaps the 
only, answer that can be given to those who 
would assign this Epistle to a late date and 
to another hand than that of St Peter. 

a servant and an apostle] This precise 
combination is found in no other apostolic 
salutation. The nearest approach to it is Tit. 
i. 1, where St Paul calls himself ‘‘a servant 
of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ.” The 
former word, used often by St Paul (Rom. 
i. 1; Phil. i. 1, &c.) and more exactly 
rendered Jond-slave, implies the entire devo- 
tion of the servant to his Lord, the latter 
the service in which his devotion engaged 
him 


like precious faith] Rather, a /ike-precious. 
The original is only one word, which does 
not occur elsewhere in the New Testament, and 
implies that the faith admits all those who 
have received it to the same Christian privi- 
leges, and is for that reason alike precious to 
them all. It is also alike precious through all 
time, to those who first received it, and to all 
those who shall hereafter do so. The gifts of 
Christ are like Himself, ‘‘ the same yesterday, 
to-day, and for ever.” But it is not meant 
that all who receive the faith profit equally 
thereby. The faith is the opened door, the 
progress made in Christian life differs accord- 
ing to the use which is in each case made of 
the good gift of God. 

faith| This is not to be understood of a 
concrete form or profession of belief, in which 
sense miorig came to be used in later times, 
but of that ‘substance of things hoped for 
and evidence of things not seen” (Heb. xi. 1) 
which alone can be spoken of as the gift of 
God's righteousness. The word rendered 06- 
tained (Naxoivor), literally, received by lot, in- 
dicates that this faith, which forms the founda- 
tion of the Christian’s life, is a gift of God's 
grace, and not of merit, or by transmission. 
It should be noticed also that the construction 
of \axeiv here with an accusative finds its only 
parallel in the New Testament in a speech of 
St Peter (Acts i. r7). 

with us| Is this Epistle addressed to the 
same readers as the first? The writer speaks 
(iii. 1) as if this were so, calling it a ‘second 
Epistle ;” also in v. 16 of this chapter it seems 
to be implied that there had been some pre- 
vious teaching given. In that case the refer- 
ence in ws may be only to himself and the rest 
of the Twelve who had been first called into 


Christ’s Church from Judaism. He would 
say to his readers ‘‘ We received the faith from 
the lips of Jesus, aut though He has gone into 
heaven, the faith is the same as ever, and of 
the same saving virtue.” But as there is no 
statement made about the readers for whom 
it was intended, we need not narrow the limits, 
for the dangers against which they are warned 
would beset all the Church alike; it seems better 
therefore to take the Epistle as designed for a 
wide circle, as the later tradition which named 
it ‘‘catholic” implies. Then the expression 
with us would include the Apostle and all 
those members of the Christian Church among 
whom he was labouring when the Epistle was 
written. If, for illustration, we suppose him 
writing at Rome to the Christians whom he 
knew in Proconsular Asia, the words would 
intimate that the faith was one and the 
same and of a like power in all the churches, 
salvation offered to mankind through Christ 
on whom they have believed. 

through the righteousness | Better, ‘in the 
righteousness.” That is, in the righteous 
dealing of God with men. The Judge of all 
the earth will do right, and under the Chris- 
tian dispensation admits all believers to equal 
privileges through faith. The causes which 
prevent them from equally profiting thereby 
are not of God. He is no respecter of 
persons, 

of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ] In 
the best MSS. the pronoun is with God. The 
translation should be, of our God and the 
Saviour Jesus Christ. It is indeed possible to 
explain both God and Saviour here as titles 
given to Jesus Christ, and so to render “ our 
God and Saviour Jesus Christ.” But as the 
Father and the Son are spoken of in contra- 
distinction in the next verse, it is better to 
preserve the distinction here also. It should 
moreover be observed that we nowhere else 
find ‘*God and Saviour” used of Christ. 
‘** Lord and Saviour” occurs in this Epistle 
(i. I, iii. 18) and elsewhere in the New Tes- 
tament very frequently. 


2. Grace and peace be multiplied uzto you] 
The order of the Greek is, ‘‘ Grace unto yor 
and peace be multiplied,” and is the exact 
phrase employed in 1 Pet. i.2. Here how= 
ever it is further explained how the grace and 
peace can be multiplied. 

through the knowledge| Better, inthe knowe 
ledge. The noun is one much used by St Paul 
in the Epistle to the Colossians (i. 9, 10, ii. 
2, ili. 10) and in the Epistles to Timothy 
(2 Tim. il. 4; 2 Tim. ii. 25, iii. 7) and Titus 
(i 1) as well as in other places. It signifies 


237 


238 


3 According as his divine power 


hath given unto us all things that us 'to glory and virtue: 


pertain unto life and godliness, through 


—_— 


a steady growth in knowledge, an advance 
step by step, not knowledge matured but ever 
maturing. Wecan understand how such aword 
would come to be chosen by the Apostles to 
describe Christian knowledge, when the sim- 
pler word for knowledge (yvdas) had become 
identified with the heretical teaching of the 
early Gnostics, and so while yvéous is found 
in St Peter’s first Epistle, émiyvwors is not, 
because the need for such a term had not 
become apparent when the first Epistle was 
written. Such knowledge as the Gnostics 
professed to have was a knowledge “that 
puffeth up,” because it claimed to have reached 
an eminence whence no advance was needed. 
émiyvwors 1S a protest against such teaching ; 
it implies a constant growth both as possible 
and indispensable. Jn this constant increase 
of the knowledge of God through Christ (no 
man cometh unto the Father but by Him) 
shall be found the abundance of peace for 
which St Peter prays. The steps of this growth 
in grace,-and consequent peace, are set forth 
afterwards in vv. 5—8. 

Jesus our Lord| This is an unusual expres- 
sion found only here and in Rom. iv. 24. 
An imitator would have written some more 
common form, and would have introduced 
Christ before or after Jesus. There is probably 
some emphasis intended by the position of the 
pronoun 7juév with which the verse concludes. 

- Jesus is our Lord (the Lord of us), for His 
divine power hath granted unto ws His pre- 
cious promises, and He has called us by His 
own glory and virtue, and so He may claim 
us for His liegemen and faithful servants. 


83. According as his divine power, &c.] 
Better, Seeing that His divine power, &c. 
There is no comparison implied in the sen- 
tence. The prayer which the writer has uttered 
in the previous verse needs only earnest zeal 
on man’s part to bring about its fulfilment, 
since God has given on His side all things that 
tend to this increase of grace and peace. The 
construction is the same as in 2 Cor. v. 20, 
‘* Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, 
seeing that («% since) God doth beseech you 
by us,” &c. 

his divine power| Here His seems most 
fitly referred to Jesus. Had the Father been in- 
tended there would have been no need for the 
adjective divine. ‘The divine power of Jesus, 
and that He is able to grant those things 
which pertain unto life, had been evidenced by 

Is resurrection, and through that resurrec- 
tion Christians are begotten again unto a lively 
hope (x Pet. i. 3). This divine power of the 
Son of Man would call for marked emphasis 


iL. (PETER. (FL 


[¥- 35 4 
the knowledge of him that hath called 


4 Whereby are given unto us ex- 





at a time when men were ready to deny this 
‘“‘ Master that bought them.” 

hath given| ‘The verb so rendered in A.V- 
is not the ordinary verb translated give, and 
for that reason a better English rendering here 
would be sath granted. The word in the 
original deserves notice, because in the New 
Testament it is only found here and in 
Mark xv. 45 of Pilate granting the body of 
Jesus to Joseph of Arimathea. The close 
similarity between the language of the second 
Gospel and of these Epistles of St Peter has 
been noticed elsewhere. (See Introduction, 
p. 227.) 

all things that pertain unto life and godliness] 
Under /ife is embraced all that is needful for 
the attainment of eternal life, in possession as 
well as in reversion, both the soul’s support in 
this life, and the hope for the world to come; 
godliness refers to those means whereby the 
blessing of such life is to be cherished, and 
that growth in divine knowledge attained 
through which eternal life will become ours. 
Both are Christ’s free gifts for men to treasure 
and to use. ‘‘ Do the works and ye shall (ever 
more and more) know of the doctrine.” ‘*And 
tnis is life eternal, to know God and Jesus 
Christ whom He hath sent.” And a// things 
that pertain to both these gifts come to us 
through the divine power of Jesus. 

The word rendered godliness occurs only in 
this Epistle (i. 3, 6, 7, iii. rr) and in St Paul’s 
Pastoral Epistles, and in a speech of St Peter 
(Acts iii. 12), ‘‘ by our own power or godli- 
ness” (A.V. holiness). 

through the knowledge of him| As in the 
previous verse it is the constant progress of 
such knowledge which is intended. 

that hath called us to glory and virtue] 
There is no original text which is capable 
of this translation. Some authorities read 
through glory and virtue (8a Sdéns kal 
dperjs), but the text which is best supported 
is by His own glory and virtue (idia bof kal 
dpern)- That the word virtue (or excellency) 
should be applied to a divine Being need not 
startle us. It is in exact accordance with the 
usage in St Peter’s first Epistle (ii. 9), “* That 
ye may shew forth the virtues (or exce/lencies) 
of Him who called you out of darkness into 
His marvellous light.” Glory is the essential 
subjective conception of the Godhead ; virtue, 
the manifestation of God’s working in and for 
believers. St Paul’s teaching (Eph. i. 17, 
&c.) is of like character. The calling of 
Christians and their enlightenment is a revela- 
tion of the glory of God in Christ, ‘‘ God... 
the Father of glory, may give unto you the 
spirit of wisdom...The eyes of your under- 


(Or, dp. 


v. §| II. PETER. I. 239 


ceeding great and precious promises: the corruption that is in the world 
that by these ye might be partakers through lust. 


of the divine nature, having escaped 


5 And beside this, giving all dili- 





standing being enlightened, that ye may know 
what is the hope of His calling and what the 
riches of the glory of His inheritance in the 
saints.” 


4. Whereby are given unto us| ‘The verb 
is the same, and in the same tense, as in the 
preceding verse, It is therefore better to 
render, Whereby he hath granted unto 
us. Whereby refers to all those things that 
are requisite for life and godliness spoken of 
in v. 3. Through these first-imparted aids we 
are enabled to become sharers in still larger 
gifts of grace. Christ is first the Way, and 
then the Truth and the Life. He first bestows 
those gifts which lead to Life, and then gives 
Life eternal to those who have rightly ac- 
cepted His leading thereunto. 

exceeding great and precious promises| ‘The 
best supported text here puts precious in the 
first place; and the rendering of the A.V. 
omits any indication of the article (taking the 
place of the possessive pronoun) which is in 
the Greek. Read therefore, His precious 
and exceeding great promises. ‘The pre- 
ciousness consists in their being not promises 
merely, but actual present aids to our growth 
in holiness. So Christ’s sacraments are not 
pledges for the future only, but strength for 
the present. The word precious (tipios) 1s 
used by St Peter ‘n the first Epistle (a. 7, 19) 
of the trial of the Christian’s faith, and of the 
blood of Christ, applications of the word 
which link together the diction of the two 
Epistles. 

that by these] i.e. the aids granted unto you 
towards life and holiness. 

ye might be partakers| The tense of the 
verb shews that the statement is undefined in 
time and is meant for believers in every age. 
So read, that yemay become gartakers, &c. 
The idea of growth, which pervades all the 
language of this clause, is best given by the 
literal rendering of the verb. The true Chris- 
tian is ever going onward, becoming ‘re- 
newed through the Spirit in the image of his 
mind,” and yet constantly looking forward to 
the day when he shall attain to ‘‘the stature 
of the fulness of Christ.” 

of the divine nature| i.e. of the holiness 
which belongs to God. All God’s discipline, 
even His chastisements, are designed for this 
end, that we may become “‘ partakers of His 
holiness” (Heb. xii. 10). God’s word at first 
was ‘‘Let us make man in our image, after 
our likeness.” His will is still to restore to its 
pristine holiness that which was at first very 
good in His sight. We shall be like Christ 
when we see Him as He is, and nearer to this 
restoration God is ever leading those whom 


in His love He has already called ‘‘sons of 
God” through Christ. 

having escaped the corruption that 1s in the 
world through lust} ‘The literal rendering of 
the original is, ‘‘ having escaped from the cor- 
ruption that is iz the world im lust ;” for the 
preposition is in each case the same. The 
latter makes clear the force of the former. 
Corruption is iz the world, is making its 
ravages daily, and so has taken an objective 
shape, and we can see its fatal action; but its 
fountain is im the lust that dwells within men’s 
hearts (cf. Mark vii. 21). Through in the A.V. 
should therefore be understood as signifying 
“ consisting in.” 

The word for escape is peculiar to this 
Epistle, and is found again ii, 18, 20. It 
seems meant to convey St Peter’s idea of the 
nature of the Christian’s deliverance. He must 
flee from the corruption which is in the world, 
as Lot fled from Sodom, fleeing for his life 
and casting no look behind him, lest he should 
become again entangled, Such a retreat is the 
truest valour, ‘‘for we wrestle not against 
flesh and blood.” 

The Greek word rendered corruption, also 
has the sense of destruction, and is used with 
that meaning in il. 12 of ‘the brute beasts 
made to be taken and destroyed.” For the 
full appreciation of the Apostle’s meaning 
both senses should be kept in mind. The 
destruction is the sure consequence of the 
corruption, and he who would escape the one 
must flee from the other. But the language 
of the text shews that the source of the cor- 
ruption is not in the natural creation, but in 
the heart of man. ‘The first sin was a Just to 
become as gods, and the climax of the guilt 
of the world before the flood is described by 
saying, ‘‘ All flesh had corrupted his way upon 
the earth,” and ‘Every imagination of the 
thoughts of man’s heart was only evil con- 
tinually.” 


5. And beside this, &c.] This rendering 
cannot be maintained, and interferes with the 
Apostle’s train of argument. It is because God 
has granted unto Christians His precious and 
exceeding great promises that they are to be 
careful, for their part, to give proof that they 
value these gifts. God has begun the good 
work, they are to evince a desire that it may 
be perfected. So render Yea, and for this 
very reason, &c. 

giving all gveence | This is the portion 
which man is to contribute toward his growth 
in Christian graces. And the verb, which 
would be more precisely rendered contribute 
ing, intimates that it is only a little which 
men can do along with the mighty work 


240 


gence, add to your faith virtue; and 
to virtue knowledge ; 
6 And to knowledge temperance ; 


ILVRETER. UL 


[v. 6, 7. 


and to temperance patience; and to 
patience godliness ; 


7 And to godliness brotherly kind- 





which is being wrought in and for them. Its 
literal meaning is ‘‘to bring in by the side 
of,” and it is one of the numerous unique 
words which are found in these two Epistles 
of St Peter. The spiritual life is begun by 
faith which is the gift of God. True, it is so 
much an essential to the Christian’s vitality 
that the Apostle here calls it your faith, but it 
is that which, as the commencement of all 
things that are requisite to life and godliness, 
God must first bestow. Christian graces, 
growing up in the life of faith, increase by 
diligent culture expended on them. This dili- 
gence it is which man is to bring in as his 
offering, his share in working out his own 
salvation, while God is working in him ac- 
cording to His good pleasure. 

add to your faith virtue] Literally, pro- 
vide in your faith virtue. In this sentence 
the verb (a compound) is one which conveys 
an entirely Greek notion. It originally meant 
‘to furnish the expenses of a chorus when a 
new play was to be brought upon the stage.” 
But this word was one not unknown to the 
writer of the first Epistle, for in x Pet. iv. rz 
we find the simple verb in the sentence, ‘if 
any man minister, let him do it as of the 
ability which God swupplieth.’ From the 
primary sense the word came to have the 
general notion of supplying or providing in any 
matters. ‘The word is also found in St Paul’s 
Epistles (2 Cor. ix. 10; Gal. iii. 5; Col. ii. 
19), and below in v. 11 of this chapter, and 
in all these places it is rendered minister. 

God’s gift of faith is to be evidenced by its 
fruits, and the Apostle begins the enumeration 
of these with a word in common use among 
heathen writers for the summit of moral ex- 
cellence. Beza writes on this word dpern, 
‘* Verbum nimis humile si cum donis Spiritus 
Sancti comparetur.” Where unaided morality 
ends, there God’s grace begins. But St Peter 
by his use of the word, and by his application 
of it (1 Pet. ii. 9; 2 Pet. i. 3) to God, has 
shewn that he employs it in a special sense. 
With him it seems te mean that earnest and 
living spirit which prompis to action. Glory 
(ds€a) and virtue (aperj) are connected in 
2 Pet. i. 3 exactiy as glory (dd£a) and might 
(kparos) are in 1 Pet. iv. rx, so that, when 
used of God, dper is the energy and power 
exerted on those whom He calls, that mighty 
anfluence by which they are drawn to Him. 
In the verse before us it indicates a like energy 
to be exhibited in the life of Christians. For 
such men will not rest content without deeds 
which shall bear evidence of the reality of 
their faith. 

But as earnestness misdirected may do harm 
instead of good, there is to be joined unto it 


knowledge. Thus the force of the verse be- 
comes: In your faith (i.e. in its exercise) 
supply virtue, and in your virtue knowledge. 
Thus good desires may be brought to good 
effect. Here the word for knowledge is the 
simple yyadors, for what is here intended is 
but one stage of the Christian’s advance, 
while éziyvwars is the gradual progress which 
goes on through the whole life. 

6. And to knowledge temperance] Here 
also, as the idea is the same, it is best to 
render: And in your knowledge temperance. 
Temperance here implies that whole self-control 
of the life, its feelings, tempers, passions and 
longings, which enables a man to gain rule 
over himself. ‘‘ He that striveth for the mas- 
tery is temperate in all things” (x Cor. ix. 
25). The sense of the English word has been 
sorely curtailed in modern times, and there 
is a danger that the narrowed sense may be 
substituted here for that greater and nobler 
one of which the poet speaks, 

“Unless above himself he can 
Exalt himself, how poor a thing is man!” 


and to temperance patience! Read, and in 
your temperance patience. And this patience 
is to be no mere callous Stoical indifference, 
but in it (as is shewn in the next clause, 
which should be rendered, and in your 
patience godliness), and constituting the main 
part of it, is to be that true fear of God, 
which makes men ready to endure hardships 
and wrongs for His sake and in His service. 
It will include also steady perseverance, like 
the constant but imperceptible growth of a 
fruit-bearing tree, of which the same word is 
used in Luke viii. 15. 

Godliness is a grace which shews itself in 
continual exercise, and is profitable to all 
things both in this life and that which is to 
come, The word is much used by St Paul 
in the Pastoral Epistles (as are so many of 
the words of these Epistles of St Peter), and 
it is coupled with honesty, faith, love, and 
patience in those Epistles also. It marks the 
motive from which our actions should flow, 
and is equivalent to that fear of God in which 
St Peter, in the first Epistle, exhorts Chris- 
tians to pass the time of their sojourning here 
(1 Pet. i. 17); it is that fear of God which 
shall make men good servants and masters 
(1 Pet. ii. 18), and win husbands, by its 
manifestation in the lives of their wives, to a 
love of the same Master. No better argument 
for the accord in all things between St Paul 
and St Peter can be found than this oneness 
of tone which pervades what they have left as 
their legacies to the churches. 


7. And to godliness brotherly kindness; and 


1 


v. 8.] 


ness ; 
charity. 


and to brotherly kindness 


MM. (PETER. ib 


8 For if these things be in you, 
and abound, they make you that ye 





to brotherly kindness charity| Here also we 
should read, And in your godliness brotherly 
kindness, and in your brotherly kindness love. 
When our hearts are filled with that fear of 
God which is also love towards Him, we shall 
not rest there. As God is the Father of the 
whole race, and we all are brethren, our affec- 
tions will extend themselves to all men. Yet 
it is both natural and scriptural that our 
Christian fellow-believers should hold the first 
place in our hearts. So St Peter mentions fore- 
most brotherly love, that is love towards our 
brethren in Christ, just as St Paul (Gal. vi. 
Io) writes, ‘‘ Let us do good unto all men, 
especially unto them which are of the household 
of faith.” As members of one household sym- 
pathize with and help most those with whom 
they have most in common, so will it be in 
Christian societies. But the Lord of Christians 
has taught us that His servants should do 
more than others. So both of these Apostles, 
in the spirit of their Master, follow up the 
precept that enforces brotherly love, with that 
of the grander love*which St Paul has so 
highly extolled (1 Cor. xiii.), and which he 
expressly (1 Thess. iii. 12) prays for as the 
completion of the Christian character. ‘‘’The 
Lord make you to abound in /ove one toward 
another and foward all men.” Just of the 
same tone is St Peter’s language here. ‘In 
your brotherly kindness (supply) love.” 
With the much restricted sense in which 
charity is often used in the present day there 
is great loss in rendering dyamn charity, for 
we thereby put out of sight the Godlike cha- 
racter of this virtue, that it is the /ove which 
the Father hath for men (John xiv. 23), that 
this love is of God, and maketh its possessor 
“born of God” (x1 John iv. 7), yea that ‘it 
is an attribute to God Himself,” for ‘* God is 
love” (z John iv. 8). And as this virtue is 
sO eminent, so it is most difficult to attain 
unto, and thus fitly forms the climax of this 
scale of graces. It is no trial to love those 
who love us, but ‘to bear all things, believe 
all things, hope all things, endure all things,” 
is the summit of Christian advancement. 
‘The greatest of these is love.” Its fitness 
to conclude the list of steps in Christian pro- 
gress is also seen from the language of St Paul 
(Col. ii. 14), ‘*‘ And over all these things put 
on Jove which is the bond of perfectness.” 
Just as here it is set forth as being the highest 
step of the ladder, so there the Apostle pic- 
tures it as the uppermost covering in the Chris- 
tian dress, that which shall be apparent to all 
men. “By this shall all men know that ye 
are my disciples, if ye have Jove (dyamnv) one 
to another” (John xiii. 35). 

The preposition éy which St Peter has here 


New Test—Vot. IV. 


employed throughout his enumeration of 
Christian graces, conveys somewhat the same 
notion. Each virtue is to be included within 
the one mentioned before it, and though the 
orde thus appears to be reversed, and Jove 
(dyamnj is the last mentioned, and so in- 
cluded within all the rest, it is only so because 
the character, as St Peter here depicts it, is 
described as it should appear unto God, while 
St Paul is describing it as men should see 
it. ‘*Man looketh on the outward appear 
ance, but God on the heart.” 

The list of graces enumerated in these three 
verses comprises first those which form the 
Christian character viewed in itself, such are 
virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience ; then 
follow those which mark the follower of 
Christ (1) as a servant of God, and (2) asa 
member of the brotherhood of the Church of 
Christ, and (3) as belonging to the larger 
brotherhood of all mankind. 


8. For if these things be in you, and abound | 
Rather, For if these things be yours, and. 
abound unto you. Literally, ‘for these 
things being yours...... make you,” &c. The 
pronoun though occurring only once in the 
original, and in close connection with the 
former of the two verbs, yet belongs to the 
latter also. And the first verb is one that is 
constantly used of ‘‘ possession.” ‘Therefore 
the sense is not, ‘‘If these things be in you,” 
as A.V. The difference is that between owner- 
ship and tenancy. ‘There is to be no uncer= 
tainty in the holding unto these graces, they 
are to be part of the man himself. ‘There 
must be no wavering exhibition of them. They 
are to be firmly fixed, like a plant deeply 
rooted, and whose growth is constant. This 
is the sense of the latter verb abound, which 
perhaps would be better rendered multiply. 
They are not merely to be abundant and con- 
tinue so, but are to become daily more and 
more, growing with the Christian’s growth 
and strengthening with his strength. 

they.make you that ye shall neither be barren 
nor unfruitful| Better, they make you not idle 
nor unfruitful. The italics of the A.V. render 
the sentence cumbrous without adding to its 
force, while 4arren is not the sense of the first 
adjective. It is used of ‘‘ id/e words” (Matt. 
xil. 36) and of labourers ‘standing idle” 
(Matt. xx. 3, 6), and so it should be rendered 
here, and thus the tautology of “barren and 
unfruitful ” is escaped. The Apostle’s words 
intimate that such a growth in grace as he 
has just described cannot be hid, it will 
work, and make its presence felt. And in the 
form of his sentence he has expressed the 
earnestness of such action. He says it will 


Q 


243 


242 


shall neither be barren nor unfruitful 
in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus 
Christ. 

g But he that lacketh these things 


PPE TER 


[v. 9, 30 


is blind, and cannct see afar off, and 
hath forgotten that he was purged 
from his old sins. 

10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, 





make you ‘not idle” and “not unfruitful,” 
which was a Greek way of expressing ‘‘ very 
active” and ‘very fruitful” in the most 
emphatic form. 

in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ 
A better rendering of the preposition woul 
be towards or unto the knowledge, &c. It 
marks the goal unto which all the Christian’s 
works and their fruits will be tending. Here 
we have the ever-waxing knowledge (ériyve- 
ows) again. The knowledge of the Saviour 
is never to stand still, and the gifts of the 
Spirit are all of them helps towards its in- 
crease. ‘‘ He will guide you into all truth;” 
‘“‘ He will teach you all things” was said not 
alone for the chosen twelve. And although 
this complete knowledge can never be ours in 
this world, the increase of grace within us 
makes increase of our spiritual discernment, 
and we are constantly finding some portion 
of the darkened glass made clearer, some ap- 
proach toward seeing Christ as He is. 


9. But he that lacketh these things is blind, 
and cannot see afar off | A literal rendering 
is, For 4e to whom these things are not 
present is blind, seeing only what is 
near, and this brings out the Apostle’s 
reasoning far better. He wishes to explain 
the impossibility of spiritual progress, increase 
in the knowledge of Christ, without the ac- 
quisition of the graces which he has before 
enumerated, and so he begins with a particle 
for which shall introduce his reasoning. After 
this he says, “he to whom these things are 
not present.” He has gone back in thought 
to the initial stage of the course. He speaks 
not now of the gifts as being the Christian’s 
own, but merely as being present to him. 
There are many gradations in religious life. 
Some men cannot be said to have the graces 
of which St Peter has been speaking. ‘They 
have made but small progress, only a single 
step on the upward road. But even the least 
advanced are in a better state than he to whom 
these things are not present, to whom no 
light shines to guide his footsteps on the way 
of faith. Such a one is blind, continues the 
Apostle, and then, with another of his unique 
words, he defines the nature of the defect 
which he has called ‘blindness. Such a 
man ‘‘sees only what is near.” The word 
(uverafwyv), and technically myops, is used of 
one who has to close his eyes that he may see 
at all, who is weak-sighted, and to whom 
the light is painful, whose vision is conse- 
quently very limited. By this figurative word 
St Peter seems to pamt for us the condition 
of such men as having once entered on the 


Christian life (for soon we read of the man 
as one who had been cleansed from his 
old sins) have sought for no help, striven for 
no advancement, and to whom therefore pro- 
gress and all which prompts thereto is uncon- 
genial. He first of all calls such a one d/ind, 
but correcting this first expression, he gives a 
definition of it which shews us a state worse 
than blindness. ‘‘If ye were blind, ye should 
have no sin,” says our Lord (John ix. 41), 
but here is one worse than blind, who having 
known. some light has preferred to fall back 
into darkness. 

and hath forgotten that he was purged from 
his old sins| More closely, having forgotten 
the cleansing from his old sins. But the 
expression (A7@nv AaBev) is no ordinary phrase 
for forgetting. ‘The noun is found nowhere else 
in the New Testament. Having incurred or ace 
cepted forgetfulness would be a literal rendering. 
The words mark that the condition into which 
such a man has come is one which he has 
voluntarily accepted; he has made no effort, 
given no diligence to contribute anything 
towards improving the first gifts pertaining 
unto life and godliness. To him there ma 
be imputed a wilful closing of the eyes =, 
to justify the Apostle’s first expression, ‘‘ He 
is blind.” ‘To him the Gospel message had at 
first come, as it came to St Paul (Acts xxii. 
16), ‘‘ Arise and be baptized and wash away 
thy sins:” and thus far has he gone forward, 
but no step beyond; and as in the parable, 
where from the servant who has but hid his 
talent in a napkin, there is taken away that 
which was bestowed on him at the beginning, 
so here if the baptismal washing has been 
followed by no growth in holiness, the memory 
of that first blessing is taken away, and the 
guidance which would have strengthened each 
endeavour to advance is withdrawn, and the 
man no longer sees where to go. Hisspiritual 
sight becomes weakened, the light of Christ's 
example is painful, because he has so long 
neglected to use it; he therefore shuns it, and 
beholds only the things close around him; in 
this life and its concerns he becomes wholly 
entangled. 


10. Wherefore the rather, brethren, give 
diligence] Though separated from the verb 
by the intervening vocative, the adverb rather 
(u@dXov) belongs closely to give diligence (orrov- 
dacare), and the force of the words is 
given by Wherefore, brethren, give the more 
diligence. Wherefore, i.e. because by the 
possession and constant increase of these graces 
you become fruitful unto the knowledge of 
Christ, be ye the more diligent, There are 


%. 11, 12.) 


ive dili to make your calling 
ea on sure: for if ye do these 
things, ye shall never fall : 


ir For so an entrance shall be 


H.' PETER. f- 


ministered unto you abundantly into 
the everlast ng kingdom of our Lord 
and Saviour Jesus Christ. 

12 Wherefore I will not be ne- 





two reasons assigned why this diligence should 
be given, first, because of the bountiful supply 
of grace granted from God, and, secondly, be- 
cause the cultivation of these gifts results in 
an ever-increasing knowledge of the Lord Jesus. 
It is after the mention of this latter reason, 
that the Apostle dwells upon such a result 
as a motive for still greater zeal. 

brethren] A favourite form of address 
with St James, only used in this passage by 
St Peter, his usual expression being beloved, 
which occurs in all the Epistles, but most 
frequently in St John, St Jude and St Peter. 
The employment of an unusual word marks 
the earnestness of the Apostle’s exhortation. 

to make your calling and election sure| ‘The 
‘employment of this adjective indicates that 
both the calling and the election have reference 
to conditions which neglect may render in- 
secure. Both words should therefore be taken 
of the entering into communion with God in 
this world. St Peter has already addressed 
the converts to whom he writes (1 Pet. ii. 9), 
“Ye are an elect race,” but that-does not 
prevent him from urging on them to abstain 
from “lusts which war against the soul,” and 
which will render their walk unworthy of the 
vocation wherewith they had been called. 
Thus election (exXoy7) is found in St Paul’s 
letter to the Thessalonians (x Thess. i. 4), 
about whom yet the Apostle had fears lest the 
tempter should have tempted them, and his 
own labour be in vain. The ca// to which St 
Peter refers had come through the preaching of 
the Gospel, the election through the admission 
of the converts into Christ’s Church. They 
were among those that were “being saved” 
(Acts if. 47) and had been “‘added to the 
church,” and so called out of the world. 

Sor if ze do these things, ye shall never fall) 
The last verb would be better rendered 
stumble. And herein is no contradiction of 
what is said by St James (iii. 2), ‘* In many 
things we all stumble.” In that expression 
there is implied only such a degree of error, 
in the words and acts of daily life, as it may 
be possible to recover from. But the stum- 
bling which shall render the calling and election 
of Christians insecure, is one from which there 
is no rising. It is a ‘stumbling that they 
should fall,” such as that which St Paul 

om. Xi. Ir) intimates would have made the 
restoration of the Jew impossible, 


ll. For soan entrance shall be ministered unto 
you abundantly, &c.] More closely, For thus 
s#hall be richly provided for you the en- 
trance, &c. The Apostle takes up here the 


word which he had employed in wv. 5, when he 
spake of what the Christian man should fro- 
vide on his part. ‘The beginning of the new 
life, the gift of faith, was from God. This is 
to be used as a groundwork on which the 
follower of Christ labours to build up virtue 
after virtue. And in the end there will be 
provided for him, also from God, the entrance 
into Christ’s eternal kingdom. Both the begin- 
ning and the end of the work are of God. 
And so are most of the intervening stages also. 
For in the word entrance (cicodos) is implied 
not only the final entrance into the kingdom 
of glory in heaven, but also the power and 
strength to approach nearer and nearer unto 
Christ in His kingdom of grace in this world. 
For a like use of the word cf. Heb, x. 19, 
where the entrance into the holiest is after- 
wards defined to be ‘‘drawing near” unto 
God ‘with a true heart in full assurance of 
faith.” 

into the everlasting kingdom, &c.] As 
aiamos contains other ideas beside that of 
duration of time, it is better to use for it the 
word eternal. 


12—21. And I will strive while I live to 
Keep these things in your remembrance, and 
also that ye may not forget them after my 
death. For it is no fable by which we have 
been led in our teaching; but we were wit- 
nesses of the Transfiguration and heard the 
heavenly voice which proclaimed Jesus to be 
the Son of God. And more firm even than the 
assurance of this voice, heard only once, we 
have the word of prophecy, unto which we 
charge you to give heed, for it is the true 
source of enlightenment, it is a message sent 
from God through men who spake being 
moved by the Holy Ghost. 


12. Wherefore I will not be negligent to put 
you always in remembrance of these things| Ac- 
cording to the reading of the best MSS., the 
rendering would be, Wherefore I shall be ready 
(or sure) always, &c, Thissense of the word 
here used (ueAAjoe) is not unfrequent in clas- 
sical Greek, especially in Sophocles, Thus (‘Phi- 
loctetes,’ 446) where an enquiry is made about 
Thersites, and Neoptolemus answers, “I never 
saw him, but I heard he was alive ;” the reply 
is (€ueAXe), ‘‘ He was sure to beso.” And we 
may compare the New Testament use of the 
same verb (Matt. xxiv. 6), ‘‘ Ye shall hear of 
wars.” It may be that the Apostle intended to 
say that the letter which he was now writing 
should be a voice after his death. This sense 
is countenanced by the word a/wways, and it 
is not till the following verse that he speaks of 


Q2 


243 


244 


gligent to put you always in remem- 
rance of these things, though ye 
know them, and be established in the 
present truth. 

13 Yea, I think it meet, as long 
as I am in this tabernacle, to stir 
you up by putting you in remem- 
brance ; 


the admonitions to be given while he was alive. 
So that the connection would be (wv. 12), 
““T will a/ways keep you in remembrance” 
(vv. 13, 14), both in my lifetime, and (v. 15) 
after I am dead. 

though ye know them, and be established in 
the present truth| ‘The last clause would be 
clearer if we read, and are established in the 
truth which is with you. This means the 
truth which has been imparted to you by 
your teachers, and which ye now profess, 
‘the Gospel which ye have received and 
wherein ye stand.” The same word is ren- 
dered (Col. i. 6), ‘‘ The Gospel which is come 
unto you.” Those to whom the Apostle is 
writing had obtained a like precious faith with 
himself. The word rendered established, which 
with its derivatives is a favourite with the 
writer (cf. 1 Pet. v. 10; 2 Pet. iii. 16, 17), is 
a part of that same verb which our Lord used 
in his exhortation to the Apostle (Luke xxii. 
32), ‘* When thou art converted strengthen 
thy brethren.” 

In the words “though ye know them” we 
have an indication that the letter is written 
either to those whom the Apostle himself had 
instructed, or whom he knew to have been 
taught by St Paul (cp. iii. 12), or by Silvanus 
(1 Pet. v. 12), to whose brotherly faithfulness 
allusion is made in the first Epistle. (See note 
on that passage.) 


13. Yea, I think it meet, &c.] Better, 
And I think it right. It is not the meetness 
or fitness of his admonition which the Apostle 
has in mind, but that it is the right and just 
thing for him to do, the only way in which 
he can discharge his duty. 

as long as I am in this tabernack| This 
figurative expression for the body is also used 
by St Paul (2 Cor. v. 1—4), and it is worth 
notice that St Peter here employs the same 
mixture of metaphors which occurs in St 
Paul’s language there. First the tabernacle is 
viewed as a building, and then spoken of as a 
garment which must be put off, or rather 
replaced by another; so St Peter speaks in the 
next verse of the putting off the tabernacle of 
the body. 

to stir you up by putting you in remembrance } 
The literal and better rendering would be, 
“to excite or keep you awake in (or by) 
reminding you.” The expression occurs 
again in iii. 1, where it is rendered, ‘to stir 


Ih. PETER. 4. 


[v. 13—1§. 


14 Knowing that shortly I must 
put off this my tabernacle, even as 


“our Lord Jesus Christ hath shew- Jos 


ed me. 

15 Moreover I will endeavour that 
ye may be able after my decease 
to have these things always in re- 
membrance. 


up (your pure minds) by way of remem- 


brance.” ‘The end of such reminding is that 
they may not be idle, and so unfruitful. 


14. Knowing that shortly I must put off this 
my tabernacle) Better, Knowing that the 
putting off of my tabernacle cometh 
swiftly (or is soontocome). These words 
may refer to the advanced age of the Apostle, 
from which he was conscious that the fulfil- 
ment of Christ’s prophecy concerning him 
(John xxi. 18, 19) could not be far distant. 
‘« When thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch 
forth thy hands and another shall gird thee, and 
carry thee whither thou wouldest not.” And 
the adjective ray.wos (swift, y) may also 
relate to the violent and hastened death which 
was to close the Apostle’s existence. The 
rendering, ‘‘is soon to come,” seems to refer 
more clearly to Christ’s words, while the 
other interpretation would contain something 
prophetic uttered by St Peter about himself, 
which would hardly accord with the tone of 
the whole passage, which speaks of a know- 
ledge derived from what our Lord had shewed 
to him. 

The word amodcois, putting off, is only 
found here and in x Pet. ili. 21. 

even as our Lord Jesus Christ hath shewed 
me| Better simply, shewed me. The verb is 
an aorist. The allusion is not only to John 
xxi. 18, 19, quoted above, but to John xiii. 
36, ‘‘ Whither I go, thou canst not follow 
me now, but thou shalt follow me afterwards,” 
which words find an echo in the words of 
Jesus (John xxi. 22), ‘‘ If I will that he 
till I come, what is that to thee? /o//ow thou 


me.” St Peter had now learnt the full force’ 


of Christ’s sayings, and to what end the fol- 
lowing of Jesus was to bring him. 


15. Moreover I will endeavour that ye 
may be able after my decease to have these 
things always in remembrance] Better, Yea 
I will give diligence that at every time 
ye may be able after my decease to call these 
things to remembrance. The moreover of the 
A.V. seems to imply that the Apostle was 
promising some new care, but he had pre- 
viously said, ‘I shall be ready always.” It 
is better therefore to look upon the particles 
as only an emphatic resumption of something 
which had gone before. The adverb of time 
qualifies the first portion of the sentence, and 
the whole clause signifies that there shall be 


v. 16.] 


16 For we have not followed 
cunningly devised fables, when we 


left behind, when St Peter is dead, some record 
to which at each occasion, when need arises, 
they may be able to appeal for a reminder of 
his lessons, which they would probably not 
have always in remembrance. 

A similar use of the verb to have (€xewv) in 
the sense of ‘‘to be able” is found Mark xiv. 
8, ‘‘She hath done what she was able” (lit. 
what she had). And for traces of a gradual 
slipping into this meaning see Matt. xviii. 25, 
“because he 4ad not to pay,” and John viii. 
6, ‘‘ that they might 4ave to accuse him.” 

“To call these things to remembrance.” 
The phrase, which is only found in this place 
in the New Testament, is one used by classical 
writers in the sense of ‘“‘making mention” 
(cf. Thuc. 11. 54). But St Peter does not 
mean that his lessons shall be spoken of only, 
but when called to mind, they shall be acted 
upon. 

The word é£o0dos=decease (lit. departure) 
is that which is used by the Evangelist (Luke 
ix. 31) in the account of the Transfiguration, 
concerning Christ’s decease, and there can be 
little doubt that the thoughts of the writer are 
led by the use of this unwonted expression for 
‘“ decease” to the recollection of that scene of 
which in the succeeding verses he makes ex- 
press mention. In that last recorded conver- 
sation of our Lord with St Peter (John xxi. 
22) the Apostle had been bidden to follow his 
Master, and it was known that the words of 
Jesus, in that parting interview, had reference 
to the death whereby St Peter ‘‘ should glorify 
God.” St Peter would naturally give the 
same name to his own death as had there been 
given to Christ’s. He would naturally turn in 
mind to the wondrous manifestation of which 
he had been one witness. But to suppose that 
an imitator or forger would do this is to as- 
sume in such writer a subtlety of thought and 
a power to transfer himself into the position 
of him whose character he assumed, which 
would be marvellous in an age of greater lite- 
rary power than that in which our Epistle 
appeared. 

In the first verb in the verse, ‘‘I will give 
diligence,” the writer is looking back to the 
exhortation in verse ro, ‘‘ Wherefore, brethren, 
give diligence.” It is as though he would 
say, ‘I have urged you to diligence in your 
Christian course, and I will not be wanting, 
on my part, to supply you with means for 
your guidance and encouragement when I am 
taken away from you.” 


16. For we have not, &c.| As soon as 
the writer begins to speak of things with which 
not only himself but James and John also had 
to do, he passes at once from the singular into 


I); RETER. I. 


made known unto you the power 
and coming of our Lord Jesus 


the plural number. He might have continued 
to use the singular, but the memory of the 
scene is with him, and in thought he is with 
his companions on the mountain, and thus 
they are included in his language. 

followed| The verb in the original is a 
compound form, and thus may be presumed 
to have asomewhat fuller force. It is found 
only in this Epistle in the New Testament. 
In the next chapter we have it in ver. 2, 
‘‘many shall fo//ow their pernicious ways,” 
and in ver. 15, ‘‘ following the way of Ba- 
1aam.”” Hence some have thought that the 
preposition ¢&=/rov or out of has reference to 
the wrong character of the guidance which is 
followed. It seems better, however, not to 
press such a sense upon the word, but to take 
it in its usual meaning of ‘‘to follow where 
some one leads.” ‘Thus the Apostle is made 
to assert that he is not merely following the 
lead of another, speaking at second-hand, in 
what he says, but is himself the actual witness 
of and for the whole narrative. 

cunningly devised fables! As the mind of 
the writer is fixed upon that manifestation of 
the glory of Christ which was revealed at the 
Transfiguration, it is to be supposed that by 
“fables” (ui6o1) he alludes to the heathen 
stories of the appearance of the Gods among 
men, or to some of the Gnostic figments 
concerning emanations from the Divinity. 
That legends of this kind, as well as Jewish 
myths concerning the Messiah, were current, 
and had produced errors in the faith, we can 
see from the frequent warnings against them 
contained in the Pastoral Epistles (x Tim. i. 
4, lv. 7; 2 Tim. iv. 4; Tit. i. 14); where alone 
except in this verse the word (yd4or) is found 
in the New Testament. The same erroneous 
teaching is here meant as that which (ii. 3) is 
spoken of as ‘‘ feigned words” (z\aaro! Aoyor), 
and the adjective there used may guide us to 
the signification of ‘‘cunningly devised” in 
the text. ‘The stories had been moulded and 
fashioned by the skill and cunning of their 
authors, while in the narrative of the Trans- 
figuration all that the writer tells us he had 
seen for himself, 

made known unto you] As this Epistle is 
addressed to Christians far and wide, and the 
labours of the other Apostles are included in 
the expression, these words must not be re- 
ferred to the first Epistle of St Peter, though 
the power and coming of Christ are there 
spoken of, as in all Christian Scriptures, but 
rather to the preaching of St Peter and his 
companions. ‘Their account of what they 
had seen was published orally at first, and 
though by the time when this Epistle was 
written, there may have been a Gcspel narra- 


248 


246 


Il. PETER. 1. 


[v. 17, 


Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his the Father honour and glory, when 


majesty. 


there came such a voice to him 


17 For he received from God the excellent glory, This is my 


tive circulated among the churches, yet all 
that is here implied may be only the preach- 
ing of the first Christian teachers, 

coming] Or, presence. To the presence of 
the Son of God among men they were the best 
witnesses who had seen His glory, and heard 
the voice which declared the divine nature of 
Jesus. Thus could they with firm assurance 
teach that He had come into the world. But 
this first coming was only a pledge of that 
second coming about which the disciples asked 
in the same phrase (Matt. xxiv. 3), ‘“* What 
shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the 
end of the world?” 

eyewitnesses] The word is not the same 
which is so rendered Luke i. 2. In heathen 
writers the word rendered here eyeavitnesses 
(enéntns) is very frequently used of those 
who have been admitted by initiation into 
the highest mysteries of their religious wor- 
ship. And the word may have been de- 
signedly used here by the Apostle to signify 
the initiation of himself and his companions 
on the mount of the Transfiguration into 
mysteries which they were to make known 
when Christ was risen from the dead. This 
noun (here alone) and its kindred verb 
(€romrevw) are used by St Peter only (1 Pet. 
il. 12, iii. 2) among New Testament writers. 

majesty] i.e. as it was displayed when He 
appeared unto them in His glory. The word is 
one of rare occurrence in the New Testament, 
but it is worthy of notice that it is used (Luke 
ix. 43) in the narrative of the healing of the 
lunatic boy which took place at the foot of 
the mountain of Transfiguration, to describe 
the miracle which had just been wrought, 
‘“ They were all amazed at the mighty power 
of God.” ‘Thus the wonder of the multitude 
at once owns the “ majesty” of which the 
Apostles had just been made conscious by 
the heavenly glory and words from above. 

The solemnity of the statement in ver. 16 is 
such that we cannot conceive that any forger 
could have made it. The two participial clauses, 
eEaxo\ovbnourtes, ‘having followed,” and 
emontat yevnOevres, ‘‘ having been constituted 
eyewitnesses,” are exactly parallel, the first 
giving an account of what the writer was zot 
guided by, the other of that which did guide 
him in his teaching. More literally the con- 
struction would be expressed thus: ‘* We did 
not make known, &c., from the mere follow- 
ing of fables, but we did so because we had 
been constituted eyewitnesses.” 


17. For he received| ‘The construction 
wm the original is interrupted. The sentence 
commences with a participle, ‘‘ For having re- 





ceived,” &c., and the strict tical se- 
quence would require that the next verse should 
begin with a finite verb referring back to this 
participle, e.g. ‘‘ He had us as listeners thereto 
when we were with him,” &c. There is a 
similar interruption in the grammar of 2 Cor. 
v. 6—8. 
Srom God the Father] because the heavenly 
voice declared ‘“‘ This is my beloved Son.” 
honour and glory| It seems most probable 
that these refer here, the first to the voice 
which declared Jesus to be the Son of God, 
the latter to the brightness of His body and 
robes at the time of the Transfiguration, 
Though glory (80£a) is used by Christ Himself 
(Joh. vili. 54) as almost an equivalent to 
honour (riwn). ‘If I glorify (A. V. sonour) 
myself, my glory (4onour) is nothing.” 

when there came such a voice] The literal 
rendering would be ‘‘ qwhen such a voice was 
brought,” and the same expression is found 
in the next verse, ‘‘ which came,” i.e. which 
was brought. The verb is the same asin Acts 
ii. 2, where the sound which came from 
heaven is spoken of, and which, subsequently 
in verse 6 of that chapter, is called a woice 
(porn), though the rendering of the A. V. 
‘*Now when this was noised abroad” does 
not make this clear. 

Srom the excellent glory| The preposition 
is that which after a passive verb would be 
strictly rendered dy. ‘The force is seen when 
the clause is translated literally, ‘‘such a voice 
was brought to him éy the excellent glory.” 
The excellent (or majestic) glory is an expres- 
sion equivalent to the Hebrew Shechinah, the 
visible manifestation of God’s presence above 
the mercy-seat, and so signifies God Himself. 
By God was the voice uttered which pro- 
claimed Jesus as divine. The adjective (ueya- 
Aompenns) excellent (or majestic) is used b 
the LXX, (Deut. xxxiii, 26) as a title of God, 
6 peyadorperns Tod orepedpatos. (The A. V. 
comes more closely to the Hebrew, and ren- 
ders ‘‘in his exce/lency on the sky.”) The 
same adjective is applied (2 Macc. viii. 15) 
to the name of God, and more especially 
illustrative of the story of the Transfigura- 
tion is its application (3 Macc. ii. 9) to the 
manifestatior (émupavera) Of God. This noun 
is applied often by St Paul (2 Thess, ii. 8; 
1 Tim. vi. 14; 2 Tim. iv. 1, 8; Tit. ii, 13) to 
the appearance of Christ in the clouds when 
He shall come to judge the world; and also 
(2 Tim. i. 10) to His appearing in the world 
at His birth, and in like manner peya\ompemps 
doa here describes the magnificent splendour 
which shone round the whole scene of the 
Transfiguration, and told that God was there 


v. 18, 19.] 


yeloved Son, in whom I am well 
pleased. 
18 And this voice which came 





as when on Sinai (Exod. xxiv. 17) ‘‘the sight 
of the glory of the Lord was like devouring 
fire on the top of the mount.” 

This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well 
pleased] Though the A. V. makes the render- 
ing exactly accord with that of Matt. xvii. 5 
(and could hardly do otherwise) yet the Greek 
of the two passages presents a variation. (The 
Evangelist writes év 6 edddxnoa, the text in St 
Peter has cis év éya evddxnoa; while in the 
parallel passages (Mark ix. 7; Luke ix. 3 5) 
the words év & evddxnoa are omitted alto- 
gether.) So that the text before us corresponds 
literally with none of the records of the Evan- 
gelists. Had one been merely writing in 
the character of St Peter, and making use of 
the Apostle’s name that he might gain more 
acceptance for what he was saying, it is hardly 
conceivable that he would not have followed 
to the letter some one of the Gospel narratives, 
whereas an actual witness of the scene who 
cared less for the exact words than for the 
fact to which he testified, would feel no scru- 
ple about the change of form in his language. 


18. we heard] As if to mark specially 
the personal connection which the writer had had 
with the events which he relates, the personal 
pronoun is here emphatically inserted, and the 
first clause of the verse would be both more 
literally and more forcibly represented thus: 
‘cand this voice we ourselves heard come (or 
brought) out of heaven.” 

the holy mount| It has been objected that 
in this expression there is trace of a late 
date, since such an appellation would not be 
in early days given to the mount of Trans- 
figuration. But of all places to which spe- 
cial sanctity would be ascribed by Christ’s 
followers, surely that would be the first to be 
so marked where the most solemn testimony 
was given to the divinity of Jesus. To the 
Jewish Christian this would rank with Sinai, 
and no name would be more fitly applied to it 
than that which had so constantly been given 
to aplace on which God first revealed Himself 
in His glory. The ‘“‘holy mount of God” 
(Ezek, xxviii. 14) would now receive another 
application, and he would see little of the true 
continuity of God’s revelation who did not 
connect readily the old and the new cove- 
nants, and give to the place where the glory of 
Christ was most eminently shewn forth, the 
same name which was applied so oft to 
Sinai. 

19. We have, &c,| The pronoun may be 
faken as referring to the Apostles, of whom 
the writer may say that in consequence of 
the vision at the Transfiguration the sense of 
prophecy is:‘to them more clear, and they have 


Is PETER. 


from heaven we heard, whe we 
were with him in the holy mount. 
19 We have also a more sure 





amore sure grasp of its meaning. But as the 
closing words of the verse are an exhortation 


_ to his readers to give heed to the word of pro- 


phecy, it is better to make the pronoun ‘“‘ we ” 
include both the Apostle and those for whom 
he is writing. ‘‘ We are all of us more sure 
of the meaning of the prophetic writings, be- 
cause of the revelation which we received and 
have imparted unto you.” Thus would the 
new light imparted at the Transfiguration be 
viewed as illuminating the hitherto dark places 
of the Old Testament prediction, and this 
sense would be best brought out by rendering 
‘‘ And we have the word of prophecy made 
more sure.” 

But the meaning of the text may well be, 
‘¢ We have, as a still more sure ground of con- 
fidence than our vision at the Transfiguration, 
the word of prophecy, which has spoken so 
fully of the Messiah, and received so complete 
a fulfilment in the life of Jesus.” This would 
imply that though St Peter laid great stress on 
the revelation which had been vouchsafed to 
him and his companions, who were to go forth 
as the heralds of Christ, yet that the broader 
view given of the Messiah’s office and the life 
which He should lead on earth is, at any rate 
for other men, a more sure basis of faith than 
can be the evidence derived from the narrative 
of one single vision. With this the sequel of 
the verse best accords. The Christians are 
exhorted to take heed to this prophetic word, 
to use it asa lamp which will guide them in 
their way to a full knowledge of God as He 
has revealed Himself, a more sure word of pro- 
phecy. ‘The phrase is definite and the adjective 
belongs to the predicate. Render either (1) 
we have the word of prophecy made more 
sure (¢.e. by what we have seen and heard 
when we were with Jesus at His Transfigura- 
tion). Or (2) we have the word of prophecy 
yet more sure (i.e. on which men may 
rather rest their trust than on our narrative of 
what we have seen). 

This latter rendering is here to be preferred. 
And to appreciate this we must put ourselves 
somewhat in the place of those for whom St 
Peter wrote. The New Testament as we have 
it was to them non-existent. Therefore we 
can readily understand how the long line of 
prophetic scriptures fulfilled in so many ways 
in the life of Jesus would be a mightier form 
of evidence than the narrative of one single 
event in St Peter’s life, however mighty the 
influence of that event might be on the mind 
of him to whom it occurred. And this is one 
of those passages which indicate that here we 
have no work of an inventor. Had such a 
one been writing he would have been sure to 
give most prominence to what had been made 


247 


248 


word of prophecy; whereunto ye do 
well that ye take heed, as unto a 
light that shineth in a dark place, 
unti! the day dawn, and the day star 
arise in your hearts : 


known to St Peter directly. The true St 
Peter acts differently. 

6 mpodntixos Adyos is used by Clemens 
Romanus (‘2 Ep. ad Corinth.’ 11) of words 
which are not contained in the Old Testa- 
ment, and which bear some resemblance to 
passages in the New Testament (James i. 8, 
&c.), but we cannot refer the expression here 
to anything but the writers of the Old Testa- 
ment, the false prophets under which dispensa- 
tion are presently referred to in ii. 1. 

as unto a light] Better, as unto a lamp. 
The idea conveyed by the words is of some- 
thing which can be employed to give light 
wherever light may be needed. It is not merely 
a beam of light which shines in where all else 
is gloomy, but such a means of lighting as can 
be brought to bear now on one spot, now on 
another. 

that shineth in a dark (or squalid) place. 
‘The lamp of prophecy was the source of light 
to God’s servants as they moved through this 
life, which is a squalid place until it receives 
the full illumination which a right faith in 
Jesus brings to the heart. It is clear from the 
Apostle’s exhortation, urging on his hearers to 
take heed to the word of prophecy, that it is to 
this life that his words refer, and he is looking 
forward to an advance in spiritual knowledge 
for those to whom he speaks. They are Chris- 
tians, but still they have many things to learn 
before God’s whole dispensation becomes clear, 
and the words of the prophets will be their best 
guide towards their complete enlightenment. 

until the day dawn] ‘The verb rendered 
“¢ dawn” is only found here in the New Testa- 
ment. It differs from the word used by the 
Evangelists (Matt. xxviii. 1; Luke xxiii. 54), 
and implies a thorough illumination, and bears 
out the explanation given above, that in the 
Apostle’s thought there is a course of illumi- 
nation which must gradually be shed over the 
believers, and in the end they will attain to 
that brightness which may be compared to 
entire daylight. Of course the perfect day will 
not be reached till this life is ended, and there. 
cannot but be in language like that of the text 
some looking forward also to that time when 
we shall know even as also we are known, but 
the primary reference of the words is to that 
degree of Christian light and knowledge which 
may be reached in this life. 

and the day star arise in your hearts| ‘*day 
star” (@wodopos) is another unique word, 
and the picture set before us by this “ light- 
bringer” is of that light which grows within 
men’s hearts as the reward of constant faith, 


Il VETER. @ 


Tv, 20, 2%. 


20 Knowing this first, that no 
prophecy of the scripture is of any 
private interpretation. 





and study of God's revelation, which makes 
them wise unto things divine, and also gives 
them understanding concerning a life to come. 
The world will still remain the “squalid 
place,” but the light which is kindled within 
the heart will preserve the steps from stum- 
bling, and cheer the dreariness and gloom of 
the journey. 


20. Knowing this first] The sense re- 
quired is better given by the English verb 
understanding. The Apostle is laying 
down a rule for the right use of the prophetic 
word, and without a due comprehension 
thereof, there may be error in the use. This 
they are first to understand thoroughly before 
they begin to interpret prophecy. 

that no prophecy of the scripture| ‘The trans- 
lation would be made more exact by the 
omission of ‘‘ the,” 

is of any private interpretation] ‘The word 
rendered ‘‘interpretation” is only found here in 
the New Testament, but the verb from which 
it is derived is used in St Mark (iv. 34), ‘*He 
expounded all things to His disciples,” and that 
sense is no doubt the correct one. The force 
of the whole verse would be better seen if the 
verb rendered ‘‘is” were morc fully trans- 
lated; here it has its proper sense of “ bee 
comes,” ‘‘arises,” ‘‘ originates.” Thus we 
are guided to apply the words to proph 
as it was uttered by those who first gave it 
forth. It did not arise from the private inter- 
pretation of the prophets. The words of the 
prophets of old were no mere human exposi- 
tion, no endeavour on man’s part to point to a 
solution of the difficulties which beset men’s 
minds in this life. The prophets were moved 
by a Spirit beyond themselves, and spake 
things deeper than they themselves understood. 
With this may be compared what St Peter 
(i. 10) says about the prophets enquiring what 
the Spirit of Christ, by which they were 
moved to speak, was shewing unto them. 

The force of idios ‘‘ private” (or special) 
in other passages of St Peter’s Epistles (1 Pet. 
iti. 1,5; 2 Pet. ii. 16, 22,;/ 03, WeOmagy 
where it is generally rendered “own,” ma 
suggest that the writer would also have his 
readers understand, that prophetic Scripture 
does not become its own interpreter, does not 
bring its own interpretation with it. It needs 
for its full comprehension the coming of the 
day-star. The Spirit of God in men’s hearts 
will continue to illumine words that aforetime 
seemed dark. 


21. For the prophecy came not in old time 


21 For the prophecy came not in 0+, af 
old time by the will of man: but rs 


q 


v. 1.] 


holy men of God spake as they were 
moved by the Holy Ghost. 


CHAPTER II. 


- He foretellath them of false teachers, shewing 
the impiety and punishment both of them 
and their followers: 7 from which the godly 
shall be delivered, as Lot was out of Sodom: 


by the will of man] There are several points 
im the rendering of this sentence which are 
capable of greater exactness. Instead of “in 
old time,” read rather, ‘‘at any time,” as in 
the . Next for ‘came,’ read ‘was 
brought.” It is the same verb which is ren- 
dered ‘‘ moved” in the next clause of this 
verse, and of the voice from heaven mentioned 
in verse 18, and which isused of the ‘‘rushing” 
wind, indicative of the Holy Spirit’s presence 
in Acts (ii. 2). The article would also be 
better omitted before ‘‘ prophecy,” and so the 
clause would read “for no prophecy ever was 
brought (or imparted) at the will of man.” 
The prophets were only God's instruments, 
the carriers of His message, a sense well ex- 
pressed by the frequent phrase in the Old 
‘Testament, ‘by the hand of.” (Cf, Isai. xx. 2 
(marg.), Num. xv. 23, &c.) 

but holy men of God spake as they were 
moved by the Holy Ghost] Here is a variation 
in the Greek texts. The most authoritative 
reading would be rendered, “‘but men spake 
from God, being moved by the Holy Ghost.” 
It is not meant that the very words were given 
to the prophets, but that God’s Spirit within 
them was the source and commencement of all 
their utterances. What to say was given to 
them, the garb in which it was to be clothed 
was marked by the individuality of the men. 

The verb spake (€AdAnoay) is not unfre- 
quently used in the New Testament writings 
of words spoken by God or by His prophets. 
(Cf. Luke i. 45, 55, 70, Xxiv.25; Acts ili. 21, 
24; James v. Io.) 


Cuap. II. 1—22. The whole chapter 
forms but one paragraph, of which the con- 
nection may be indicated thus. As of old 
there were false prophets, so shall there be 
false teachers now. ‘These shall lead astray 
many, but in the end shall be destroyed. 
‘They shall be punished as surely and as 
terribly as the angels that sinned, or as the 
world before the flood, or as Sodom and 
Gomorrah, but, like Noah aud Lot, they that 
are godly shall be saved, for the Lord knoweth 
how to deliver. The most patent marks of 
those who shall become false teachers are that 
they yal ater the ft and are self-will 
despisiuig dominion ; they live merely a life of 
sense, and count it pleasure to revel in the 
daytime, and being licentious themselves be- 
guile others by their evil ways. Yet they 


MI PETER HE. 


10 and more fully describeth the manners 
of those profane and blasphemous seducere, 
whereby they may be the better known, and 
avoided. 
UT there were false prophets 
also among the people, even as 
there shall be false teachers among 
you, who privily shall bring in dam- 





promise boldly that they will give freedom to 
those who walk with them, whereas they are 
themselves very slaves of corruption. They 
have known something of the way of righte- 
ousness and had escaped in a measure from 
the defilements of the world, but now are en- 
tangled again therein. So their last state is 
worse than their first, and they fulfil the pro- 
verb, ‘* The sow that is washed has turned 
again to the mire.” 


1. But there were (arose) false prophets] 
The language of the Pentateuch (Deut. xiii. 
I—s5) speaks of such misguiding teachers and 
proclaims no mercy toward them. The text 
speaks of the gradual rise and spread of les- 
sons that should lead men astray from the 
purity of the faith. The writer is standing at 
the commencement of such an irruption of 
error, and marks the signs of the times and 
gives his warning. 

also| i.e. as well as the “‘ sure word of pro- 
phecy” spoken of in i. rg. In the visible 
Church, Jewish as well as Christian, the evil 
is ever mingled with the good. 

among the people) i.e. of Israel. The word 
people (ads) is thus used of the Jews as dis- 
tinguished from the rest of the world in Rom. 
xv. 11, and in Jude 5 they are spoken of asa 
people (Xaos) Whom the Lord had saved out of 
Egypt. As the whole history of Israel is a 
type of what should come on Christ’s church 
in later days, so the evils were pictured there 
as well as the blessings and mercies. That 
St Peter felt this to be so, cf. 1 Pet. ii 4—10. 

false teachers} Now that He was come ot 
whom all the prophets had spoken, the gift of 
prophecy was withdrawn and Christ’s minis- 
ters were to be teachers after another manner, 
yet their lessons should be travestied for the 
delusion of men as had been those of the pro- 
phets before them. St Paul (Acts xx. 30) 
had foretold such false teachers rising out of 
the midst of the Church, and doing harm 
which none but they were able to do, drawing 
away disciples after themselves, and Christ 
Himself (Matt. xxiv. 11) had spoken of these 
days. The writer of this Epistle was one 
stage nearer to the appearances of such de- 
ceivers, and could see what form their teachings 
would take, and what their lives would be like. 

privily shall bring in| This in the orginal 
is one verb, which in addition to the notion 
of introducing something alongside of somes 
thing else contains also the idea of secrecy 


249 


250 IL} PETE RS If: [v. 2. 
nable Leresies, even denying the Lord 
that bought them, and bring upon 
themselves swift destruction. 


2 And many shall follow their ' per- 1 Or, Zan 
nicious ways; by reason of whom the ways, as 
way of truth shall be evil spoken of. Sice rea 





It is found here only in the New Testament, 
though the adjective derived from it is em- 
ployed by St Paul gia ii. 4) to describe the 
false brethren privily brought in to the Chris- 
tiancommunity. In Jude 4, we havea different 
verb, though compounded with the same pre- 
positions, to describe the men who in his day 
have already accomplished their evil work and 
are crept in unawares. St Peter foresaw what 
St Jude witnessed in fact. 

The whole question of the relation of the 
Epistle of St Jude to this second chapter of 
St Peter’s Epistle has been discussed in the 
Introduction to 2nd Peter. The contrast be- 
tween sapevoaéovow here and the rapeioédv- 
cay in Judeis that which most definitely marks 
the difference in time between the two writers, 
and it would do violence to the literal mean- 
ing of the Greek words did we not place 
St Peter’s narrative anterior to St Jude's, 
The former says the false teachers will come 
in, the latter, using the aorist, yet speaks of a 
thing accomplished, of men who are in the 
Church and doing their mischief, and he only 
employs the indefinite tense because he feels 
that while some are already in the Christian 
communities yet still more are coming after 
them. The whole relation of the two pas- 
sages seems to suit only with the grammatical 
acceptance of these key-words to the position 
of their respective writers. 

damnable heresies| Better, destructive 
’ heresies. The literal rendering of the Greek 
is ‘‘ heresies of destruction,” signifying ‘‘ here- 
sies which lead to destruction,” i.e. which 
destroy not only those who are led astray 
thereby, but those who lead them likewise. 
Cf. below on v. 12, where the false teachers 
are spoken of as to be destroyed in their own 
destroying, and in the final clause of this verse 
are said to be ‘bringing upon themselves 
swift destruction.” 

even denying the Lord that bought them] 
The even qualifies the latter portion of the 
sentence, and the word rendered Lord should 
be Master. Denying even the Master that 
bought them would therefore express the mean- 
ing of the original more nearly. ‘These self- 
willed teachers knew that Christians were not 
their own but bought with a price (x Cor. vi. 
20), and therefore were the bondservants of 
Christ (1 Cor. vii. 23), for Christ had bought 
them off from the curse of the Law (Gal. iii. 
13), and in that purchase He made them sons 
of God by adoption (Gal. iv. 5). But both 
by their lessons and lives they ignored all this. 
St Jude expands and explains St Peter’s phrase, 
“denying our only Master and Lord, Jesus 
Christ.” 


This clause of the verse describes the nature 
of the heretical teaching, and Bp Wordsworth 
points out, from the history of the heresies of 
the Apostolic age, how every phase resulted 
in a denial of Jesus Christ. The Jewish 
teachers explained away the doctrine of the 
Trinity. One form of Gnosticism taught that 
there were not in the Godhead three distinct 
persons, but only three different revelations of 
the same person. Others taught that the body 
of Christ was but a phantom; others that 
He was merely man, though the greatest and 
best of men; others that Jesus was man, but 
Christ was the divine Spirit, which entered 
into Jesus at His birth but left Him before 
His crucifixion; while others in practice, by 
their dissolute lives, denied Christ as their 
Master, and used their bodies as their own 
and not His. 

After his own fall and repentance, to deny 
the Master would be in Peter’s mind the 
strongest term which he could find for apo- 
stasy. But when he denied Jesus the Master 
had not yet paid the price for the redemption 
of His servants. How much more grievous 
must be the falling away of Christians; yet 
for all these who now denied Him, Christ had 
died. ‘The redemption which He wished to 
make was to be for all men, “even for the re= 
bellious.” 

and bring upon themselves swift destruction] 
The verb is a participle, ‘‘4ringing upon them- 
selves,” and expresses the result of the wrong 
teaching. These men bring in heresies of 
destruction unto others, and know not that 
they are bringing at the same time destruction 
on themselves. Swift (rayiwos) refers quite 
as much to the suddenness with which the 
destruction shall come as to any other charac- 
teristic of it. 

Taxtvés, like evdod:ddcKados and rapewa- 


yew, 1s a word peculiar to St Peter in the 


New Testament. 


2. The rendering should be, And many 
shall follow their lascivious qays. Cf. 
below, v. 18, where ‘by words of vanity” 
these teachers are said ‘‘to entice in the lusts 
of the flesh by /asciviousness.” 

In this verse the Text. Rec. reads drw- 
Xefas, but all the earliest MSS. have doed- 

eiats. And this isnow adopted by all editors, 
or it is easy to see how the former word 
has come in from the previous verse, while 
the earlier reading is in the spirit of St Jude’s 
more expanded expression, r7y rod Gcov nuar 
xapira peraridevres eis doeAyerav. 

by reason of whom] ‘This refers no doubt 
both to those who teach error and to those 


v. 3, 4] 


3 And through covetousness shall 
they with feigned words make mer- 
chandise of you: whose judgment 
now of a long time lingereth not, and 
their damnation slumbereth not. 


who follow them. Both bring the way of 
truth into dishonour, the former by the words 
which they speak against it, the latter by de- 
serting it and affording to others an argument 
that it is not worth following. 

The early Church had much to dread from 
the calumnies which might be cast upon it 
from the evil lives of any who professed to be 
in any sense Christians, for charges of immo- 
tality were among the most common slanders 
against which the early Apologists had to 
defend the Christians, and these no doubt 
grew out of the licence encouraged and in- 
dulged in by these false brethren. 


8. And through covetousness| ‘The prepo- 
sition in Greek is éy=in, and the literal ren- 
dering expresses exactly the condition of these 
false teachers as set before us in Scripture. 
From Simon Magus onward they are described 
as covetous, and so the Apostle styles them 
below in v. 14, and Jude (16) expands the 
idea, ‘‘ having men’s persons in admiration for 
the sake of advantage.” And to Timothy 
St Paul (1 Tim. vi. 5) had spoken of those 
who supposed gain was godliness, and to 
Titus (i. 11) of men who ‘teach what they 
ought not for filthy lucre’s sake.” These false 
brethren were sunk zz covetousness. 

with feigned words| ‘The adjective is only 
found here in the New Testament, and alludes 
to the lying character of the promises which 
these men made to those who listened to 
them. They promised what they could not 
give because they had it not. (See below, 
v.19.) Cf. also Rom. xvi. 18. 

make merchandise] As with the Judaizing 
teachers of whom St Paul speaks (Gal. vi. 13), 
the glory of these false brethren was to have 
a multitude of followers. ‘These they are re- 
presented as buying, but all the price they pay 
is ‘‘ feigned words,” promises which never can 
come true. No doubt there is also a notion 
that such teachers would be supported by 
their followers, and in covetousness they 
aimed to secure such support, and treated in 
this respect their adherents as objects of traffic 
out of which they might make gain. 

whose judgment| Rather, sentence. Their 
doom is pronounced already, and their end is 
destruction. (Cf, Phil. iii. 19.) 

éxmadar=now of a long time, is a Petrine 
word, found only here and in iii. 5, while in 
Gpyet and yvorde, the former of which is 
unique and the latter occurs only here and in 
Matt. xxv. 5 (in its literal sense), we have 
examples of that figurative language of which 


FL, PETER, LE. 


4 For if God spared not the ane 
gels that sinned, but cast them down 
to hell, and delivered them into chains 
of darkness, to be reserved unto judg- 
ment ; 


so many examples can be produced from both 
the first and second Epistles. Their judgment 
is not idly Joitering, nor is their destruction 
nodding to sleep, but is sure to come. 

and their damnation] Better, their destruc- 
tion. The original is the same word that 
occurs twice just before in v. 1. 


4. The Apostle proceeds to give examples 
of the punishment of the ungodly and the 
deliverance of the righteous. These he draws 
(2) from angels that sinned, (2) from the 
world before the food and the deliverance of 
Noah, and (3) from the overthrow of the 
cities of the plain out of which Lot was 
saved. 

For if God spared not the angels that sinned} 
There is no definite article in the original. 
Better, spared not angels when they sin- 
ned. It has been generally held that the 
allusion here is to the narrative in Gen. vi. 4, 
and that the angels here mentioned are those 


who are there called ONT ‘33, but as there 
1s no account given in Genesis of the punishe 
ment of those offenders, and as it is the punishe 
ment which in the Epistle is mainly dwelt on, * 
it seems better to conclude that the allusion is 
to some extra-biblical literature in which men- 
tion is not unfrequently made of the sins and 
punishments of the angels (e.g. ‘ Bk. of Enoch’ 
VII. 1, 2). Such traditional literature was 
familiar to the Apostles, as we may see from 
r Cor. x. 4; 2 Tim. iii. 8, &c. For instances 
illustrative of this passage from Rabbinical 
literature, see Additional Note at the end of 
the Chapter. 

The parallel passage in Jude 6, which ex- 
pands the statement of St Peter, ‘‘angels which 
kept not their own principality [or dominion] 
but forsook their proper habitation,” seems to 
give some countenance to the connection ot 
this passage with the story in Genesis, but yet 
that expansion may equally well be referred 
to the Rabbinical tradition, for there too a 
change of abode is mentioned. 

but cast them down to hell] ‘The origina 
taptap#cas, Which is not found elsewhere, is 
literally, ‘‘having cast them into Tartarus,”’ 
which to a Jewish mind would be the same as 
Hades or Gehenna. ‘That the notion of Tar- 
tarus, though strictly a heathen one, was not 
unfamiliar to the Jews we may see from Jose- 
phus, who (‘c. Apion.’ II. 33) speaks of the 
oldest heathen. gods as év raprdpw dSedeuévous 
=fettered in Tartarus. 

and delivered them into chains of meh! 
In the verb delivered (rapédaxe) is the idea 


251 


252 


5 And spared not the old world, 
but saved Noah the eighth person, 
a preacher of righteousness, bringin 
in the flood upon the world of the 
ungodly ; 

6 And turning the cities of Sodom 


IL: REFER: FE 


[So 


and Gomorrha into ashes condemned 
them with an overthrow, making them 
an ensample unto those that after 
should live ungodly ; 

7 And delivered just Lot, vexed with 
the filthy conversation of the wicked : 





committing to prison. Cf. Acts viii. 3, xii. 4 
and other places. 

On the word rendered ‘‘ chains” the MSS. 
&, A, B, C have a various reading which 
might be translated ‘“ pits” or ‘* dens,” and 
this reading has been adopted by recent edi- 
tors. But there are variations of text in A 
and & which if adopted would require the 
word to be taken as an adjective, and the 
variation is so slight (cetpors for cerpats) that 
it seems hardly established that ‘‘ pits” should 
be the rendering. For the word as found in 
use signifies a pit where grain can be stored 
and kept safe for use. Now this is scarcely 
the notion required by our context, while the 
expression ‘‘chain of darkness” is found 
Wisd. xvii. 17, and it will be seen that the 
idea of ‘‘ chaining in darkness” enters largely 
into the Rabbinical literature concerning the 
fallen angels. (See extracts at the end of this 
Chapter.) 

to be reserved unto judgment] Amid such 
pains as are said in the Gospel (Matt. xxv. 
41) to be ‘‘prepared for the devil and his 
angels.” 


5. And spared not the old (ancient) 
world| ‘Though the wrong doers and wrong 
teachers may be many, their number shall not 
profit them, for God spared only Noah and 
his family when the flood swept away the 
world of the ungodly. 

but saved (preserved) Noah the eighth 
person| ‘This is a not uncommon though 
somewhat abbreviated Greek formula= Noah 
with seven others. ‘The expression ‘‘ guarded” 
or ‘‘preserved” (épudagée), is apparently an 
allusion to the words of Genesis (vii. 16), 
“the Lord shut nim in,” 

a preacher of righteousness| We have no 
intimation of this in the Scripture, but we 
may see from Josephus (‘ Antiq.’ I. 3. 1) that 
there was a tradition of the kind among the 
Jews. The whole passage, which illustrates 
our text, is as follows, ‘‘ Noah being grieved at 
the things which were done by them and being 
displeased at their counsels, urged them to 
change for the better their thoughts and ac- 
tions. But seeing that they did not yield, but 
were mightily mastered by the pleasure of 
evil, fearing lest they should kill him, he de- 
parted from the land with his wife and his 
sons and the women whom they had married.” 
And in the Midrash, ‘ Bereshith Rabba,’ xxx. 
6, we find ‘‘ There rose up a erald for God 
dm the age of the deluge: that was Noah.” 


This explanation of the Midrash is notes 
worthy in the light of St Peter’s word “herald” 
(xnpv€). 

bringing in the flooa upon the world of the 
ungodly| Better, when He brought a flood, 
&c. There is no article in the Greek, indeed 
the whole verse is remarkable for having no 
article in it. 


6. dnd turning...into ashes| The verb so 
rendered (re@pwcas) is unique and is one of 
the writer’s picturesque and expressive words. 

condemned them with an overthrow | The 
dative here, as in Mark x. 33, might be taken 
=to overthrow. But “overthrow” is not a 
word of the same character as ‘“‘death” in 
that passage, and in the case of the cities of 
the plain it was dy their overthrow that thei 
deeds were condemned, and they made a per- 
petual warning. The expanded text of St 
Jude (v. 7) in this notice of Sodom and Go- 
morrah is worth observation, as a sign of a 
later date when the licentiousness of these 
false teachers had become more apparent, and 
had made the parallel between them and the 
cities of the plain more complete. 

making them] Rather, having made 
them, and so in St Jude they are said to be 
“set forth,” as if in perpetuity, that men may 
always be able to point to them. 

an ensample unto those, &c.| i.e. a type of 
the utter overthrow which should come on 
such offenders. 

that after should live ungodly} The word 
“after” would be better omi aa makes 
a double translation of peAdovray, the future 
sense of whichissufficiently given by ‘‘should.”’) 
The offences of the sinners before the flood 
and of the inhabitants of Sodom and Go- 
morrah are described by the same term age- 
Beiv. First they have no fear of God before 
their eyes, and when that is absent regard for 
man, either in their own persons or those of 
others, soon follows it, and so these men may 
all be classed together. 

7. And delivered just (righteous) Lot 
He, like Noah, had by his life been a herald 
righteousness. Josephus styles him ‘‘ one who 
had learnt Abraham’s goodness.” 

vexed] The verb is rather connected prie 
marily with the sense of physical weariness 
than mental pain. So ‘‘ worn out” or dis- 
tressed would be a closer rendering. He 
had talked to no purpose. ‘‘ He seemed as 
one that mocked unto his sons-in-law.” The 
word only occurs in the New Testament again, 


v. 8—10.] 


8 (For that righteous man dwell- 
ing among them, in seeing and 
hearing, vexed his righteous soul from 
day to day with their unlawful 
deeds ;) 

g The Lord knoweth how to deli- 
ver the godly out of temptations, and 


Acts vii. 24, of the Israelite who was wronged 
by the Egyptian. 

with the filthy conversation of the wicked | 
Literally, ‘‘ by the life of the wicked in lasci- 
viousness.” Conversation in the older English 
of the A.V. nearly always represents, as here, 
the Greek dvactpopyj, meaning ‘‘manner of 
life.” Perhaps the best rendering would be, 
by the lascivious manner of life of the 
‘wicked. 

The word here rendered wicked is only 
found in this Epistle (here and iii. 17) in the 
New Testament, and signifies ‘‘ those who set 
law at defiance and so are deprived of its 
protection.” 


8. This parenthetic verse is an explanation 
of the nature of the distress under which Lot 
suffered. It was by what he saw and heard 
that he vexed (the word literally means tor- 
mented) his righteous soul. The sentence 
is so framed as to give emphasis to Lot’s self- 
torture because of what he saw. And when 
we notice the words ‘‘ dwelling among them,” 
and remember that it was his own choice 
(Gen. xiii. 11) that selected the plain of Jor- 
dan and the neighbourhood of Sodom for his 
home, we can understand how such self- 
tormenting might be natural. For it is re- 
corded when he made the choice that ‘the 
men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before 
the Lord exceedingly.” 

The words seeing (@déupa) and dwelling 
among (éyxato.kéw) are not found elsewhere 
in the New Testament. 


9. Here we come to the apodosis of those 
conditional clauses which commenced in v. 4, 
and all depend on the conjunction that is only 
once expressed there. 

The Lord knoweth| And God’s knowledge 
implies His power. 

to deliver the godly| As He shewed in the 
instances of Noah and Lot. The temptation 
in the former case seems not to have been so 
wilfully entered into as was Lot’s, but whether 
God send the temptation or men choose it for 
themselves, yet if they resist it and continue 
to hold fast their integrity, the way to escape 
will be made for them. 

In the next clause the verb rendered by the 
A.V. ‘to be punished” is not in the future 
but in the present tense, and is closely con- 
nected with the other verb in the sentence. 
It is better to render: and te reserve under 


Pt) PETER, If 


to reserve the unjust unto the day ot 
judgment to be punished : 

10 But chiefly them that walk 
after the flesh in the lust of unclean- 


ness, and despise ‘government. *Pre-! Or, dame 
sumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are « judges 


not afraid to speak evil of dignities. 


punishment the unrighteous. For their 
state is one of chastisement even before the 
judgment-day comes. Our Saviour’s picture 
in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus 
reveals this to us. 

the unjust] i.e. such as the offending angels, 
and the ante-diluvian generation, and the 
Sodomites, of the first of whom it has been 
already (wv. 4) said, that they are ‘‘to be re- 
served unto judgment.” 


10. But chiefly] i.e. above all others shall 
God reserve under punishment the sinners now 
to be described. 

them that walk after the flesh] St Jude, who 
saw to what lengths these offenders had come, 
describes them as offending in like manner 
with Sodom and Gomorrah. ‘ Yet” (é.e. in 
spite of the warning set forth before their 
eyes) “in like manner these also defile the flesh.” 
Some Gnostic teachers allowed themselves in 
sensual excesses, and the writer of this Epistle 
speaks not so plainly indeed as St Jude of 
their foul lives, but yet shews that he saw 
clearly whither they were tending. 

in the lust of uncleanness| Just as St Paul 
to the Ephesians (iv. 22) speaks of “lusts of 
deceit,” deceitful lusts, lusts which deceive all 
who follow them, so the lusts spoken of here 
are such as defile all who are captivated by 
them. The word for ‘‘ uncleanness,” as also 
a kindred word in wv. 20 rendered ‘‘defile- 
ments,” is used nowhere else in the New Tes- 
tament. The former signifies a condition ot 
defilement, the latter the thing which defiles. 

and despise government| Better, dominion. 
The word signifies /ordship, and it may be 
referred primarily to Jesus Christ, but it also 
includes every form of authority which would 
exercise restraint upon these offenders. Christ 
or other authority they utterly disregard. 

Presumptuous are they| Better, simply, 
Daring: though they have known the penal- 
ties of sin yet they defy them. 

selfwilled, they tremble not to rail at 
dignities| Here dignities (8of&a:) seems from 
the context to refer to spiritual powers, God’s. 
agents in the government of the world. This. 
is apparent from the car’ avray of the follow- 
ing verse, where the angels are said not to 
bring a railing accusation against these do&a:, 
and a special instance is given in St Jude’s 
more expanded and Midrash-like form of the 
illustration; for he speaks of Michael the- 


253 


11 Whereas angels, which are 
greater in power and might, bring 
not railing accusation ‘against them 
before the Lord. 

12 But these, as natural brute 
beasts, made to be taken and de- 


Ll) PETERS II. 


[v. 11—1g. 


stroyed, speak evil of the thi 
that they understand not; and s 
utterly perish in their own corrup- 
tion ; 

13 And shall receive the reward 
of unrighteousness, as they that count 





archangel disputing with the devil, and yet 
bringing no railing judgment. In later times the 
inhabitants of heaven were ranged in Christian 
literature into ranks and orders. Such a divi- 
sion was no doubt largely due to the Gnostic 
teaching with its systems of AZons, each pos- 
sessed of its own specific powers and office. 
But speculations on such a subject might find 
an earlier warrant from words like those of St 
Paul (Rom. viii. 38), where he speaks of 
‘* angels, principalities and powers ” as separate 
classes of spiritual agencies. In the verse 
before us St Peter means that the daring and 
self-willed sinners of whom he speaks, though 
knowing the might of the spiritual powers, yet 
in contempt of them, whether they be good or 
bad, proceed on their evil courses, setting at 
naught the danger into which evil powers may 
lead them, and disregarding the warnings which 
may be ministered to them by the good. 
And though doing this they tremble not. 


ll. Whereas angels} And St Jude’s ex- 
ample is that of the mighty archangel Michael. 
though greater in power and might] i.e. 
than the dignities (So£a:), for in all orders of 
the hierarchy of heaven, whether founded on 
Scripture or not, the angels and archangels 
stand first. 
bring not a railing judgment against them] 
The only apposite illustration in Holy Scrip- 
ture is Zech. iii. 2, where the ‘angel of the 
Lord” appears with Joshua the high-priest 
under his care, while Satan comes forth as an 
adversary. ‘There it is said, ‘‘ The Lord said 
unto Satan, The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan.” 
In which passage the manifestation of the 
divine presence under the form and name of 
‘“‘the angel of the Lord” is in harmony with 
the rest of the Old Testament narrative, and 
this representative of Jehovah must have been 
the speaker of the words of rebuke to the 
adversary. And the very words ‘‘the Lord 
rebuke thee” are put by St Jude into the 
mouth of Michael (Jude 9). 
before the Lord| By some MSS. and editors 
these words are omitted, but the balance of 
evidence is in favour of their retention. For 
such a scene is here hinted at, where Jehovah 
resides as supreme Judge, hearing all sides 
fore He gives a decision, cf. Job i., and 
similar descriptions are not unfrequent in the 
Rabbinical writings. Cf. ‘ Bereshith Rabba,’ 
p- viii. (on Gen. i. 26). 


19. But these] the sinners of whose evil 


lessons and practices the Apostle is giving 
warning. 

as creatures without reason. Though 
professing to have greater light than other 
men they act with as little reason as the brute 
creation. The A.V. ‘‘as natural brute beasts” 
is a most expressive rendering of this word 
and those which follow, but scarcely enables 
the reader to see the force of the several Greek 
words. 

born mere (or natural) animals. 
And never advancing beyond the ‘things 
which they know naturally as brute beasts” 


(Jude ro). 
to be taken and destroyed| Which, for the 
harm they do, deserve no better fate. Some 


have rendered these words, ‘‘to take and de- 
stroy,” as though they looked on to the latter 
clause of the verse, thus making them a de- 
scription of the acts of those men who en- 
snared and ruined all whom they were able to 
beguile by their teaching. But it seems better 
to connect them with the description of the 
animals. 

railing in matters whereof they are 
ignorant. ‘Thus shewing themselves “ crea- 
tures without reason.” 

shall in their destroying be utterly 
destroyed. Inthis respect too their lot shall 
be that of mere animals, which by their appetites 
are led on to destruction, and are taken and 
slain while attempting to seize some prey. So 
these men while they are bent on misleading, 
and so destroying, shall fall themselves into the 
destruction which they have made for others. 


13. And shall receive the wages of un- 
righteousness] This is another form of ex- 
pressing that for their work of destruction 
they shall reap destruction. ‘The wages of 
unrighteousness can be but ruin, as to Balaam 
(Num. xxxi. 8, 16) and to Judas (Acts i. 18). 
Some very ancient MSS. read here, “ being 
wronged in the wages of unrighteousness,” 
and a sense may be obtained from these words, 
if we think that these deceivers had looked for 
different wages from their master than they in 
the end obtained, that the promise made to 
them at the outset had been as fair-seeming as 
that which they now make to others. 

wages of unrighteousness] The words mo 
Ody ddixlas are only found here and below in 
v, 15, and in St Peter’s speech concerning 
Judas (Acts i. 18). The expression is thus 
peculiar to St Peter, and it is well that it 
should be rendered by the same English exe 


tGr. an 
adulieress. 


w, ify ¥5;, 


it pleasute to riot in the day time. 
Spots they are and blemishes, sporting 
themselves with their own deceivings 
while they feast with you ; 

14 Having eyes full of tadultery, 


pression in each case. The A.V. has varied 
them in each instance. 

men who count it pleasure to revel in the 
day time. Were begins an enumeration of 
other features in the character of the false 
teachers. Hitherto there has been mainly 
noticed their bearing towards all authority, 
now we are to hear of their excessive self- 
indulgence. 

tpudy is rather ‘delicate living” than ‘‘riot.” 
Cf. James v. 5, ‘‘ Ye have /ived in pleasure on 
the earth.” Some have understood rv év 
npéepa tpupyy of luxury which lasted for a 
brief time, but the design of the Apostle is to 
describe these false teachers not as simply 
sinners, but as far worse than other sinners. 
The day is for honest walking, and ‘‘they that 
are drunken are drunken in the night” (1 
Thess. v. 7), but these men give day as well 
as night to their revels, and find their pleasure 
in so doing. 

Spots and blemishes] An utter contrast to 
those whom Christ redeemed (1 Pet. i. 19), 
and who should strive after His likeness Who 
was as a lamb without blemish and without 
spot. Cf. for this character of true Christians 
iil, 14 and Eph. v. 27. 

revelling in their deceivings] Here 
the ‘‘deceivings” would signify the things 
which they have gotten by deceit, and on 
which they live delicately. For not only self- 
indulgence and licentiousness but greed of 
gain is among the offences of these sinners. 

Some ancient authorities and some modern 
editors read here dyarais for dwaras, and this 
is the word in Jude 12. At first sight the 
pronoun avray appears to be an obstacle to 
the adoption of the same word here. It seems 
natural enough to say ‘“‘they revel in (or on) 
their deceivings,” but not quite so to speak of 
the love-feasts as theirs. But if we hold St 
Peter’s Epistle to be the earlier we can see a 
reason for the change of the pronoun. In 
his day these false teachers at love-feasts of 
their own devising held their riot, but when 
St Jude wrote the evil had spread farther and 
from being a practice confined to the few who 
had crept in unawares was become so extend- 
ed that he could speak of such men as blots 
on the agapz of the whole Church, But it is 
impossible to decide with certainty on the true 
reading here, though the word in Jude is in 
some degree an evidence that we should adopt 
the same here. 

while they feast with you] The congrega- 
tions have established these common meals to 
cheer the hearts and strengthen the affection 


iW fare. iG. 


and that cannot cease from sin; be- 
guiling unstable souls: an heart they 
have exercised with covetous prac- 
tices ; cursed children: 

15 Which have forsaken the right 


between their members. ‘The false teachers 
come and share like the rest, join in the ban- 
quet of the Church’s bounty, but are spots 
and blemishes in the body of Christians, for it 
is no feast of brotherly love which they- seek 
to share, but by their boldness and licence to 
lead their fellows astray and turn the dyamy 
into rpu@y- 


14. Having eyes full of adultery| Literally, 
as in the margin of A.V., full of an adulteress. 
A most forcible but singular phrase for ex- 
pressing that complete absorptfon in sensual 
thoughts and desires that the eye, the most 
expressive feature, seems to realize the presence 
of some object of the desire and to be intently 
gazing on it. 

and that cannot cease from sin| ‘The eyes 
have been so schooled to sensual expression 
that now they never lose it, but seem ever on 
the watch for opportunity to do evil. 

enticing unstedfast souls. The me- 
taphor is from a bait to catch fish, and the 
word occurs again in v. 18, and is used by 
St James (i. 14), and would come at once to 
the minds of the fishermen of Galilee. Une 
stedfast (aotnpixros) is only found in this 
Epistle (here and iii. 16), and is a word of 
much significance for St Peter, for he was 
charged specially to labour against such unsted- 
fastness (Luke xxii. 32), ‘‘ When thou art con- 
verted, strengthen (ornpiéov) thy brethren.” 

having a heart exercised in cove- 
tousness. Here we come on the third evil 
characteristic of these deceivers. They are 
greedy of gain. (The Text. Rec. gives m\eco- 
ve&iais, Which the A. V. renders rightly by the 
plural, but the best MSS. read z\eovefias, and 
the verb is not uncommonly followed by such 
a genitive.) The exercise indicated by the verb 
is that of an athlete for a contest. In like 
manner have these men trained themselves in 
their habits of greed. 

children ofcursing. TheA.V. ‘‘cursed 
children ” scarcely gives the force of the origi- 
nal. ‘The sense is like that phrase (Eph. ii. 3) 
‘children of wrath,” z.e. for whom wrath is 
prepared, and so these men have a curse in 
store for them. 


15. forsaking the right way] Accord- 
ing to Tischendorf’s eighth edition the present 
tense has rather more authority than the aorist, 
but it is so closely joined with the finite verb 
which follows in the aorist, that the change 
does not affect the sense. ‘‘ The right way” 
is that which is called (Acts xiii. ro) ‘‘the 
right ways of the Lord,” which Elymas (a 


255 


256 


way, and are gone astray, following 
the way of Balaam ¢he son of Bosor, 
who loved the wages of unright- 
eousness ; 

16 But was rebuked for his ini- 
quity: the dumb ass speaking with 





forerunner of the false teachers against whom 
St Peter speaks) was seeking to pervert. 

they are gone astray| Having at first been 
deluded, but afterwards giving themselves up 
to the wrong way into which they have been 
brought, they are seeking to make others as 
bad as themselves. 

having followed the way of Balaam the son 
of Bosor| The verb ‘having followed,” which 
is a strengthened form, is found three times in 
this Epistle (i. 16, il. 2, 15) and nowhere else 
in the New Testament. It gives the idea of 
following out to the end, as Balaam went on, 
though he learnt that his way was unpleasing 
to the Lord. 

It is noteworthy how many times the word 
‘¢ way” occurs in Num. xxii., the account of 
Balaam’s sinful journey. 

Bosor is a form which arose probably 
from some dialectic pronunciation of the Y in 
the name 7)Ya, and it would be better here to 
conform the English Version to the Old Tes- 
tament orthography. 

In Rey. ii. 14, 15 Balaam is mentioned in 
such a conjunction with the Nicolaitans that 
we can hardly help concluding the writer 
of this Epistle and St Jude had those false 
teachers in their thoughts when they spake of 
Balaam’s sin as marking the offenders against 
whom they wrote. 

who loved the wages of unrighteousness | 
See above on v. 13. Balaam’s love was for 
the gain, though on his lips was, ‘‘ Though 
Balak should give me his house full of silver 
and gold.” So these deceivers have one thing 
on their lips but another in their hearts. 


16. But was rebuked for his transgres- 
sion] His offence was a defiance of God’s 
command, which at first spake expressly that 
he should not go with Balak’s messengers. 
The word for ‘‘ rebuke” is only found here 
in the New Testament. 

a dumb ass] vrotvytoy, literally ‘‘a beast of 
burden,” is used of the ass, but in the East 
that animal and the mule are the only ju- 
menta. 

speaking with man’s voice stayed the mad= 
ness of the prophet] It was not the ass but 
the angel who really hindered Balaam on the 
way, but the clearer vision of the dumb beast 
was the cause of the first delay, and so the 
whole result is ascribed to what was but the 
first step towards it. It is not without pur- 
ang that Balaam is styled ‘‘the prophet,” 

ut thus the contrast is heightened between 


MW PETER AL 


[v. 16, 17. 


man’s voice forbad the madness of 
the prophet. 

17 These are wells without water, 
clouds that are carried with a tempest; 
to whom the mist of darkness is re- 
served for ever. 


the wicked folly of him who should have 
been wise, and the brute beast by which he 
was rebuked. 

The word for madness (wapadpovia) is only 
found in this place. 


17. Having specified the sins which should 
mark the lives of these false teachers, the 
Apostle now goes on to notice the vain nature 
of all which they profess to teach. 
promise great things, and men look to them 
with expectation but are doomed to disap- 
pointment. 

These are springs without water] It is 
to bring out as strongly as possible the idea 
of apostasy that the imagery of this verse is 
employed. ‘These false teachers bear the sem- 
blance of teachers, just as, for a little time, 
a place in Eastern lands where water has 
flowed will continue green, but disappoint the 
thirsty traveller who may be led by a little 
verdure to hope for water. ‘There was water, 
and perhaps not long ago, but there is none 
now, and so with these deceivers. They 
give promise, but that promise is never rea- 
lized. And the same notion is in the next 
clause. 

and mists driven by a tempest. 
These promised showers of blessing, but the 
wind carried them away, and they did no 
good to the ground over which they were 
swept so quickly. The Text. Rec. reads ve- 
oéAac=clouds (A.V.), but the best MSS. 
have instead kai ouiyAa. opiyAn is not found 
elsewhere in New Testament. 

for whom] i.e. for the deceiving teachers. 

the blackness of darkness] The words 
are the same as in Jude 13, and it is better 
to translate them in the same way in both 
places. 

hath been reserved] The way of the 
wicked is frequently spoken of as a way of 
darkness (cf. Prov. iv. 19), but the passage 
which is most nearly an illustration of the 
text is Jer. xxiii. 9—12, where false prophets 
are spoken of, over whose deeds “the heart is 
broken, for the land is full of adulterers, both 
prophet and priest are profane...wherefore 
their way shall be unto them as slippery ways 
in the darkness.” 

At the end of the verse the A.V. has “ for 
ever,” but these words are not in the original 
of the best MSS., and appear to have been 
inserted here in later MSS. to bring the text 
of St Peter into more exact accord with that 
of St Jude, where the words are found. 


v. 18—20.] 


18 For when they speak great 
swelling words of vanity, they allure 
through the lusts of the flesh, through 
much wantonness, those that were 


Or, fora \clean escaped from them who live 
Hittle, or, a j 
while,as_ in error. 


19 While they promise thei li- 


iW. PETER. 1. 


berty, they themselves are the ser- 
vants of corruption: for of whom a 
man is overcome, of the same is he 
brought in bondage. 

20 For if after they have escaped 
the pollutions of the world through 
the knowledge of the Lord and Sa- 





18. For uttering great swelling words 
of vanity| In the previous verse we had these 
false teachers described in figures, now we have 
the application. We see why they are water- 
less fountains, and rainless mists, because their 
words are vanity. All that they say must 
come to naught. Cf. Eph. iv. 17, ‘ The 
vanity of their mind.” 

This first clause describes the means em- 
ployed to beguile the unstable; words which 
promise much. The ‘‘ when” of A.V. is not 
needed. The boastful promises of the de- 
ceiver are always there. The adjective ren- 
dered “great swelling words” (umépoyxa), 
is only found here and in the parallel passage, 
Jude 16, and the verb @6cyyeca: is not the 
usual word for speaking but rather indicates 
a public and loud proclamation, and it is to be 
noticed that it is only found in the New Testa- 
ment here and above (v. 16) of Balaam’s ass, 
and in Acts iv. 18, a passage of which the 
language is probably due to St Peter. 

they entice] as above in v. 14. 

in the lusts of the flesh | Here is described 
the condition in which these men live. ‘‘ They 
walk after the flesh in the lust of defilement,” 
and ‘have eyes that cannot cease from sin.” 

by lasciviousness. ‘The word is plural 
in the original and intimates that there is no 
temptation which they do not offer. This is 
the bait by which they entice their followers. 

those who are just escaping. (The 
Text. Rec. here is rods dvtws drodvyovras, 
which is well rendered those that were clean 
escaped, but the oldest MSS. give ddiyws with 
the present participle.) This suits the context 
better. For they who were clean escaped 
would not be in so much danger of falling back 
as would those who were but just getting free. 

Srom them that live in error| With this 
expression may be compared i. 4, ‘‘ having 
escaped from the corruption that is in the 
world through lust.” Those that live in error 
are the heathen who know not God. Having 
lived lives according to the flesh hitherto, they 
are more easily led astray by temptations of 
that nature, when they have just begun their 
Christian profession. To such weak brethren 
the false teachers utter their proud promises, 
and shewing them a life more like their old 
one, and calling for less restraint than true 
Christianity demands, win them to their 
teaching. 


19. Promising them liberty] No doubt 
New Test.—Vot. IV. 


these apustates would make a wrong use of 
words like those of St Paul (Rom. viii. 21) 
concerning ‘‘the glorious /:serty of the children 
of God,” and (2 Cor. iii. 17) ‘‘where the Spirit 
of the Lord is there is /iberty,” leaving out of 
mind that other admonition (Gal. v. 13), 
‘‘use not /iberty for an occasion to the flesh.” 
And here we have an example of those sayings 
of St Paul which ‘‘the ignorant and unsted- 
fast” (like these backsliding professors) ‘‘ wrest 
unto their own destruction.” 

while they themselves are bondservants 
of corruption. Here, as in i. 4, there is deepe 
rooted in the word for “corruption” the 
other notion of ‘‘destruction,” as above in 
v. 12 Of this chapter. These false teachers 
have taken service as bondslaves under a mas- 
ter who uses them to corrupt others, but who 
at the same time will, in their service, destro 
them too. They destroy others and wi 
themselves ‘‘in their destruction be destroyed.” 
The verb for ‘“‘are” in this clause is one which 
describes their being as a settled condition. It 
is used below (iii. 11), ‘‘ what manner of 
persons ought ye ¢o 4e in all holy living.” 
The notion is that of being ‘‘employed on” 
or “busy about ” anything. 

Sor of whom (or what) a man is overcome, 
of the same is he also brought into bondage] 
For the sentiment cf. John viii. 34; Rom. vi. 
16. The also, which is in the Text. Rec. as 
well as old MSS., seems to give force to the 
sentence. It is possible for a sinner, though 
he fall, yet to rise again, and try once more to 
resist temptation, but when he has owned 
himself beaten, then sin goes further and makes 
him its slave. 


20. In this verse the Apostle gives a reason 
for calling these false teachers bondservants, 
They had once got free, or what seemed to be 
free, from their life in error, but a relapse 
makes them powerless to struggle into free- 
dom again. They are hopelessly enslaved now. 

For if after they have escaped the defile- 
ments of the world] These defilements are 
the corruption that was in the heathen world 
through lust (i. 4). These teachers by join- 
ing the fellowship of the Christian Church 
seemed to have made this amount of progress. 

Here pudopara is an unique word. 

through the knowledge of the Lord and Savicur 
Jesus Christ} This is that full knowledge 
(émiyvaots) on which the Apostle so strongly 
insists (cf. 1. 2), and which he here defines as @ 


257 


258 


viour Jesus Christ, they are again 
entangled therein, and overcome, the 
latter end is worse with them than 
the oeginning. 

21 For it had been better for them 
not to have known the way of right- 
eousness, than, after they have known 


knowledge of Jesus Christ as the Lord and 
Saviour. It was such a knowledge which 
these apostate teachers appeared once to have 
had, but now they were ‘‘ denying the Master 
that bought them.” 

they are again entangled therein, and over- 
come| ‘They called their condition freedom, 
but the Apostle sees that they are like the 
fishes (to which by his language he has already 
compared those whom they entice), caught in 
the folds of a net from which there is no 
escape. 

the last state is become worse with 
them than the first] Cf. Christ’s language, 
Matt. xii. 45. “he evil spirit that had been 
cast out has returned and brought with him 
seven other spirits more wicked than himself. 
Such applications of the language of Jesus as 
we find in this verse and the one preceding it, 
where the words are not literally repeated, as 
a forger might have been tempted to use them, 
but given with such modifications as shall 
retain their spirit, though suiting the form to 
the occasion which calls for their use, are most 
interesting because they indicate that the writer 
knew the circumstances under which Christ 
spake, and could use His words as they were 
intended to be used. And more than this, 
they are in some degree characteristic of a 
time when the Gospel narrative was being 
orally delivered, and when living hearers of 
Jesus were still in the world. 

The rovrors in this verse has by some been 
made emphatic and referred to the false teach- 
ers, and thus the whole sense of the verse 
modified in this wise. For if (those who are 
beguiled by these apostates) after they have 
escaped...are again entangled by these (de- 
ceivers)...the last state, &c. But sucha ren- 
dering seems to suit the context very ill. For 
those men who were only just escaping from 
those that live in error (wv. 18) can hardly be 
said in any sense to have attained to the 
knowledge of Jesus Christ the Lord and 
Saviour, or to have ‘known the way of 
righteousness” (v. 21). 


21. For it had been better for them, &c.] 
For with increased knowledge comes increase 
of responsibility, and greater condemnation for 
the misuse of what men know. On the con- 
dition of such apostates cf. Heb. vi. 4—6. 
They crucify the Son of God afresh. 

the way of righteousness] This was defined 
in the last verse as the knowledge of the Lord 


il, PETER. 1. 


{v. 21, ex, 


it, to turn from the bolv command- 
ment delivered unto them. 

22 But it is happened unto them 
according to the true proverb, The 
dog 7s turned to his own vomit again; 
and the sow that was washed to her 
wallowing in the mire. 


and Saviour Jesus Christ. But the Apostle’s 
use of the present expression as equivalent to 
the former, shews that faith in Christ was 
never without works of righteousness. 

the holy commandment, &c.| Christ’s ex- 
planation of the moral law in His Sermon on 
the Mount may emphatically be called by this 
name. And some of the precepts which He 
there delivered were those which these false 
teachers disregarded in their own lives, and 
from the restraints of which they promised 
freedom to those who joined their number. 
And Christ’s interpretation and application of 
the Mosaic code (which St Paul [Rom. vii. 
12] had called holy of itself) had made that 
law still more worthy of the title, 


22. has happened unto them, &c. The 
“But” of the A.V., representing dé in the 
Text. Rec., seems to be a later addition, and 
not warranted by the earliest MSS. 

proverb] ‘The two proverbs which are here 
cited are taken from the two beasts held in 
greatest contempt in Eastern and Jewish 
thought. ‘The dog to this day is the usual 
scavenger in Oriental cities, and swine are an 
abomination. For an instance of the coupling 
of these two animals as illustrations of what 
is most profane and degraded, cf. Matt. vii. 6. 

The dog turning to bis own vomit again| 
It is better to translate the participle form o 
the original exactly. This first proverb is 
generally referred to Prov. xxvi. rz, but it 
seems very doubtful whether that be the 
source of the Apostle’s words. The LXX., 
from which he would quote if he were think- 
ing of that verse, has domep ktwv Grav eréOn 
émi Tov éavrov éyerov. In which passage nei- 
ther the verb, the pronoun, nor the final noun 
are the same as in St Peter. It seems much 
more likely that the proverbs were both of 
them in frequent use and in several forms, and 
that the Apostle has used one, which was well 
known to his readers. We can see from our 
Lord’s words quoted above that these animals 
were not unlikely to be chosen as representa- 
tives of all that was degraded, and so would 
come into the proverbial philosophy of the 
land in many ways. 

and the sow that had washed to her wallow- 
ing in the mire| The LXX. of Proverbs xxvi, 
rr adds to the first proverb the words “‘and 
becomes abominable.” It has been suggested 
by some who believe that there was an Ara 
maic original of and Peter, that under these 


If; PETE Ry Ve. 


words of the LX X. we have a trace of some 
lost Hebrew words, which were the source of 
the second proverb, but which the LX X. mis- 
rendered. This however is not very probable. 
The word for “wallowing” is found of a dif- 
ferent form in some texts. The form adopted 
by the A. V. signifies ‘‘a place for wallowing,” 


ADDITIONAL NOTES 


In this second chapter, besides those illus- 
trations of the character and punishment of 
false teachers which he draws from Holy 
Writ, the writer of the Epistle in three pas- 
sages makes reference to some things not con- 
tained in Scripture, but probably forming part 
of that traditional teaching of which the Jews 
had so much, and of which we find traces 
in other parts of the New Testament (1 Cor. 
x. 4, &c.). This traditional literature has 
never been fully collected, but we have great 
stores of it in the Talmuds of Babylon and 
Jerusalem, in the various Midrashim and the 
Zohar. ‘The dates of these different works it 
is impossible to fix with any exactness, but 
the traditions, which they have preserved for 
us, go back far beyond the earliest date as- 
signed to their present form, and may be taken 
as representing a great deal of what was cur- 
rent teaching among the Jews in the days of 
our Lord and His Apostles. 

It seems worth while therefore to gather 
such traces of extra-biblical tradition as we 
find in this literature that we may gain the 
nearest approach now to be attained to what 
was in the mind of the writer of this Epistle, 
and from which he and the Jewish audience 
he addressed drew their illustrations quite as 
readily as from the canonical books. 

In vw. 4 we read, ‘‘ For if God spared not 
angels that sinned, but cast them down to 
hell, and committed them unto chains of dark- 
ness to be reserved unto judgment.” 

In the Zohar (ed. Zolkiew, III. 208 a), 
we have the following, ‘‘ Rabbi Isaac opened 
his lecture and said, ‘ What is man that thou 
rememberest him?’ (Ps. viii. 4). This verse 
the Rabbis settled in the following way: that 
the governors of the world said it at the time 
when it rose in the will of the Holy One to 
create man. He called many hosts of the 
upper angels and placed them before Himself 
and said unto them: ‘I wish to create man.’ 
Then they said before Him, ‘Man will not 
continue one night in his glory’ (Ps. xlix. 12). 
Then the Holy One stretched forth His finger 
and burnt them. After that He placed other 
hosts before Him, and said unto them: ‘I 
wish to create man.’ And they said before 
Him: ‘ What is man that Thou rememberest 
him?’ What is the good of this son of 
man? And he said unto them: This man 
shail be in our own image so that his wisdom 
shall be superior to your wisdom. When 
God had created man, and he had committed 


and to make this somewhat more clear the 
translators added ‘‘ her” before ‘‘ wallowing.” 
The better text means ‘‘ the act of wallowing.” 
Both forms are found nowhere else in the 
New Testament, and the same hodds good of 
vomit (€&épaua) and mud (BopBopos) in this 


verse. 


on CHAP. Il. 4, II, 15. 


a sin, and had gone forth as a culprit, there 
came Uzza and Azael and said before God, 
We have a cause of complaint [lit. an open- 
ing of the mouth] against Thee. Here is the 
son of man whom Thou hast made; he has 
sinned before Thee. And He said unto them: 
If you had been among them, you would have 
done worse than they. What then did the 
Holy One? He threw them down from the 
holy position that was theirs, even from heaven.” 

Then follows a short digression, after which 
he continues: ‘‘After the Lord had thrown 
them down from their holy place, even from 
heaven, they erred after the women of the 
world, and caused the world to err. Here is 
a point worthy of our meditation. Surely it 
is written [Ps. civ. 4], He maketh His angels 
spirits, and surely these were angels? How 
could they then exist on earth? Come and 
see [z.e. I will give you an explanation]. All 
these angels of above do not exist and cannot 
exist except in the upper light that shines unto 
them and preserves them, and if this upper 
light is cut off from them they cannot exist. 
How much less those whom God has thrown 
down, and from whom that light of above has 
ceased? For their glory was altered, and 
when they came down and the air of this 
world got rule over them, they were changed 
into another [7.e. lower] degree. Here is an 
explanation. ‘The manna that came down to 
Israel in the wilderness sprang originally from 
the dew of above (see Canticles v. 2), which 
comes down from the Ancient One, the hidden 
of all hidden things. And when it comes 
down its light shines through all the world, 
and from it is fed the field of the apples and 
the upper angels. But when it came down 
here below and the air of this world had rule 
over it, it became congealed and its splendour 
was changed, becoming only like coriander 
seed [Num. xi. 7] and nothing more. How 
much more angels? When they came down 
and the air had power over them, they were 
changed from their former degree in which 
they had been. What did God then do? 
He saw that they were misleading the world, 
so He bound them in tron chains in the moun- 
tains of darkness. \n what place do they sit? 
In the depths of the mountains He placed 
Uzza, and cast darkness into his face, because 
at that time when God bound them, Uzza 
hardened himself and rebelled against the 
Highest. So God threw him down into the 
depth up to bis very neck and cast darkness inte 


R2 


259. 


260 


bts face. Now Azael, who did not harden 
himself, God placed near his fellow, but let 
the darkness be light to him.” 

And again (Zohar, 1. 9b), the writer 
speaking of the spirits of light and darkness 
says, ‘‘ They dive into the great sea, and when 
they have arrived at the chain of Uzza and 
Azael, they rouse them and these spring into 
the mountains of darkness and think that the 
Holy One is going to cite them to judgment.” 

That some traditional teaching of this kind 
was current in our Lord’s day is evident from 
the petition of the devils (Luke vili. 31), 
“They besought Him that He would not 
command them to go out into the deep.” 

The second passage in which some tradi- 
tional development of the words of Holy 
Writ is found is in v. 11, ‘Angels which 
are greater in power and might bring not 
railing accusations against them before the 
Lord.” 

On this it will be enough, after the instance 
cited above of the Lord’s rebuke to Satan in 
Zech. iii. 2, to quote from the Jalkut the 
comment which the compiler extracts from 
the ‘Agadath Samuel,’ dn Isai. vi. 2, “And 
one cried unto another and said, ‘ Holy, holy, 
holy.’ This teaches us that the angels honour 
one another ; the one says to the other: ‘Com- 
mence thou, because thou art greater than I.’ 
And some say that they [the angels] are com- 
panies, and the one company says to its neigh- 
bour, ‘Commence thou, for thou art greater 
than I.’” 

And with reference to the special instance 
given in St Jude of Michael the archangel 
not railing against Satan, we read in the 
MWD NOH thus: ‘‘ Samael was the chief of 
the Adversaries, and every moment was ex- 
pecting when the time would arrive for him 
to put Moses to death and take away his life, 
just as a man expects some great joy. When 
Michael the prince of Israel saw Samael the 
wicked one expecting to put Moses to death, 
he lifted up his voice and wept, while Samael 
rejoiced and laughed. And he said to him, 
‘Wicked one, while I weep thou laughest.’ 
And some tell us that he said, ‘ Do not rejoice 
against me, mine enemy, though I have fallen 
I shall rise again; I have fallen in Moses, 
I shall rise again in the leadership of Joshua.’” 

The third passage is where (v. 15) it is said 
of Balaam that ‘he loved the wages of un- 
righteousness.” This perhaps might be in- 


CHAPTER III. 


1 He assureth them of the certainty of Christ's 
coming to judgment, against those scorners 
who dispute against it: 8 warning the godly, 
for the long patience of God, to hasten their 


Cuap. III]. 1—7. The Apostle recurs 
once more to the purpose w'‘th which he 


It? PET ee ie. 


ferred from the narrative in the Book of 
Numbers, but there is abundance of evidence 
that this view of Balaam’s character was much 
dwelt on in Jewish traditional literature. 
Thus in the Midrash Rabba on Numbers, 
par. 20, we find, ‘‘ Behold there is a people 
come out from Egypt, come curse (gabahb) 
me them.” (Balak uses one word for curse 
(ara’), but Balaam in repeating his message 
before God uses the stronger expression 
gabab.) This is to teach us that Balaam hated 
the people more than Balak, for Balak did not 
say gabah but arab. And the meaning of the 
gabab is distinctly shewn. For the one (Ba- 
lak) says, ‘‘that I may drive them out of the 
land,” but the other says, ‘drive them out” 
unqualified, i.e.] ‘‘from this world and the 
world to come.” And God said unto Balaam, 
Thou shalt not go with them. ‘Then he replied 
to Him, ‘‘Shall I then curse them from my 
place?” And He said to him, ‘‘Thou shalt 
not curse the people.” Then he said, ‘‘ Shall 
I bless them?” ‘They have no need of thy 
blessing for they are blessed.” As folks say to 
the wasp, ‘‘ Neither with thy honey nor with 
thy sting” (¢.e. do we want anything to do). 
And Balaam rose up early in the morning, and 
said unto the princes of Balak, &c. Balaam 
did not say to them, He hath not given me 
leave to go and to curse, but “‘ He refuseth to. 
give me leave to go with you. God said to 
me, It is not for thy honour to go with these, 
but with greater men than these; for (said: 
he) he takes pleasure in my honour.” ‘There- 
fore (we read), And Balak sent again princes. 
more and more honourable (as it says), ** For 
I will promote thee to very great honour, 
more than thou hast received in times past do. 
I give thee.” And Balaam answered and said, 
“If Balak will give me his house full of silver 
and gold.” From hence thou learnest that 
Balaam had three qualities: an evil eye, and a 
proud spirit, and a grasping heart. An evil 
eye, for it is written, ‘‘ And Balaam lifted up. 
his eyes and saw Israel dwelling according to. 
their tribes.” A proud spirit, for it is written, 
‘‘ Because the Lord refuseth to give me leave 
to go with you.” A grasping heart, for it is 
written, ‘If Balak would give me his house 
full of silver and gold.” 

The same qualities are ascribed to Balaam: 
in the ‘ Pirke Aboth,’ v. 29 (Taylor, p. 109),. 
and in the ‘ Midrash Tanchuma,’ par. Balak, 
§ 6. 


repentance. 10 He describeth also the man- 
ner how the world shall be destroyed: 11 ex- 
horting them, from the expectation thereof, 
to all holiness of life: 15 and again, to think 
the patience of God to tend to their salvation, 
as Paul wrote to them in his epistles. 


wrote this second Epistle, and gives an ad 
ditional mark by which the false teachers may 


v. 1—3.] 
HIS second epistle, beloved, I 


now write unto you; in both 
which I stir up your pure minds by 
way of rememtrance : 
2 That ye may be mindful of the 
words which were spoken before by 


be known: to their other sins they will add 
that crowning one of ‘sitting in the seat of 


the scornful,” in wilful forgetfulness that it is 
eternally true that ‘‘the way of the ungodly 
shall perish.” 


1. This is now, beloved, a second epistle 
which I write unto you. In the conclusion 
of the letter the Apostle grows still more 
earnest, and appeals to the affection of those 
to whom he writes. The word “beloved” 
addressed to them is found four times in this 
short chapter. It is difficult to understand 
how such an expression could be used by any 
except one who was well known to those 
whom he addressed, and the writer could 
scarcely have dared to speak of St Paul, as he 
is spoken of in v. 15, except he had been a 
contemporary of that Apostle’s. Had our 
Epistle been written at the date assigned to it 
by many, such words could have found no 
sibsces And the whole subject treated of in 
the chapter is too solemn to be made the 
material for a literary forgery. 

The “ now” =already (#87) iatimates that 
the second Epistle came not long after the first. 

and in both of them I stir up your sin- 
cere mind by putting you in remembrance. 
This verse is not, as some have suggested, the 
commencement of another Epistle, but merely 
a resumption of what has been said in i. 13. 
There he had said, ‘‘I think it right to stir 
you up by putting you in remembrance.” In 
the second chapter many examples of the 
destruction that awaits sinners have been set 
forth, and he now returns to earnest exhorta- 
tion. Here the mind (é:avora) is the faculty 
which weighs and estimates and so under- 
stands. It can be darkened (Eph. iv. 18), 
but in those to whom St Peter wrote it was 
still bright and clear (which is the original 
force of the word rendered sincere), and so 
prepared to receive pure impressions from his 
teaching. 

2. That ye should remember the words 
avhich were spoken before by the holy prophets | 
Of the value which the writer of this Epistle 
attached to the teaching of prophecy we have 
evidence in i. 19. It is noteworthy that St 
Jude only mentions (v. 17) ‘‘the words 
spoken before by the Apostles.” He knew 
how earnestly this letter of St Peter urged on 
Christians the study of prophecy, and for him 
“the words spoken by the Apostles ” included 
the other exhortation of this verse. 

and the commandment of the Lord 


BE). PETER Tk 


the holy prophets, and of the com- 
mandment of us the apostles of the 
Lord and Saviour : 

3 Knowing this first, that there 
shall come in the last days scoffers, 
walking after their own lusts, 


and Saviour through your apostles. 
The evidence of MSS. is nearly all in favour 
of your (juav) instead of our (jay). So that 
the ‘‘us” of the A.V. cannot stand. And 
the Apostles can rightly be called the Apostles 
of those to whom they have written or preach- 
ed. No doubt St Peter includes himself among 
the number of such Apostles, but the persons 
for whom he wrote knew the Epistles of St 
Paul (iil. 15), and to judge from the numerous 
allusions to it which are contained in St Peter's 
first Epistle, as well as some in this, they must 
have been familiar with the Epistle of St James. 
Therefore, as in i. 16 when speaking of the 
Transfiguration he did not employ the singular 
pronoun and say, ‘‘ J have not followed,” &c., 
so here he speaks of your Apostles, rather than 
make any direct reference to himself. 

The commandment 1s called in the original 
‘the commandment of the Lord and Saviour,” 
and then with another genitive “the com- 
mandment of your Apostles.” But the sense 
of the latter is well given by through. The 
commandment came through the A postles from 
Christ, and is the same which is spoken of 
before in il. 21. 


3. Knowing this first] He has used the 
same phrase i. 20 concerning prophecy and its 
interpretation, and now that he is about to 
give warning against those who shall mock at 
the non-fulfilment of the promise of Christ’s 
coming, he repeats the words. For the men 
against whom he wrote were the men who 
would expect prophecy to have its fulfilment 
in strict accord with their private interpreta- 
tions, and if it were not so, would make it a 
ground for mockery. 

that...in the last days] This expression was 
used by the Old Testament writers to signify 
the end of that dispensation. Thus Isaiah ii. 
2, ‘It shall come to pass in the last days that 
the mountain of the Lord’s house shall be 
established.” And so in Micah iv. 1 (the 
parallel passage). Then in the New Testa- 
ment it occurs of the coming of Christ in the 
flesh. Thus 1 Pet. i. 20, “‘ Christ who in 
these /ast times was manifest for you” (cf. 
Heb. i. 2). But specially was the phrase, in 
some form, employed after the Ascension to 
signify the, no doubt soon expected, return of 
Christ to judgment, before which event St 
Paul (2 Tim. iti. 1) had foretold that ‘‘in the 
last days perilous times should come.” And 
St Peter and St Jude after him, seeing the 
signs of the times, spake of them as marks 


aot 


262 


re 


4 And saying, Where is the pro- 
mise of his coming? for since the 
fathers fell asleep, all things continue 
as they were from the beginning of 
the creation. 


PETE Rie 


[v. 45 5» 


5 For this they willingly are ig- 
norant of, that by the word of God 
the heavens were of old, and the 


earth ' standing out of the water and t Ge. eon- 


in the water: 





that the time of the end was near. And there 
can be little question that these Apostles ex- 
pected the second coming would not be long 
delayed, but both St Paul in his Second 
Epistle to the Thessalonians and St Peter here 
indicate the proper spirit in which such ex- 
pectations were to be entertained. Men were 
not to think of knowing times and seasons. 
With God one day is as a thousand years, 
and a thousand years as one day; and if He 
bring not the end at once, it is because He is 
long-suffering, and willeth not that any should 
perish. 

mockers shall come with mockery. Of 
such mockery he gives a specimen in the next 
verse. The words rendered ‘‘ with mockery ” 
are not found in the Text. Rec., and the 
noun does not occur elsewhere in the New 
Testament, but the MS. evidence is so strong 
in favour of them, that they are received by 
all modern editors. Beside which they are an 
expansion quite in the Hebrew style, of which 
there are so many traces in the Epistle. The 
word for ‘‘mockers” is only here and in the 
parallel place in St Jude. The characteristic 
of this mockery seems to be that the men 
would profess themselves willing to accept all 
that was told them concerning Christ, if only 
they could have the evidence for it framed 
after their own desire. 

walking after their own lusts] And demand- 
ing evidence according to their own heart’s 
fancy in consequence. But by reason of fol- 
lowing their own lusts, they were too blind to 
discern the true nature and signs of Christ’s 
kingdom. 

4. And saying, Where is the promise of his 
coming?) In the spirit of those mentioned in 
Isaiah (v. 18, 19), ‘*who draw iniquity with 
cords of vanity, and sin as it were with a cart 
rope, who say, Let Him make speed and 
hasten His work that we may see it.” Cp. 
Jer. xvii. 15; Ezek. xii. 22, 27. 

for from the day that the fathers fell 
asleep] As it is the second coming of Christ 
which is here spoken of, and as the expectation 
of that coming could only have been enter- 
tained since His ascension, and the promise 
of the angels that he should come again, the 
fathers here spoken of can only be the first 
Christian generation. ‘These had looked for 
and no doubt often made mention of the ap- 
proaching Advent, but they had died without 
seeing it, and the mockers now beheld all 
things still continuing, and these fathers taken 
away with hopes unfulfilled, and so they 
mockingly said that the coming was never to 


be. Stephen was the first of those who had 
‘‘fallen asleep,” and after him James the 
brother of John, and then that other James, 
the bishop of Jerusalem, and many more would 
rank as ‘‘ fathers” of the Christian community 
whose names have not been written for us, 
but who were well known to the Churches, 
If these men had died, and the Advent was not 
yet, was there (asked these mockers) ever to 
be an Advent? 

all things continue as they were from the 
beginning of the creation] It seems as if while 
rejecting the hope of Christ’s return, these 
sinners also had rejected the Old Testament 
record too. They were of those, it appears, 
who maintained that God did not interpose 
in the affairs of men and nations. He had 
created the world and given it a law (this they 
might admit), but it was unchangeable. The 
thing which was, was that which ever had 
been since the creation, and which now for 
ever would be. 


5. For this they wilfully forget. The 
mockers have spoken of all things as unchanged 
from the creation of the world. The Apostle 
brings an example to refute them, and one of 
which, had it not been from wilful ignorance, 
they must have been conscious. 

by the word of God| Alluding to Gen. i. 
6, 9, where the language gives some warrant 
for the expressions used both here and in 
the Psalms quoted. The waters covered all 
things, and from the midst of them the 
land appeared at the word of God, and by the 
same word were separated from each other 
the waters above, and those under the firma- 
ment, It is unnecessary to observe that neither 
Genesis nor the Epistle of St Peter was written 
to go beyond the ideas of those for whose use 
they were intended. With regard to the 
former it has been abundantly shewn that 
scientific advancement has taken nothing from 
the true worth of its teaching, though it may 
express what is there recorded in more tech 
nical terminology. 

that there were heavens of old. The 
plural is a representation of the Hebrew word 
for ‘“‘ heavens” which is always a plural form. 

The heavens had existed, and the earth too, 
long ages before the flood, and men at that 
time might have held the same notions that all 
things in the world were unchanging. But 
the flood came. ‘God spared not the ancient 
world” (ii. 5). 

Of old (€xmaAa) is a Petrine word only 
found here and in ii. 3. 

and the earth compacted out of water 


v. 6—a.} 


6 Whereby the world that then 
was, being overflowed with water, 
perished : 

7 But the heavens and the earth, 
which are now, by the same word 
are kept in store, reserved unto fire 
against the day of judgment and per- 
dition of ungodly men. 





andamidst water. The Apostle speaks in 
the language of David, Ps. xxiv. 2, ‘‘ He hath 
founded (the world) upon the seas and esta- 
blished it upon the floods,” and Ps. cxxxvi. 6, 
‘““He stretched out the earth above the 
waters.” 


6. By which means. The Greek is here 
in the plural 8” ov, and there has been no 
plural antecedent. But the reference of the 
pronoun seems to be to the twice-mentioned 
water of the previous verse. The waters above 
the firmament and those under it were alike 
employed to bring about the deluge. The 
fountains of the great deep were broken up 
and the windows of heaven were opened. 

the world that then was| The world (xoo- 

s) must be used here in a limited sense, for 
it was only the inhabitants of the earth that 
perished. The destruction was not like that 
which is to come hereafter when ‘the heavens 
being on fire shall be dissolved.” 

being overflowed with water, perished] 
The very element out of which and amidst 
which the earth had been compacted was em- 
ployed as the means of its destruction. And 
it is against Him these mockers scoff, at 
whose word the same agencies become, ac- 
cording to His will, creative or destructive. 


7. But the heavens that now are. 
In contradistinction to the ‘“‘new heavens” 
spoken of below in verse 13. 

and the earth, by the same word have 
been stored up for fire. Here some 
authorities read “by his word.” It makes no 
difference to the sense. The argument is that 
as in the ancient world, created by God’s 
word, there was, even in the materials whereof 
the earth was created, a means whereby it 
could be destroyed, so hereafter the heavens 
and the earth are to be destroyed by that 
other element which now tends so much to 
their conservation. That the future destruc- 
tion of the world shall be by fire cf. Isai. Ixvi. 
15; Dan. vii. 10, and especially Mal. iv. 1, 
“The day that cometh shall burn them up.” 
And point had been given to all these pre- 
dictions by the language of our Lord, Matt. 
Xxiv. 29, and other similar passages. 

It is possible, though not so satisfactory, to 
construe zrupi= ‘‘ with fire,” and then the sense 
would be that the agency was already prepared 
by which they should be destroyed. It is 


BEL PBRERS IDR 


8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of 
this one thing, that one day is with 
the Lord as a thousand years, and a 
thousand years as one day. 

g The Lord is not slack concern- 
ing his promise, as some men count 
slackness ; but is longsuffering to us- 
ward; not willing that any should 


better to take wvpi with the verb which pre 
cedes it, than to render as the A.V. ‘“re- 
served unto fire against the day of judgment.” 

being reserved against the day of 
judgment and destruction of ungodly men. 
And at that day not only shall the earth be 
destroyed, but the sun shall be darkened, the 
moon shall not give her light, the stars shall 
fall from heaven, and the powers of the hea- 
vens shall be shaken. ‘This shall be the birtn- 
day of the new heavens and the new earth, 
wherein righteousness shall dwell, the ungodly 
having been swept away from it as the sinners 
from the world before the flood. 

‘The destruction of ungodly men” is exe 
plained (2 Thess. i. 9) as being wrought ‘ by 
the face of the Lord and the glory of his 
might, when he shall come to be glorified in 
his saints,” just as (2 Thess. ii. 8) the lawless 
one is said to be slain “‘ with the breath of his 
mouth, and brought to nought by the mani- 
festation of his coming.” 


8—13. The Apostle gives another argu- 
ment against the mockers. Time is no ele- 
ment in the counsels of Him who is from 
eternity to eternity. When His promise seems 
to tarry, it is mercy which holds back His 
hand. He will have all men to be saved. But 
the day of the Lord will come suddenly, and 
the destruction by fire shall come to pass as 
Christ foretold. ‘The thought of this should 
be an incentive to godly living, and specially 
so unto those who look earnestly for the 
fulfilment of God’s promise of a new heaven 
and a new earth in which only righteousness 
shall dwell. 


8. But forget not this one thing, 
beloved. Be not ye like these mockers, forget- 
ful of what the older Scriptures should have 
taught them. ‘The allusion in the verse is to 
Ps, xc. 4, ‘* A thousand years in thy sight is 
but as yesterday.” For God time, as men 
regard it, exists not. So His doings cannot 
be subjected to human standards, 


9. The Lord is not slack, &c.| The idea 
which the Apostle desires to express is that 
the Lord, who has made the promise, does 
not, for any reason of His own, delay the 
fulfilment thereof. 

@s some men count slackness| Which would 
be that might be tardy in fulfilling what 


263 


264 


perish, but that all should come to 
repentance. 

10 But the day of the Lord 
will come as a thief in the night; 
in the which the heavens _ shall 
pass away with a great noise, and 


they had promised because they would gain 
by the delay. God deals not so with men; 
when He is slow, it is that they may be the 
gainers. 

but ts longsuffering to you-ward]| All the 
best authorities are in favour of the pronoun 
of the second person. 

God’s delay of the day of judgment is an 
illustration of that character in which He re- 
vealed Himself when He proclaimed His name 
unto. Moses (Exod. xxxiv. 6), ‘‘ The Lord, 
the Lord God, merciful and gracious, /ong- 
suffering,’ but even there it is added for the 
warning of mockers, ‘‘ that will by no means 
clear the guilty.” 

not desiring that any should perish] Man 
being allowed free-will in his actions may sin, 
and though God gave man free-will and must 
have foreseen that he would fall, yet it was 
not of God’s will that he fell, and a way was 
prepared at once fer his redemption ; and this 
provision declares that from everlasting God 
has been the same, not desiring that any should 
perish, but offering to the fallen the way of 
life. 

but that all should come to repentance| St 
Paul (1 Tim. ii. 4) says the same in other 
words, ‘‘ He willeth that all men should be 
saved and come to the knowledge of the 
“truth.” And the way unto this ‘‘ knowledge 
of the truth” is by repentance (2 Tim. il. 25), 
and this repentance is the gift of God, but He 
offers it to all who will accept it. And this 
is hinted at in the word ywpjoat, which is not 
the simple word ‘‘to come,” but contains in 
itself the notion of ‘‘ opening for the reception 
of anything,” and so shewing a readiness to 
accept it. 


10. But the day of the Lord| ‘The expres- 
sion is common in the Old Testament to 
signify the advent of the Messiah, and is found 
from Isaiah to Malachi, usually connected 
with the idea that His coming would be a 
time of judgment. In consequence it was 
readily adopted by the New Testament writers 
(1 Thess. v. 2), and also the form “the day 
of Christ,” to signify the second Advent (cf. 
x Cor. i. 8; Phil. i. 6; 2 Thess. ii. 2). 

will come as a thief| The Text. Rec. 
adds ¢v wri, but the best authorities reject 
the words, which are probably an insertion to 
make this verse accord with r Thess. v. 2. 
Both passages are founded on Christ’s words, 
Matt. xxiv. 43. 

in the which the heavens shal pass away 


Il. PETER IIT. 


[v. 10, tm 


the elements shall melt with fervent 
heat, the earth also and the works 
that are therein shall be burned 
up. 

11 Seeing then that all these things 
shall be dissolved, what manner of 





with a great noise] poitndov=with a great 
noise, is a root which is used to describe the 
noise of bees, the sound of flights of birds, the 
whizzing of weapons through the air, and the 
din of cataracts of water. 

shall pass away] is Christ’s own word 
(Luke xxi. 33) of the destruction of heaven 
and earth. 

and the elements shall be dissolved with 
fervent heat] The so-called elements, viz. 
fire, air, earth and water, cannot all be included 
in the term here, for one of them is to be 
employed as the agency whereby all nature’s 
composition shall be unloosed. Some have 
therefore confined the word orozyeia here to the 
sun and the planets, the heavenly bodies, a sig- 
nification which the word undoubtedly has in 
some astronomical writings. But this seems 
too late and technical a sense to be that in- 
tended by St Peter. He rather employs it of 
the whole constitution of the world, and 
means that as water was the agency of de- 
struction in the ancient world, so at the last 
day fire shall not be restrained within its own 
domain, but prevail over and bring to nought 
all else. The participle translated ‘* with fer- 
vent heat” is found only here and in verse 12. 

the earth also and the works that are therein 
shall be burned up| ‘‘The works that are 
therein” refers to all man’s creations, and 
everything which he has done. And in this 
connection some editors have preferred a read- 
ing, which has very early MS. authority, 
‘shall be discovered,” instead of ‘shall be 
burned up.” ‘This sense joins on very well 
with the question in the next verse, ‘* What 
manner of men ought ye to be?” and accords 
with the language of verse 7, where in con- 
nection with the destruction by fire we have 
the mention of ‘‘the day of judgment and 
destruction of ungodly men.” 

But the use of evpioxes is of persons seeking 
to find something out, and its passive could 
hardly be made to bear the sense “shall be 
found out” when used of things. So it has 
been proposed to render this clause interro- 
gatively, ‘“ And shall the earth and the works 
therein be found?” (é.e. remain at such a 
time). But the reading though undoubtedly 
old has not been accepted by many editors 
and is beset with much difficulty. 


ll. Seeing that these things are thus ail to 
be dissolved. For otv=then, good authorities 
read orws =thus. 

qwhat manner of men ought ze to be] The 


10r, Aast- 


ung. 


v. 12—15.] 


persons ought ye to be in // holy con- 
versation and godliness, 

12 Looking for and ' hasting unto 
the coming of the day of God, where- 
in the heavens being on fire shall be 
dissolved, and the elements shall melt 
with fervent heat? 

13 Nevertheless we, according to 


DEL PEVTERN IIE 


his promise, look for new heavens 
and a new earth, wherein dwelleth 
righteousness, 

14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that 
ye look for such things, be diligent 
that ye may be found of him in peace, 
without spot, and blameless. 

15 And account that the longsuf- 





word rendered what manner has the primary 
signification ‘‘of what country,” and seems 
to indicate that the life of the Christian should 
be one which shewed that he was looking for 
a better country. 

in holy life and godliness. The old word 
“conversation” has lost its meaning, which 
was an admirable rendering of dvacrpody in 
1611 (see above, il. 7). The life of the 
believer will be in marked contrast to that 
which these false teachers allow and practise. 


12. Looking for and earnestly desiring 
the coming of the day of God| ‘The second 
verb in its literal signification=‘‘ to hasten.” 
This sense is accepted here by some as intimat- 
ing that the diligence in holy living among 
God’s people will sooner bring on the day of 
God, and therefore their lives may in a sense 
be said to hasten it on. This was the render- 
ing of Erasmus, Expectantes et accelerantes ad- 
venium dici, But the conception is not in 
accord with other parts of Scripture, and 
the word omevder is elsewhere used in the 
New ‘Testament only intransitively. Thus 
the sense of “earnest desire” is to be preferred. 
The old expression of the A.V. meant this, 
though it is not clear to a modern reader. 
The transitive sense is also noticed in the 
margin of A.V. 

the coming] (lit. the presence) is the word 
constantly used of the second advent of Christ. 
Thus (Matt. xxiv. 3), ‘‘ What shall be the 
sign of thy coming?” And St Peter here 
expressly names that coming, the day of God, 
even by his form of words testifying to that 
teaching which fills the whole Epistle, and 
was cast off by the false teachers who denied 
the divinity of Jesus. In all other places “‘the 
presence” (mapovcia) is spoken of as the 
coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, and St Peter, 
feeling the needs of his day, takes the oppor- 
tunity of modifying the expression so as to 
emphasize the truth which was being denied. 

by reason of which the heavens being on 
fire shall be dissolved] ‘The original does not 
signify ‘‘ wherein,” as A.V., but that the 
coming of the Son of Man shall be the cause 
of all these signs and destruction. This is in 
harmony with the language of St John (Rev. 
XX. 11), where it is said, ‘‘ From whose face 
the earth and the heaven fied away, and there 
was found no place for them.” 

and the elements shall melt, &c.] The verb 


is not the same as in verse ro. It is stronger 
in force and implies not only the relaxation of 
all the bonds of nature, but the wasting away 
of the whole universe from its place. 


13. But according to his promise. The 
promise is that made through Isaiah (Ixv. 17), 
“Behold, I create new heavens and a new 
earth,” and as that only which is nghteous 
can be permanent before God, the prophet 
says (Ixvi. 22), ‘‘ The new heavens and the 
new earth, which I shall make, shall remain 
before me, saith the Lord.” It is the coming 
of Christ which is to destroy that lawless one 
whom the Lord will consume with the breath 
of Hts mouth (2 Thess. ii. 8), and the same 
shall be the lot of all that is unrighteous. Cf. 
Rev. xxi. 27. In the city of the Lord, the 
Zion of the Holy One of Israel, ‘* the people 
shall be all righteous” (Isai. lx, 21). 


14—18. The Epistle closes with an earnest 
exhortation to holiness of life because Christ’s 
coming is expected, and also to a right 
conception of the longsuffering of the Lord. 
The Apostle enforces the latter part of his 
admonition by a reference to the teaching of 
St Paul, and exhorts that those who had been 
thus taught should stand fast in the truth, 
and strive by adding grace to grace to know 
still better their Lord and Saviour Jesus 
Christ. 

14. Wherefore. beloved, seeing that ye look 
for these things] that is, for the promise of 
the new heaven and the new earth, strive to 
prepare that you may be fit to be received 
into those everlasting habitations. 

give diligence that ye may be found of 
him in peace| ‘The thought in the last two 
words is illustrated by St Paul (1 Thess. v. 
23), “‘The very God of peace sanctify you 
wholly.” By this sanctification alone can 
men look with peace for the coming of the 
day of the Lord, and this St Paul shews by 
the way in which his prayer in that verse con- 
tinues, ‘‘and may your spirit and soul and 
body be preserved entire without blame at the 
coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” 

without spot, and blameless in his sight. 
Conformed as much to the likeness of Christ 
as sinful men may be. He was without spot 
and blameless (Eph. i. 4), and if God sanctify 
us wholly we shall then be made like unto 
Him. It is better to connect avr@ closely with 


265 


266 


fering of our Lord is salvation ; even 
as our beloved brother Paul also ac- 
cording to the wisdom given unto 
him hath written unto you ; 


Gpoépnror, though no doubt the pronoun relates 
both to the word that follows and to that 
which precedes it. 

The character of the Apostle’s exhortation 
is framed with reference to the dangers of the 
time arising from those false teachers whom 
he has called ‘‘ spots and blemishes” (ii. 13). 


15. And account that the longsuffering of 
our Lord is salvation] Cf.v.9. The passage 
in the writings of St Paul which comes nearest 
to the language of this verse is Rom. ii. 4, 
which Epistle, being written to the Jews as 
well as the Gentile converts at Rome, might 
by the end of St Peter’s life be well known 
and circulated among the churches of Asia. 
But the spirit of the words is to be found 
elsewhere in St Paul’s Epistles (cf. 1 Tim. ii. 
Ais Mitenicerm): 

even as our beloved brother Paul...wrote 
unto you] ‘The use of the plural. pronoun 
‘‘our” is very natural, for if St Paul had 
already written to the churches for which the 
present Epistle was intended, he would be 
dear to them as to St Peter; and in his labours 
among ‘‘all the churches” he may have been 
known by face to some to whom St Peter was 
writing. ‘‘Beloved” (ayamnros) is a word 
applied four times in this chapter to those to 
whom the Epistle was sent, and seems to have 
been like ‘‘brother” (adeAgos), a term of affec- 
tion much used among the first Christians. It is 
found very frequently in St Paul’s Epistles, and 
we can quite understand that St Peter would 
use it in speaking of St Paul, just as he would 
of other members of the Christian churches. 
But it is not easy to believe that a writer in the 
second century would thus have spoken of one 
who in the mouths of all who then allude to 
him is mentioned in terms of highest reverence, 
as sanctified, blessed, glorious and divine. Some 
such epithets would have been sure to have 
been applied at that date in a passage which 
like the present admits of the largest praise 
being bestowed on the Apostle of the Gentiles. 

For the use of adeAdos cf. Acts ix. 17, xxi. 20, 
and numerous passages in St Paul’s Epistles. 

according to the wisdom given unto him] 
St Paul though comparing himself to a wise 
master-builder, yet speaks of his own labours 
as wrought ‘‘according to the grace of God 
which was given unto him” (1 Cor. iii. ro). 
There can be no doubt that his learning and 
special training in the Jews’ religion made him 
in every way the most prominent and able 
member of the Apostolate, and that his in- 
fluence is no more than duly represented by 
the large share which his writings occupy in 
the New Testament. To St Peter his wisdom 


Ih IPE PER SIT 


[v. 16, 


16 As also in all és epistles, 
speaking in them of tnese things; 
in which are some things hard to be 
understood, which they that are un- 


would be the more abundantly apparent afte 
the spread of Christianity so widely amony 
the Gentiles. 

wrote to you. The verb is aorist. We 
cannot tell what Epistle is here alluded ta 
The Epistles of St Peter were written tc 
Christians scattered throughout Asia Minor, 
in which region were the churches of Galatia, 
Ephesus and Colossz, to which St Paul wrote 
Epistles that still remain, and of Laodicza, to 
which he also sent an Epistle (Col. iv. 16). 
Now without speculating whether there may 
not have been other Epistles of St Paul known 
to St Peter which are not preserved to us (and 
we know that some of his letters have not 
come down to us), there is enough in the 
Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians, con- 
cerning diligent preparation for the coming 
of Christ, of being without spot and blemish, 
and of the mercy of God in man’s salvation, 
to give abundant foundation for St Peter’s 
remark. ‘To take only a few instances : (Eph. 
i. 4) ‘‘ God therefore chose us in Christ before 
the foundation of the world, that we should be 
holy and without blemish before him in love.” 
Eph. ii. 8, ‘‘ By grace ye have been saved 
through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is 
the gift of God.” Cf. also Eph. iv.5, v.27; also 
Col. i. 22, ii. 8 (a warning against teachers such 
as St Peter had in his thoughts when writing), 


16. As also in all bis epistles] ‘These 
words shew that St Peter had not in his mind 
any one single topic on which St Paul had 
written, but those general lessons and warn= 
ings which are found in all his letters, to avoid 
false teaching, to stand fast in the Lord, to be 
stedfast, unmoveable, and always abounding 
in the work of the Lord, knowing that it 
would not be in vain that they laboured thus 
in the Lord. 

speaking in them of these things] This clause 
also shews that there were many points of St 
Paul’s teaching in the writer’s thoughts on 
which that Apostle’s lessons had been to the 
same effect, and given with a foresight of like 
dangers with those which St Peter saw to be 
coming. 

wherein. There is a variation here in the 
MSS. between ois and ais. The latter has 
been more largely adopted by modern editors, 
and this would make the relative refer to the 
‘« Epistles,” while ois would be connected 
with rovrwv immediately preceding it, and 
would imply that among the sudjects on which 
St Paul had given his lessons, and for which 
St Peter was referring to him, there were some 
hard to be understood. Which certainly 
would be true; but it seems better to suppose 


¥. 17, 18.] 


learned and unstable wrest, as they do 

also the other scriptures, unto their 
own destruction. 

17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing 

e know these things before, beware 

est ye also, being led away with the 


that the Apostle was here speaking of the 
general difficulties which are to be found in 
many parts of St Paul’s writings. 

are some things hard to be understood] A 
statement as true now as when St Peter wrote 
‘t, though we cannot tell to what difficult 
matters he m2 be alluding, except by reflect- 
ing on what subjects St Paul’s teaching was 
wrested in tire early days of the Church. 

which t## ignorant and unstedfast 
wrest. The three principal words in the sen- 
fence are peculiar to St Peter and to this 
Epistie, the first adjective and the verb being 
found ouly in this verse. The full sense of 
the verb is ‘*to put on the rack, to subject 
to torture,” and it is very expressive of the 
violent metheds of those who made St Paul 
contradict St James, or St Peter, or St John. 

There are many points of St Paul’s doctrine 
which might be wrested in this way, as that 
concerning ‘‘the liberty with which Christ 
makes men free,” and also that statement 
‘cwhere sin abounded there grace did much 
more abound,” which some men might con- 
ceive to be a warrant for doing evil that good 
might come. 

as they do also the other scriptures] Thus 
St Peter includes the Epistles of St Paul 
among the “Scriptures” (ypadat). This word 
is used in the New Testament of the Old Tes- 
tament Scriptures alone, except in this passage. 
The noun in the singular number may be 
found applied to some words (James iv. 5) 
which are not found in either the New Tes- 
tament or the Old Testament, but the use of 
the plural is limited to the Holy Scriptures, 
and indeed the adjective “holy” (a@y:a:) is 
not unfrequently joined with it. e may 
therefore conclude that as the Mount of 
Transfiguration was beginning to rank side by 
side with Sinai as ‘‘the holy mountain,” so 
there were being gathered even at this datea 
body of writings concerning Christ and His 
Church which were to form a new covenant 
to be set forth to fulfil and in a degree to 
supersede the older Scriptures, and among 
these writings the Epistles of St Paul were 
included. 

unto their own destruction] ‘The lessons of 
the false teachers have been called ‘heresies 
of destruction” (ii. 1), and such as should 
bring on those who held them ‘‘swift destruc- 
tion,” and it is said (ii. 12) ‘“‘ in their destroy- 
ing they shall surely be destroyed.” And 
even when the enors and torturings of Scrip- 
ture are made by the ignorant and unstedfast 
without the malicious aim of leading others 


FR. PEPER. If. 


error of the wicked, fall from your 
own stedfastness. 

18 But grow in grace, and in the 
knowledge of our Lord and Saviour 
Jesus Christ. To him 4e glory both 


now and for ever. Amen. 


astray, nothing but destruction can await those 
who thus abuse what is written. 


17. Ye therefore, beloved, knowing these 
things before] i.e. that false teachers shall come 
and beguile the unstedfast, and that the end 


* will be destruction both to the deceivers and 


the deceived. 

beware that ye be not /ed away with the 
error of the wicked| The same word for 
“wicked” has been applied (in ii. 7) to the 
people of Sodom in the days of Lot, and there 
is no doubt that the sensual indulgence which 
the Gnostic teachers permitted to their fol- 
lowers was a bait quite as powerful as, if not 
more powerful than, any pride which they 
might rouse in men by their profession of 
superior knowledge. 

and fall from your own stedfastness| Which, 
as has been before noticed, St Peter was spe- 
cially charged to secure among his brethren. 
The word orpprypos is only found here. 


18. But grow in grace] ‘The food which 
shall promote such growth is described 1 Pet. 
ii. 2, ‘spiritual guileless milk,” which can 
only be longed for by those who have put 
away all malice, guile, hypocrisy, envies, and 
evil speaking ; and the steps of this growth are 
marked 2 Pet. i. s—7, and there we are told 
that the result shall be a progress toward full 
‘knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.” 

and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour 
Jesus Christ} Here he calls Jesus not only 
Lord (as in i. 8), but Saviour also, this being 
the doctrine for which from the outset he has 
been contending, and which the false teachers, 
some in one way, some in another, denied. 
Jesus is the Saviour; men through His pro- 
mises may become partakers of the divine 
nature, and may enter into the eternal king- 
dom. Knowledge of Him would help men 
to escape the defilements of the world, that 
they may be found of Him, at His coming 
in the day of the Lord, without spot and 
blameless. This is what the Epistle teaches 
from the beginning to the end. 

To him be the glory both now and for ever. 
Amen] The glory for all the gracious gifts 
and helps which could come from none but 
God, therefore to Him be that eternal glory 
which belongs to God alone. 

for ever] is literally “‘into the day of 
eternity,” ze. not only in time be the glory 
given to Christ, but also when time shall be 
no more, When that day of eternity comes 
there shall be no night to succeed it, and so 
the glory will be, like the day, eternal. 


267 


1 A ae ee 


. fee = 
- ote A | , ‘ . si 
‘ ‘ j 


ity. cud) fis? | Ba aetwl uit Ger wets 












te 198) toe deat 
Se ote Shia 


7 % 
“r | 7 e _ SS 


re 
; vi} Hath oy 


3 ol ano ee 
‘ 4 Sree Lies bal . 


ea; 


. 
: 4 
vr 
4 : 
4% 
? 
is ne a 
2 wi 
To . ae: 
yy Uy viThCy 
, & & 
' ‘ 
moa VS ube 
| > 4 = 
s < vs : . 
" rj 
7” ty 
z ti 
4 i 
7 | Tew 
ME OFE 
vol iy 
rd teie 4 ald 
J ; ik orks SONI CUnge 
alig>. aed aved oan 
: iota“ fous. base ct. ail) “ele 
<aertiesls Direra comet Aled ond 
“> ~y0ctaeG wow) ail’ (esi iiee al oe ea 
4 . 6 ¢ in : 7 4} 
‘A ; OF led Ite teal giptenes Biegler eating 
ad i | 0 


ap eb j . ie “te Fo ey ettot beh eter opt) cena a 
; : git at : ; tasthetegt: hue tempeh silt thon : 
avait eibeel, ho. afte mpalnitesr, add 


mere PIRS® EPISTLE OF ST JOHN. 


ACTA S. BAITHENEI. 
Die Nona Junii. 


““His quoque adjiciendum est testimonium ipsius sancti Columbe de eo: dicebat 
erim, quod Baithinus alumnus suus, ac Joannes Evangelista alumnus Christi, in mmocentia 
simcerissima, et in simplicitate prudentissima, atque in disciplina rigoris perfectorum operum 
non dissimile (sic) fuerunt®.” 

(Ex codice membraneo Salmanticensi {formerly preserved at Salamanca; but 
now in the Burgundian Library at Brussels].) 


Dans une hymne des bords du Rhin on chantait 4 S. Jean: 


Jesu cum recubuisti 
Supra pectus; ebibisti 
Dicta evangelica. 
A Venise on lui disait : 
Tu sopr’ el sacro pecto se discerno 
Di Jhesu possando ‘1 tesor gustasti 
De gran secreti, che son nel ciel superno. 
(Baunard, ‘ L’Apotre Saint Jean,’ p. 116.) 


Occurrit mihi Epistola beati Joannis; ut cujus Evangelium paululum intermisimus, ejus 
Epistolam tractando ab eo non recedamus; presertim quia in ipsa Epistola satis duld 
omnibus quibus sanum est palatum cordis ubi sapiat panis Dei, et satis memorabili in sancta 
Ecclesia Dei, maximé charitas commendatur.—Locutus est multa et propé omnia de charitate. 
Qui habet in se unde audiat, necesse est gaudeat ad quod audit. Sic enim illi erit lectic 
ista, tanquam oleum in flammé; si est ibi quod nutriatur nutritur, et crescit, et permanet. 
Item quibusdam sic esse debet, tanquam flamma ad fomitem; ut si non ardebat, accedente 
sermone accendatur. In quibusdam enim nutritur quod est, in quibusdam accenditur si 
deest ; ut omnes in una charitate gaudeamus....... 


Jam ipsum audiamus. 
‘In Epist. Joann. ad Parthos Tractatus.’—Prologus. 
(S. August. ‘Opp.’ Tom. mI. P. 2. 1978. Edit. Migne.) 


1 A Bishop of Derry and Raphoe may be pardoned for preserving in connection with a saint 
who was a native of the Diocese of Raphoe, and whose name is still preserved in the Church and 
Parish of Taughboyne (Baethin’s House), this pregnant sentence of the famous Abbot whose name 
is so closely associated with Derry.—It seems to the writer that the three great characteristics of 
St John as manifested in his Epistles are grasped with rare practical precision by St Columba— 
transparent innocence; the straightforward penetrating simplicity inseparable from the profoundest 
Christian thought ; and the unceasing aspiration after feréction, which keeps indulgence for others 
and disciplines self with rigorous severity. (‘‘Son exquise pureté, sa pénétrante simplic’k’, som 
amou: de la perfection.” Montalembert. ‘Les Moines d’Occident,’ p. 224.) 







WHOL te AO Area Tee 


24 3H EIAR 2 ATOR 


le : xii eT Mutar Yi ia4 to tad 
olkingeem gitnacd ie eae 


fy eng rhearatt ptiatingsle seep sabe 


aout ta Prbedh Petite tel lt al wort 
: 
: * 
fianf & Eo nina 1 oar ue ubyrtrt wb 
: iielead iron “et vii 
4 ” M ye 


e F 
re ipa y ve + “ie ur i 

+e peu ele 4 uemh Kj 
wit bers ; revor rumg. wl 


q ! es oP 7 
' 
u 4 cite nw ? ae 
7 Hie Oe GE 
; 3 Zee} 52 
yes 
é 
} 
wei 
“Ff oxo 
; ving Sth) ri ~htest Lip eres Op are 
te. abd} seseoel aah 
: 7 4 » woe C4 abtieel | ae ped 
{i 90) 4) (oer 4 AL ie eee 
shes é weqenty I sihtjs ae eye te 
* x ,. pt een) Spat Geese ot ae 


ave tx 02716 NOME PRs tetaeces fees ees: tenet F Betpals 
mg, ,ALA yor ’ ” AY etthyeae, ainethigtt Te Vee, #0 
; ; nook wal! “godess Tail Gar mag es 


hot G ty N, 


INTRODUCTION. 


I, 


i. Brief notice of St John’s life, in refer- 
ence to his Epistles. 
2. St ‘ohn’s connection with Ephesus 
establishe2 
(a) fiom the first chapters of the Apoca- 
lypse, 
(4) from the epistle of Irenzus to Flori- 
nus, 
(c) from the synodical epistle of Poly- 
crates. 
3. Description of Ephesus. 
Local illustrations of the First Epistle of 
St John—especially of the last verse. 


LU 


Polemical element in the Epistles of St 
John. 
1. This element exists, though often ex- 
aggerated. 
2. Indications of heresies in the Churches 
ot Asia Minor from the New Testament. 
3. Gnosticism—Dualistic and Doketic. 
Three general forms of heresy in Asia Minor: 
(a) of the inte//ect—Cerinthus ; 
6) of the senses—the Nicolaitanes ; 
3 of the imagination—Magic. 
4. Abiding principles enshrined in St 
John’s Epistles in the refutation of local and 
temporary errors. 


Ill. 
1. Close and pervading connection of the 
Gospel and First Epistle of St John. 
Three phenomena to be considered in com- 
paring the two documents: 
(a) Interpenetration, 
(4) Suggestion, 
(c) Circumscription. 
2 his connection inconsistent with a 


i wer biography of St 
John belongs to the Intro- 
duction to his Gospel, where it has 
been fully treated. It is important, 
however, to enter upon the study of 
his Epistles, with certain facts of his 
life present to the memory. 


forgery upon the part of the autnor of the 
Epistle. 

Compared with the so-called Epistle to the 
Laodiceans. 

3. Objections to the discourses of our 
Lord in the Fourth Gospel from the identity 
of their style with that of the writer of this 
Epistle—answered 

(a) upon moral grounds, 

(4) from the different tone and style of 
our Lord’s teaching under different circum- 
stances. 

Considerations from the power of impressing 
their thought and style upon others, shewn by 
writers and teachers—illustrations of this— 
applied to St John. 


IV. 


Alleged faults of St John’s style. 

1. Want of variety—answered. 

2. Want of connection—answered. 

Assurance and sublimity of St John’s style; 
the latter illustrated by Chrysostom. 

The Epistle is the picture of a soul. 


Vis 


1. Summary of the argument—as to 
(a) the authorship of the Epistle (addi- 
tional evidence from the Canon Muratorianus), 
(4) the time and place of writing (addi- 
tional evidence from the Second and Third 
Epistles). 
2. Importance of the Epistle in the con- 
troversy upon the genuineness of the Gospel. 


VI. 

External testimony to the Epistle. 
VII. 

Analysis. 

Conclusion 


The special favour bestowed upon 
St John by his Divine Master might 
have led us to suppose that he must 
have taken an active part in the propa- 
gation of the Gospel. But, in the Acts 
and Apostolic Epistles, St John is almost 
completely overshadowed by others, espe- 
cially by St Peter and by St Paul; he 


272 


is only five times mentioned in these 
books’. 

In the Acts of the Apostles he walks, 
in grave and mysterious silence, beside 
one apparently better fitted to be a 
ploneer—one of readier speech and 
more forward deed. If we contrast 
him with the other great Apostle, St 
Paul, it has been well said that both 
these servants of God seem to preserve, 
with an almost unvarying uniformity, the 
attitude in which they were surprised by 
the «all of grace. St Paul has ever 
soniething of the horseman, speeding on 
to Damascus ; St John is ever resting on 
the bosom of Jesus. 

We naturally enquire how St John was 
employed while other Apostles were tra- 
versing sea and land. 

The sacred legacy bequeathed to him 
from the Cross—the Virgin-Mother given 
to the virgin-soul—must have demanded 
his reverential care. To some it has 
appeared difficult to reconcile the sup- 
position of his residence with her at 
Jerusalem with St Paul’s distinct assertion 
that, upon his visit to that city, after his 
return to Damascus from Arabia, he saw 
none of the Apostles, except Peter and 
James the Lord’s brother*. But, as St 
John was certainly at Jerusalem during 
the second visit of St Paul’, his previous 
absence may have been temporary‘. It 
has been conjectured that he returned 
to Galilee until after the destruction of 
Jerusalem. In that case St John would 
have left the Holy Land about a.p. 67. 

The undying tradition of the Church 
that St John lived on far in the first 
century of the Christian Era, probably te 
its very close, possibly some two years 
later (A.D. 102)—after all the other 
Apostles had entered into their rest—is 
certainly quite in accordance with the 
tone of some words of Jesus preserved 
in St John’s Gospel. 


1 Once in the list of the Apostles, Acts i. 13, 
three times in conjunction with St Peter, Acts iii. 
4; iv. 13, Vili. 14. Ovce, again, he is referred to 
by St Paul, in the same breath with James and 
Cephas, as universally admitted to be among 
the chief pillars of the Church, Gal. ii. 9. This 
is the first and last occasion where St John is 
recorded to have come into personal relation 
with St Paul. 

2 Gal. i. 19. 3 Gal. ii 

“ There is, however, no trace of St John’s 

wesence at Jerusalem on the occasion of St 
aul’s last voyage, A.D. 60. (Acts xxi. 17 sqq-) 


INTRODUCTION TO 


The incident of the miraculous draught 
of fishes after the Resurrection’ has not 
merely a symbolical but a prophetical 
significance. St John did not, like 
St Peter, cast himself into the sea, whose 
waters are peoples and tongues. His life- 
work might rather be described by say- 
ing that he ‘abode®’ in the bark of the 
Church. The action of St Peter (John 
xxi. 7) might find its interpretation in 
an energetic mission to the islands 
of the sea; the words about John ad- 
dressed by Jesus to Peter (John xxi. 22) 
might be more suitable to the quiet life 
of one who bore the name of John 
in later days—the English priest and 
poet, Fohn Keble, “abiding” in the 
parish where his body rests. The first 
incident may indicate the young impulse 
of elastic life with which St Peter threw 
the Gospel net at Pentecost, or flung 
himself forward into the sea of humanity 
as a missionary of the Cross. One single 
word in the question of Jesus (v. 22) 
compresses a whole biography of blessed 
uneventful years ; and well denotes the 
work of the old man, “adiding” in the 
Church, even to the close of the first 
century, and helping to draw the net, 
filled with fishes, safely to the shore®*. 

2. Until recent times, it would scarcely 
have occurred to any ordinary writer to 
do much more than indicate some of the 
many ancient writers* who connect the 
later years of St John’s prolonged life 
with the city of Ephesus. It was un- 
hesitatingly believed that the Apostle 
found his way to Asia Minor, and died 
there at a very advanced age. Indeed, 
avery singular legend was associated with 
his grave at Ephesus®. The most de- 


1 John xxi. 1—14. 

2 étwvvves ceauTov...uévew, VY. 18—22. It is 
worth while to notice Bossuet’s admirably close 
translation of the three last words of v. 183—** Toi 
—suis-moi.” 

3 See note on the accordance with this view in 
the tone of 3 John, vw. 7, 8. 

4 Especially Irenzeus, ‘adv. Heer.’ 11. 1, 33 
Eusebius, ‘H. E.’ v. 24, III. 24. 31, V. 183 
Hieron., ‘ Epist. ad Galat.’ III. ro. 

5 The story which represents St John as actu- 
ally alive in his Ephesian tomb, and the earth as 
heaving with his slumber, is related (as ‘in qui- 
busdam Scripturis, guamvis Apocryphis”) by 
St Augustine. ‘Tractat. 124 in Evang. Joann.’ 
The whole subject is discussed with t learn- 
ing and completeness by the late Dr Mill. ‘ Five 
Sermons on the Nature of Christianity.’ Note B, 


PP. 147—149- 


THE, FIRST EPISTLE: OF JOHN. 


structive critics—even those who dis- 
believed in the authenticity of the Gospel, 
of the Epistles, of the Apocalypse—ac- 
quiesced in the universal tradition which 
gave to Ephesus the honour of a length- 
ened residence of St John’. Keim ap- 
pears to have first raised any serious 
question upon the subject*. His view is 
based upon the conjecture that John 
‘the Elder’ is confounded with St John 
the Apostle, and that in what is related 
by ancient writers the first is confused 
with the second. The same hypothesis 
has been still more recently supported 
by Scholten*. The answer to this ex- 
aggerated scepticism—which even M. 
Renan considers an instance of “the 
excessive spirit of negation which has 
come into the Protestant liberal school 
in the last 25 years”—seems to rest 
upon three evidences of undeniable 
solidity. 

(a) The first of these is contained in 
the earlier chapters of the book of the 
Revelation. 

These chapters — whatever view be 
taken of the authenticity and genuineness 
of the Apocalypse, and to whatever author 
it is assigned—form an argument of 
overwhelming weight for the Apostle’s 
connection, not only with Asia Minor, 
but with its Metropolis. If Scholten’s 
hypothesis be correct, the Christians of 
Ephesus and of the other Churches ad- 

1 So certain, indeed, did this seem to Nean- 
der, that he applies it to solve the mystery (for 
him) of the upgrowth of episcopacy. Neander 
writes from his point of view—“‘‘ the constitution 
of the Church of Asia Minor in the time of Poly- 
carp is different from the time of Paul. We are 
forced to suppose a powerful infiuence at work.” 
Hence the modern fashion of attributing diocesam 
episcopacy exclusively to St ohn, and styling 
it with some German scholars ‘‘the Johannic 
system.” Yet we find episcopacy not only in 
the Churches of Asia Minor in the A ypse 
or in the days of Polycarp. St James the Less 
presides over the Church at Jerusalem. St Paul, 
“called to diffuse himself over the whole world,” 
will have Titus remain at Crete, Timothy at 
Ephesus (1 Tim. i. 3; Titusi. 5). It is not of 
course intended to deny the important part 
which St John played in the organization of the 
Church. ‘‘ Habemus et Joannis alumnas Eccle- 
sias.. -ordo Episcoporum, ad originem recensus, 
in Joannem stabit auctorem.” Tertullian, ‘adv. 

7 IV. 
2 ‘Vie a Jésus,’ pp. 161 — 167 (1867). 


Tom. Il. pp. 41—45, 477 (1872). 
~ “De Ap. Johann. in Klein-Asien.’ Cf. Holtz- 
mann, ‘Kritik der Eph. und Kolosserbriefe,’ 


PP- 314—324- 
New Test—Vot. IV. 


273 


dressed in the Apocalyptic Epistles must 
have perfectly well known that St John 
had never been in Asia Minor. But it 
would have been palpably absurd to sup- 
pose that these Churches would have at- 
tached the slightest importance to the 
counsels or warnings of a writer who 
addressing them authoritatively spoke of 
John as an exile at Patmos’, while yet 
he must have been aware that they, 
beyond any other Christians in the 
world, were certain that the Apostle 
had never sojourned in those regions 
at all. If the wmiter of the Revela- . 
tion were not St John, it must at least 
have been some one who had absolute 
assurance of St John’s connection with 
Asia Minor and of his exile to Patmos. 
But Patmos ieads us irresistibly to 
Ephesus. That little island was scarcely 
visited except by voyagers on the way 
from Ephesus to Rome, and from Rome 
to Ephesus. It was one resting-place for 
the night, on the system of short sails 
between the two cities. The tone of the 
whole of the three opening chapters of 
the Apocalypse i is that of a metropolitan 
of the Asian Church ; and Patmos may 
almost be said to face Ephesus and points 
towards it*. 

(6) The second evidence is that ot 
Irenzus. It is unnecessary to quote at 
length one of the best-known pieces of 
early Christian literature—the fragment of 
the Epistle of Irenzus to Florinus, pre- 
served by Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical 
History. Irenzus in mentioning the so- 
journ of St John in Asia Minor appeals 
to no dim tradition. He has a clear 
recollection of Polycarp whom he re- 
membered in his youth—‘ where he sat 
to talk, his way, his mode of life, his ap- 
pearance...how he used to tell of his 


1 Rev. i. 9. 

2 “*The only way of gettiny to Patmos has 
remained the same since the days of St John. 
One must engage at Mycone, the most easterly 
of the Cyclades, or at Scala Nova, the port of 
Ephesus, a little vessel, decked well or ill, and 
manned by four or five sailors. We embarked 
boldly with the chances of a passage under sail, 
which might last twelve hours at least, perhaps 
indefinitely longer. We set out from Mycone at 
midnight ; we were at Patmos the next day just 
before sunset.” This extract is from a delight- 
fully vivid paper which has come into the wri- 
ter’s possession. (‘Une visite 4 Patmos,’ par 
M. de Julleville. ‘Revue des cours littéraires.” 
Mars 2, 1867.) 


274 


intimacy with John, and with the others 
who had seen the Lord'.” The ingenious 
attempt of Scholten to invalidate the 
authority of the letter by making it out 
to be apocryphal is unavailing, as 
Irenzeus uses almost the same language 
in another of his writings’. 

(c) The third witness is that of Poly- 
crates. 

We still possess a fragment of a sy- 
nodical epistle written by Polycrates, 
Bishop of Ephesus, to Victor and the 
Roman Church about the close of the 
second century. Polycrates wrote with 
the other Bishops of Asia in favour of 
the celebration of Easter at the same 
time with the Jews decimaguarté luna’. 
Polycrates speaks of the mighty ashes 
which sleep in Asia* to awaken at the ad- 
vent of the Lord, when He shall come 
with glory from the heavens, and raise up 
all His saints. He mentions specially 
Philip (of the number of the twelve), 
who sleeps in Hierapolis ; and his two 
daughters who grew old in their virginity ; 
and another daughter of his, having 
served the Church in the Holy Spirit, 
who taketh her rest in Ephesus—“ yea, 
and John, moreover, who reclined upon 
the breast of the Lord, who was 


1 Ap. Euseb. ‘ Hist. Eccles.’ v. 90. 
2*Ezeira "Iwavvys xal abros é&€dwxe 7d evay- 
. yor, ev "Edéo@ ris ’Aclas diarpiBwv. ‘ Adv. 
Her.’ Lib. 111. ch. i. In Lib, 111. ch. iii., he is 
said to have lived at Ephesus till Trajan’s time. 
[Lat. Vers.] Scholten’s objection is mainly based 
upon the extraordinary longevity which this nar- 
rative would imply in three persons successively 
—in St John, in Polycarp, in Irenzus. But St 
John need not have died until A.D. 96—98 
(the last seems to be the date assigned by 
S. Jerome, ‘Cat.’ 1x.), possibly three or four 
years later, and Irenzeus wrote A-D. 180. The 
author of this Introduction can testify that 
within the last few years, in or near the city 
where he is now writing, several individuals 
were alive who distinctly remembered a re- 
markable personage—a Bishop—who died in 
1802. One of these persons—in this respect 
something like Polycarp—was able to point out 
a walk which the Bishop in question had paced 
up and down, and remembered all that the 
Bishop had said to him upon one occasion. 
The writer is also well acquainted with a dis- 
tinguished physician, still alive (1881), and not 
in very advanced years, who at an early period 
of his career was for a short time much thrown 
with Mr Alexander Knox. But Mr Knox was 
a personal disciple of John Wesley, and John 
Wesley died in 1791. 
§ S. Hieron. ‘ Lib. de Vir. Illust.’ XLv. 
4 peydda croxeta Kexolunrat. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


a High Priest, bearing the plate of 
pure gold’, and martyr, and teacher. 
He ‘steepeth in Ephesus’” It is un- 
necessary to enter upon the controversy 
which has been waged as to the literal or 
metaphorical interpretation of St John’s 
wearing “the plate of gold*.” Polycrates 
at all events states that the Apostle had 
the threefold glory of being high priest, 
martyr, and doctor, and that he sleeps in 
Ephesus *. 

It is conceived that evidence such as 
this—local and unequivocal as it is— 
renders the connection of St John with 
Asia Minor and Ephesus one of the best 
attested facts of early Christian antiquity *. 

3. Some description of the great city 
thus associated with the ministry of St 
John, is not only demanded by a craving 
of the modern spirit, but adds vividness 
to our appreciation of St John’s writings. 

The importance of Ephesus is abun- 
dantly attested. For Pliny it is “the 
light of Asia.” By Seneca it is compared 


1 The 78 (7éradov, LXX.) of Exod. xxviii. 
36, xxxix. 30—lepeds 7d méradov mepopexws, 
translated by S. Jerome—fontifex eus (sc. 
Domini) aurcam laminam in fronte habens. 
The fragment of Polycrates will be fouud in 
Routh, ‘ Relig. Sac.’ 11. 13. 36. 

2 The same expression is used also in reference 
to James, brother of the Lord, first Bishop of 
Jerusalem (Epiphan. ‘in Heres.’ LXXVIII.); and 
to St Mark the Evangelist—(of the last for a 
different reason, because supposed to be of the 
lineage of Aaron, Col. iv. ro; cf. Acts iv. 36. 
‘Passio S. Marc.’ quoted by Valesius, apud 
Routh, «¢ supra.) Dr Routh adopts the meta- 
phorical interpretation. Cotta’s monograph on 
the subject is said to be exhaustive. (‘De 
Lamine Pontif. App. Joann. Jacob. et Marci,’ 
Tubing. 1754.) 

3 To the proofs of the connection of St John’s 
writings with Asia Minor may now be added the 
mode of reckoning time in St John’s Gospel. Cf. 
Bishop Jacobson’s remarks on ‘ Martyrium S. 
Polycarpi,’ XxXI. and the note in this commen- 
tary on Johniv. 6. That the Asiatic computa- 
tion of hours was adopted by St John is esta- 
blished by Bishop Wordsworth on John iv. 6, 
and with admirable clearness and fulness by Mr 
McClellan on John xix. 14. (‘The New Testa- 
ment,’ pp. 737—743-) Itis a result of the two 
different computations of the hours, Jewish and 
Asiatic (which the writer omitted to mention on 
1 Thess. ii. 9, iii. 10; cf. Acts xxvi. 7, where 
‘‘night and day” is probably the true reading) 
that St Paul naturally speaks of ‘‘night and 
day” (1 Tim. v. 5; 2 Tim. i. 3); St John of 
*‘day and night” (Rev. iv. 8, vii. 15, xii. 10, 
xiv. II, XX. Io). 

* Considerable use has been made in this 
pra of Renan, ‘L’Antechrist,’ pp. 559— 
562. 


THE FIRST: EPISTLE, OF; JOHN. 


to Alexandria. Ona coin of Vespasian 
it is spoken of as “ the chief city of Asia.” 
“Ephesus,” writes Lampe, “‘as the me- 
tropolis of Asia was a noble emporium, 
well adapted for commerce; on the coast 
of Asia, in the heart of the Mediter- 
ranean—central to Asia, Africa, Europe— 
whence the passage was easy to Syria 
and Egypt, and so to Greece and Italy'.” 

The temple of Diana was the central 
wonder of Ephesus. After rising on seven 
different occasions from its ruins it was 
finally destroyed by the Goths (a.D. 248). 
As it stood in the days of St John, it “had 
been reared by the arts of Greece and 
the wealth of Asia.” It was supported 
by 127 marble columns of the Ionic 
order, each sixty feet high, each the gift 
of anation or ofa monarch. The splendid 
altar was adorned with the sculptures of 
Praxiteles, the subjects being chosen with 
especial reference to the popular legend 
of the place —the birth of Latona’s 
children; the concealment of Phoebus 
after the slaughter of the Cyclops; the 
clemency of Dionysus to the Amazons. 
The Ephesians gloried in their poetical 
mythology. The spirit of savage fanati- 
cism which raised the cry ‘ great is Diana 
of the Ephesians,’ and which niade ‘the 
city of the Ephesians the temple-keeper 
of the great Artemis, and of the image 
which fell down from Zeus*,’ is exactly 
what might be expected from the almost 
contemporary records of classical anti- 
quity. To Tiberius the Ephesians asserted 
with hard literalism and dogmatic bigotry 
that “it was a vulgar delusion to suppose 
that Artemis and Phoebus were born at 
Delos. Theirs was the Cenchrean river, 
theirs the Ortygian grove, where Latona, 
leaning upon an olive tree which was still 
standing, had given birth to those heavenly 
twins in the grove which was consecrated 
by their express command. There had 
Phoebus escaped the wrath of Zeus for 
killing the Cyclops; there Father Liber 


had spared the Amazons*.” These sub- 


1 See the quotations in Hengstenberg ‘on 
S. John’s Gospel,’ Vol. 1. ad init. 

2 Acts xix. 34, 35. 

* Tacit. ‘Annal,’ 111. 61. “‘ Ortygia, a little 
above the sea, a glorious grove with trees of 
every kind, especially cypress. The river Cen- 
chrea flows through it, where Latona washed. 
They shew the shrine in which the swaddling 
clcthes are kept, and the olive-tree by which 
they said the goddess first rested, when her 


275 


jects appear again and again upon the 
coins of Ephesus, which are stamped with 
the images and symbols of Artemis and 
Phoebus, of the river Cenchrea, of the 
Amazons, of the four temples’. The 
great temple was 220 years in building. 
It was erected upon the marshes, as 
being semewhat less lable to entire de- 
struction by the earthquakes so common 
in that fatal soil. That the foundations 
might not be too fluid for solidity of super- 
structure, a sort of frame was formed of 
coal tramped in and of tight-rammed wool 
sacks*. Ctesiphon is named as the archi- 
tect by Strabo and Pliny. Beside the 
miracles of Christian architecture, indeed, 
the Ephesian temple would have been 
almost dwarfed into insignificance. Its 
length was 425 feet, while St Paul’s is 
500 and St Peter’s 620 feet, and the arms 
of the Christian cross require an ampli- 
tude and expansion far beyond that of 
the oblong pagan shrine. The epistylion 
excited the astonishment of beholders. 
How was that enormous mass lifted to 
such a stupendous elevation? It was 
effected by an ingenious device. Sacks 
filled with sand were heaped up until 
they rose higher than the columns. Then 
the lower sacks were gradually emptied, 
that the work might settle down in its 
bed. The erection of the structure was 
difficult. The architect’s resources and 
ingenuity were taxed to the utmost. At 
last he seemed to be baffled, and con- 
templated suicide. Wearied and worn 
out he fell asleep; and lo! in the night 
the present goddess appeared to him in 
a vision, and bid her servant live and not 
die, for she herself had taken order that 
the stones should settle into their places. 
And it was so when day dawned ; for the 
whole mass was brought into place by its 
own weight’. 

As the modern reader peruses the nar- 
ratives of travellers, his fancy catches at 
some illustrations of the writings of St 
John. One recent writer tells us how he 
visited the marshy and verdant plain 
covered with the remains of Ephesus. 
The nature of the vegetation, the 
travail was past.” Strabo, ‘ Geograph.’ XIV. p. 
641. Cf. Callimachus, ‘in Del.’ 11. 209; Ovid, 
‘Metam.’ vi. 338. 

1 Of Artemis, Phoebus, Dionysus, Heracles. 
Eckhel, ‘De Numm.’ 11. 512. 


2S. August. ‘De Civ. D.’ xxxI. 4. 
3 Plin. ‘ Nat. Hist.’ Lib. XxXvVI. 21. 


$2 


276 


flocks which grazed in the deep grass, 
the grandeur of the ruins, the extent, the 
solitude, the broken arches of the long 
aqueduct, recalled irresistibly the sombre 
majesty of the Roman Campagna. While 
examining the semi-circle of the theatre, 
the traveller was struck by the aspect of 
the sky, and its strange effect upon the 
landscape. ‘Towards the mountain the 
sky was grey and rainy; overhead copper- 
coloured clouds passed over clouds of 
spectral whiteness. At intervals pale 
gleams illuminated the immense ruins, 
the severe outline of the hills, the desert 
plain. Then all was shadowy—until look- 
ing seaward the sky was of brilliant 
azure, and the Ionian light began to grow 
pure and full’. Was the Apostle thinking 
of some effect like this when he wrote— 
“because the darkness (or shadow) is 
drifting by, and the Very light now en- 
lighteneth*”? “In the sides of Mount 
Preon,” saysthe writer lately quoted, “gape 
two tenantless grottoes. As we go down 
into their depths; as our eyes are lifted 
up to the black and yellow rocks only 
half-lighted by a mysterious gleam ; as we 
ascend to the day again by a scarped path 
in the cliff, through masses which seem to 
have been piled there by some suddenly 
interrupted convulsion, we are tempted 
to think that the eagle of the Revelation 
may have sometimes lingered in the hol- 
low rock, and have had in these truly 
Apocalyptic caverns a foretaste of the 
terrible visions of Patmos*.” All this 
may be fanciful. What seems to be as 
certain as almost any historical fact of 
the kind is that amidst these very scenes 
the Apostle St John found Christians to 
teach, and the very forms of error 
which he was divinely trained to en- 
counter and overthrow. There were 
numerous churches in that quarter, 
founded by St Paul during his third 
- Missionary journey, A.D. 55—58. From 
the well-known passage in Pliny we 
learn that Christians abounded in the 
province of Bithynia. There, in Ephesus, 
St John remained for many years, the in- 
heritor, the completer, the organiser of 
the work whose foundation had been so 


1j. G. Ampére, ‘La Gréce, Rome, et 
ae Course en Asie Mineure,’ pp. 357 
— 362. 

? 1 Johnii. 8. See noie. 


® Ampére, uf supra. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


deeply laid by St Paul‘. “At the foot of 
the shrine of Diana of the Ephesians”— 
writes an eloquent historian of the Church 
—“under a sky blazing with light: man 
atmosphere loaded with brilliant vapours; 
to minds enamoured of mystic initiations, 
and for the purpose of refuting heresies 
which naturally sprung from a soil so 
teeming, he developes, in a language 
full of grandeur, the sublime simplicity 
of Christian Metaphysics*.” 

One local allusion at least can scarcely 
be fanciful. Let any student of the First 
Epistle of St John read its six closing 
words’ in the light of Acts xix. 34, 35, 
and of the passages cited above from 
Strabo and Tacitus, and he will better 
see their force. The Epistle closes with 
a shudder—“‘the idols.” 


ie 


1. Commentators are, perhaps, respon- 
sible for having excited prejudice against 
the Epistle now before us by exaggerating 
the extent of its polemical element. When 
the student sees the formidable list of 
heresies to which St John refers, or is 
supposed to refer, he may be tempted to 
exclaim—‘“ This is an obsolete chapter in 
the history of human error. These theo- 
logical scare-crows are nothing to us now. 
The refutation of errors, which to us in 
the 19th century have the air of coming 
from some treatise on lunacy, has little 
meaning in our day*.” Now we do not 
deny the polemical purpose of parts of 
this Epistle, as will be seen. But St John 
does not confine himself to the eccentric 
and fortuitous forms of temporary error. 
He deals with its essential and permanent 
substance. Had the Apostle been hunt- 
ing down local heretics in every verse, 
Gospel and Epistle alike would have be- 
come obsolete with their overthrow. But 
the Antichrists of whom he tells us that 


“they are come, have come into being®,” 


1 Acts xix., xx. For the extension of St Paul’s 
influence in Asia Minor during the three years 
when he made Ephesus his headquarters, see Acts 
xix. 10, and the language of Demetrius, iid. 26. 

2 De Broglie, ‘ Histoire,’ I. 80. 

3 rexvia, puddtate davrods dd riv e€ldddwv. 
1 John v. 21. 

4 A perfect repertory of all that is known 
about these strange heresies will be found in 
Burton, ‘Bampton Lectures,’ Lecture V1. Vol. IIl., 
pp. 157—191, and Notes 68—86, pp. 464—527. 

5 yeybvacw, 1 John ii. 18. 


THE FIRST EPISTLE: OF JOHN. 


were the exponents, in that age, of errors 
which will appear, again and again, in 
other shapes, until the last dark and 
dreadful spirit shall arrive, whose advent 
is spoken of by the same solemn word as 
the Saviour’s own’. While we hold with 
Mosheim that Hammond has exceeded 
all bounds in his passion for “ detecting 
Gnostics where there are none” in almost 
every verse of this Epistle, it is also cer- 
tain that it contains an important polemical 
element. In it St John furnished the 
Church with infallible guidance against 
forms of error, which might have proved 
fatal to her very existence. 

2. It is perfectly certain that the pro- 
phetic words addressed by St Paul to the 
elders of the Church of Ephesus*, many 
years before the issue of St John’s Epistles, 
had received ample fulfilment. Peculiar 
germs of speculative error were in the 
teeming air of Asia Minor, which were 
destined to find an appropriate zzdus in 
the Church herself. A few years later 
(A.D. 65—66) St Paul deems it necessary 
to warn Timothy, as Bishop of Ephesus, 
against the ‘ polemics’ or ‘ antitheses’ of 
‘the gnosis that is falsely so called*.’ 
Elsewhere, in the same Epistle, he speaks 
of ‘myths and genealogies’—not Jewish 
‘stemmata,’ but systems of divine po- 
tencies, which the gnosticsand gnosticising 
Rabbis loved to call gos, drawn out in 
what seemed lines of unending compli- 
cation and tenuity*. The ‘genealogies’ 
are assuredly those of the @oms, the suc- 
cessive emanations of existences from the 
bosom of the Infinite. The deceptive 
wisdom is that of the gvosis. St Paul sig- 
nalized this error; St John confuted it. 

3. This was, probably, one of the 
gravest dangers which Chnistianity has had 
to undergo. Gnosticism was not a partial, 
it was, so to speak, a Catholic heresy. 
Its object was to take the Christian creed; 
to transform, and apparently sfzrztualize 
it; to elevate the fazth into a philosophy 
—a knowledge—and then to substitute this 
knowledge for the faith, concealing the 


1 "Avrixpurros Epxerat, tbid. 

3 Acts xx. 30. 

5 dvribéces ris yevdwripov yricews, 1 Tim. 
vi. 20. 

4 pbOos Kal yeveadoylas dmepavTos, t Tim. i. 
43; Buddeus, ‘Introd. et Hist. Phil. Heb.’ 
Pp- 336—347. Irenzus quotes 1 Tim. i. 4, 

explains the yeveaXoyiats by the Gnostic 
@ons, ‘adv. Her.’ t. Pref. 


277 


deception by retaining the terminology 
of the Gospel. Gnosticism was eclectic. 
On the side of Greece and Hellenic 
Egypt, Platonism, Stoicism, and Pythago- 
reanism—on the side of Persia and India, 
Parseeism and a pantheistic cosmogony 
supplied it with materials. 

The two most important features of 
this singular system were its dualistic and 
doketic aspects. Dualism asserted that 
the good and the evil of creation pro- 
ceeded from two principles, one good, 
the other evil,—the one light, the 
other darkness’. But sférit was the 
good influence, co-extensive with light. 
Matter was the power of evil, whose 
home is the realm of darkness. A mind 
thoroughly imbued with these ideas could 
only look at the dogma of the Incarnation 
from one point of view. The Christian 
Church taught that the ‘Word was made 
Flesh.” But how could the Word of 
Light be hypostatically united to a true 
material body, plunged in the darkened 
world of matter? Christ, indeed, had 
been seen on the earth. But the human. 
flesh which was seen was only apparent. 
Redemption was a spectral drama played 
out by unsubstantial shadows. A shadow 
was nailed in appearance to an apparent 
cross*.’ Philosophical dualism was by a 


1 S. John probably refers to this, 1 John i. 5. 
Cf. Gospel i. 5. 

2 It is impossible to mistake the exuberant 
fulness of language, so unusual with St John, in 
1 Johni. 1, 2, 3, the emphatic I. X. & capxi 
é\ndvObra, 1 John iv. 2, épxduevov év capki, 
2 John 7, the reference to the bluod and 
water from the veal Body, 1 John v. 6. A 
little later, the same region was still haunted 
by these shadowy dreamers. Ignatius writes 
with impassioned energy to the Trallians of 
Christ who ‘‘was ¢rudy born, ate and drank; 
truly suffered: truly was crucified and died: 
truly rose”—then playing upon their name, 
‘“Aéyovow 7d doxety memovbévat avtov avrol 
ovres 7d Soxetv’ (‘Epist. ad Trall.’ 1x. x). In 
the Epistle to the Church of Smyrna we find 
this form of error stigmatised as not confessing 
that ‘‘ Jesus bore real human flesh” (uy duodo- 
yav atrov capxogbpov). This heresy upon the 
Incarnation became, as it was logically bound 
to be, anti-sacramental. Doketic Christians 
ceased to observe the Eucharist (‘Epist. ad 
Smym.’ v—vul). This necessary logical con- 
clusion of Doketism lends additional force to 
the view of 1 John v. 8, advocated in the notes 
upon that place, and so clearly put in the para- 
phrase of a great Calvinistic commentator. ‘‘ St 
John means not only that water and that blood 
which flowed once for all from the side of 
Christ, and once for all gave their witness to 


278 


logical necessity theological doketism, 
anti-dogmatic and anti-sacramental. 

The errors with which St John was 
immediately concerned may be looked 
upon as heresy of the intellect, heresy of 
the senses, heresy of the imagination’. 

(a) The heresy with which St John had 
to deal in its zfe//ectual forms is specially 
connected with t.e name of Cerinthus. 
For Carpocrates, probably, lived some- 
what later than Cerinthus, and approached 
the problems of the day from a different 
and bitterly anti-Judaistic point of view. 
What is known of Cerinthus may be best 
told in the clear language of Dean Mansel. 

“The otherform of heresy,subsequently 
known as the Ebionite *, appears towards 
the close of the first century in the person 
of Cerinthus, a man of Jewish descent? 
and educated at Alexandria, the head- 
quarters of that philosophy from which 
his corruption of Christianity would most 
naturally emanate. The date of his no- 
toriety as a teacher may be inferred with 
tolerable certainty from the well-known 
anecdote recorded by Irenzeus on the 
authority of Polycarp, that St John, 


Him upon earth—but the water of Baptism, 
and the Supper of the Lord (which are Sacraments 
of the blood shed upon the cross), which will 
be witnesses to Him even to the end of the 
world,” (Piscat. ‘Anal. Log. vit. Epp. Cathol.’ 
p. 368. Doketism lingered on to a late date. 
The Homilies of Chrysostom upon St John 
were preached about dawn twicea week to earn- 
est Christians. Chrysostom would have been 
very unlikely to select any heresy for refutation 
which was not popular and prevalent, a question 
ofthe day. But in one place he shews his hearers 
how to deal with those heretics who said that 
‘all about the Incarnation was putative—a 
phantasy, a personation, an idea” (67t gavracla 
Tis qv Kal UdKpiots Kal Urdvoa TA THS olkovoulas 
amavra. S. Chrysost. ‘In Joan. Homil.’ x1. 2, 
Tom. VIII. 79, edit. Migne). 

1 This classification has been borrowed from 
M. Baunard. 

? It is not absolutely certain whether any such 
person as Ebion ever existed. The Ebionites 
prided themselves upon the derivation of the 
name of their sect from the Hebrew word for 
poor (j)°4N). Burton, ‘Bampton Lectures,’ 
Works, Vol. 111. 182—183. 

3 His Jewish descent may be inferred from 
the character of his teachings; cf. Burton, ‘B. L.’ 
P- 477- His study in Egypt is asserted by Hip- 
polytus, VII. 33, and by Theodoret, ‘ Her. Fab.’ 
I 3- Cf. Burton, ‘B.L.’ p. 175; Milman, 
‘Hist. of Christianity’ 11. p. 55. Merinthus, 
who is sometimes supposed to be a contempo- 
rary of Cerinthus (Epiphan. ‘ Her.’ xxvitl. 8), 
was probably only a nickname of Cerinthus, 
from pjpivOos, a cord. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


having entered into a bath at Ephesus, 
and finding Cerinthus within, hastened 
out of it with the words, ‘ Let us fly, lest 
the bath should fall while Cerinthus, the 
enemy of the truth, is init’.’ Other, butless 
trustworthy, authorities assign to him a yet 
earlier date. According to Epiphanius, he 
was one of those Judaising disciples who 
censured St Peter after the conversion of 
Cornelius for having eaten with men uncir- 
cumcised, and also one of the multitude 
who raised a tumult against St Paul on 
the charge of having brought Greeks inte 
the temple, and one of the false brethrer 
whom St Paul mentions in the Epistle tc 
the Galatians*. But the narrative of Epi- 
phanius is very confused, and all these 
supposed early allusions to Cerinthus are 
at variance with the statement of Irenzeus, 
who speaks of the Cerinthian heresy as 
much later than that of the Nicolaitanes*. 

“‘ The principal features of the teaching 
of Cerinthus are given in the following 
brief summary by Irenzus, who is fol- 
lowed almost word for word by Hippo- 
lytus. ‘A certain Cerinthus in Asia 
taught that the world was not made by 
the Supreme God, but by a certain power 
altogether separate and at a distance 
from that Sovereign Power which is over 
the universe, and one which is ignorant 
of the God who is over all things. He 
represented Jesus as not having been 
born of a virgin (for this seemed to him 
to be impossible), but as having been the 
son of Joseph and Mary, born after the 
manner of other men, though distinguished 
above all others by justice and prudence 
and wisdom. He taught moreover, that 
after the baptism of Jesus the Christ de- 
scended upon Him in the form of a dove 
from that Sovereign Power which is over 
all things, and that He then announced the 
unknown Father and wrought miracles ; 
but that towards the end (of His ministry) 
the Christ departed again from Jesus, and 
Jesus suffered and rose from the dead 
while the Christ remained impassible as 


a spiritual being*’” 


1 Trenzeus, ‘ Heeres.’ III. 3. 

2 Epiphan. ‘ Her.’ XXVIII. 2—4. Epiphanius 
seems to have confounded St Paul’s visit to Jeru- 
salem in company with Titus, Gal. ii. 2, Acts 
xv. 2, with the later one in company with Tro- 
phimus, Acts xxi. 29. 

3 Trenzus, 111. 11. 1. Cf. Massuet, ‘ Dissert. 
Preev. in Iren.’ I. § 125. 

* Ireneus, I. 25. Cf. Hippolytus, vil. 33. 


THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN. 


The system of Cerinthus at least bore 
its testimony to the central miraculous 
fact of Christianity, though it is difficult 
to see how the resurrection of Jesus 
could be brought into real coherence 
with its first principles. But while his 
Christology was free from the apparently 
almost insane aberration of later Gnosti- 
cism, it is evidently Gnostic’. 

(6) The errors with which St John had 
to deal as moral heresy—heresy of the 
senses—appear to have attained formid- 
able proportions. Our Lord, in His 
letter to the Church of the Ephesians, 
recognizes the existence of the Nico- 
laitanes, and commends that Church for 
its hatred of their deeds*. He also 
speaks of certain in the Church of Per- 
gamos as holding the doctrine of the 


Nicolaitanes, “which thing I hate*.” It 


is unnecessary to enter here upon the 
perplexing controversy as to the leader 
from whom the party took its name— 
to examine whether the word is formed 


’ |‘ The Gnostic Heresies,’ Mansel.— Lecture vii. 
pp. 111—113.] 

1 Tt may be well to supplement the remarks 
in the text by some sentences from Bishop Pear- 
son’s useful summary of the heresies of Asia 
Minor. ‘‘Two principal heresies upon the 
nature of Christ then prevailed, each diametri- 
cally opposed to the other as well as to the 
Catholic faith, One was the heresy of the 
Doketz, which destroyed the verity of the 
Human Nature in Christ; the other was the 
heresy of the Ebionites, who denied the Dzvzne 
Nature and the eternal Generation, and inclined 
to press the observation of the ceremonial law. 
Ancient writers acknowledge these as heresies 
of the first century; all allow that they were 
powerful in the age of Ignatius. Hence Theo- 
doret (Procem.) divided the books of these here- 
tics into two categories. In the first he included 
those who put forward the idea of a second 
Creator, and asserted that the Lord had appeared 
illusively. In the second he placed those who 
maintained that the Lord was merely a man. 
Of the first, Jerome observed (‘ Adv. Luciferian.’ 
XxI.) ‘that while the Apostles yet remained 
upon the earth, while the blood of Christ was 
almost smoking upon the sod of Judzea, some 
asserted that the body of the Lord was a phan- 
tom.” Of the second the same writer remarked 
that ‘St John, at the invitation of the Bishops of 
Asia Minor, wrote his Gospel against Cerinthus 
and other heretics—and especially against the 
dogma of the Ebionites, then rising into exist- 
ence, who asserted that Christ did not exist 
before Mary.’ Epiphanius notes that these here- 
sies were mainly of Asia Minor (@yul 6¢ & 79 
*Aola). ‘Heres.’ Lv.” (Pearson, ‘ Vindic. Ignat.’ 
Il. c. I, p- 351.) 

2 Rev. ii. 6. 

’ Ibid. 15. 


279 


from the name of “ Nicolas, a proselyte 
of Antioch,” one of the seven deacons’ 
become an heresiarch’, or is to be un- 
derstood as the Greek translation of 
Balaam. Nicolaism was plainly a fleshly 
heresy, antinomian upon principle*—a 
sensuality half veiled by Gnostic sym- 
bols. It is evident what an advantage 
such a system must have derived from 
the very sky and soil of Asia Minor. 
There were ons, it was said, who 
actually wished to be served by deeds 
of unspeakable pollution. But in the 
walks of the glorious Ortygian groye, 
by the delightful banks of the Cenchrea 
or Cayster—near the islands which were 
haunted by Aphrodite, under the shadow 
of the Temple of Artemis, beneath that 
burning and voluptuous sky, the way was 
smooth for heresy which travelled with 
the human heart. There were many 
Christians lapsed into this heresy of the 
senses, of whom it might be said that 
““Of sight or sound 
Whatever in that clime he found 
Did to his mind impart 
A kindred impulse, seem’d allied 
To his own powers, and justified 
The workings of his heart. 
Nor less to feed voluptuous thought 
The beatiteous forms of Nature wrought. 
Fair trees and gorgeous flowers. 
The breezes their own languor lent; 
The stars had feelings which they sent 
Into those favour’d bowers 4.” 


The First Epistle of St John sums up 
and represents the great strain of holy 
teaching in the Church of Ephesus, 
which won for it that precious word from 
the lips of the living Christ, tempering 
all the righteous severity of the message 
which was addressed to it—‘“‘ but this thou 
hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the 
Nicolaitanes. which I also hate®.” 

A survey of the sketch given above of 
the system of Cerinthus by Dean Mansel 
will shew how that system would naturally 
lead, if not to Nicolaitan abandonment, 
at least to a fatally lowered line of 
Christian action°—and that precisely in 


1 Acts vi. 5. 

2 So Irenzus, ‘Heres.’ 1.27; Tertull. ‘De 
Preescript.’ 47; S. Hieron. Epist. 1. 

3 Rev. ii. 15. 

4 Wordsworth, ‘Poems of the Imagination,’ 
Ruth Xx1. 

5 Rey. ii. 6. 

6 It is this, rather than absolute profligacy, 
which Ignatius seems to attribute to the appa- 


¢ 
af” 


. Jesus from Christ. 


2380 


the way indicated in the First Epistle of 
St John. The Christology of Cerinthus 
is Gnostic to its very root. The purpose 
of Christ’s coming into the world is not 
the procuring of that redemption “ which 
consists in the remission of sins’,” but 
the illumination of the intellect by a lofty 
philosophy. He is not, indeed, a Re- 
deemer, a fpropitiation*® for the whole 
world, but the teacher of the enlightened 
and initiated few*; and a teacher not of 
righteousness, not of keeping God’s plain 
undeniable commandments, but of specu- 
lative knowledge*. Cerinthus separated 
He would not admit 
any real suffering of the higher being 
who was impassible, or of the lower who 
was indeed a phantom. Sin and atone- 
ment—the nature of the first, the necessity 
of the second—find no place in his philo- 
sophy®. St John therefore defines sin ; 
asserts Christ to be a propitiation; and 
shews the reality of His Death and of the 
sacraments, which are the abiding wit- 
nesses of its existence as a fact and its 
continuance as a power’. 

(c) But heresy in Ephesus also clothed 


‘ itself in the form of oriental Magic. 


Ephesus had become a centre for 


.Magical practices, for incantations and 


evocations, for all which iv cur days might 
be called spiritualism. In the Acts of the 
Apostles “exorcists” and “ practisers of 


_curious arts” areconnected with Ephesus’. 


Magicians came constantly from Asia and 
Persia with new enchantments, and with 
supplies of the strange herb omomi, which 
was supposed to produce a sacred de- 
lirium. Alexandria poured forth a crowd 
of Egyptian diviners. Chaldeans ar- 


‘ rived for the purpose of selling their 


rently Doketic Cerinthian ‘‘heterodox” of the 
Church of Smyrna. “Concerning charity they 
care not—not for the widow—not for the orphan 
—not for the afflicted—not for bond or free— 
fog hungry or thirsty.” (‘ Epist. ad Smyr.’ 
VI. 

1 See note on Col. i. 14. 

2 1 Johnii. 2. 

3 Zoid. Cf. note on Col. i. 28. 

* See the evident references to such a gnosis 

1 John ii. 3, 4, and to false teachers of the 
kind, iii. 7. St John, indeed, does not mention 
Cerinthus or the Nicolaitanes. Throughout the 
epistle he affirms, he never discusses. It is an 
wreck, not an argument. 
® Dorner, ‘Person of Christ, 1. 197. 
© 1 Johniii. 4, 5, ii. 1, 2, v. 8. 
Acts xix. 13—109. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


calculations. Cabalistic papers, called 
“Ephesian letters,” were in repute 
throughout the Roman Empire, ‘or the 
purposes of healing and divination. 
They were written upon the statue of 
Artemis, and carved and engraved upon 
gems in rings. Apollonius of Tyana, the 
Cagliostro of antiquity, was received with 
tumultuous welcome at Ephesus. “No 
artisan,” writes Philostratus, “no man 
of such mean condition who did not 
quit his work to gaze upon Apollonius. 
Some marvelled at his knowledge, some 
at the majesty of his face; some at his 
austere way of living, others at his singular 
garb, most at these altogether.” Re- 
membering that the great diviners of an- 
tiquity—Calchas, Tiresias, Epimenides— 
had devoted a human victim, Apollonius 
hounded on the people to murder a 
poor old beggar, who lived by alms col- 
lected in the streets and upon the steps 
of the temple’. 

What is certain is that over all the 
gaiety and profligacy of Ephesus there 
hung an impression of some mysterious 
awe, of some strange communication with 
the powers of another world. In his 
Epistle to the Ephesians St Paul not 
only refers to the Temple of Artemis’, 
his recognition of the mysteriousness of 
human life, of its perpetual conflict with 
evil intelligences—of the “ prince of the 
power of the air, the spirit now in- 
working in the children of disobedience*” 
—is nowhere so awful or so ample. In 
his Gospel St John records no instance of 
our Lord’s miraculous dispossessions of 
demoniacs, though he recognizes the idea 
of moral and spiritual possession*. The 
omission may have been partly de- 
termined by the false conception of the 
holy Redeemer as a spiritualist or mighty 
magician which might have arisen in 
Ephesus. But St Paul seems to recognize 
the atmosphere of Ephesus as one in 
which the Spirit of God* and the spirits 

1 It would seem to be quite possible that the 
visit of Apollonius to Ephesus may have beer. 
during St John’s residence there. If so, it would 
give a vivid meaning to 1 John ii. g—tJ, iii. 10 
—15. Contrast with Apollonius Peter and 
John with the lame beggar at the “ Beautiful 
gate,” Acts iii. r—8. 

2 Ephes. ii. 2o—22. 

3 Ephes. vi. 12, ii. 2. 

4 John vi. 70, xiii. 2—27. It is recognized 
similarly in the Epistle, 1 John iii. 8. 

5 Ephes. i. 13, 14, iv. 30. 


al 


ERE PRO? SErISTLE (OF; JOHN. 


of evil’ worked with a quickened energy. 
St John’s tone is the exact counterpart 
of this. He does not, indeed, speak of 
supernatural gifts as continuing in the 
Churches of Asia Minor; but he does 
recognize with energy twice over their 
having chrism from Christ, unction from 
the Holy One*, even as St Paul had 
twice referred to the “sealing” of the 
Ephesians—while his warning about the 
spirits contemplates an awful revelation 
of the world of evil intelligences around 
us identical with that which is conveyed 
in the language of the Epistle to the 
Ephesians about the powers of dark- 
ness’. 

Thus we recognize a distinct and im- 
portant polemical element in St John’s 
Epistle*. It is not, indeed, a personal 
element, forno one isnamed. In this the 
writer is only consistent with himself. A 
great Italian poet represents himself as rapt 
awayinto Paradise. He looks fortheglori- 
fied spirit of St John, but can find no form 
or feature that answers to the Evangelist. 
And in gazing at the spot to which his 
eye was turned, he likens himself to one 
who, in an eclipse, looks at the sun, sees 


1 Ephes. ii. 2, iv. 27, vi. 12. Cf. the whole 
tone of Acts xix. r—8, 11—19. 

2 1 John ii. 20—27. 

3 ; John iv. 1, 2, 3. Cf. Ephes. vi. 12. 

4 It is important to notice that the polemica. 
elements in the Epistle and Gospel exist in 
precisely the tone and proportions which would 
naturally follow from the connection of z7terpene- 
tration. The hzstortan cannot enter upon the 
discussion of controverted principles without 
snapping the thread of his narrative, and more 
or less breaking the firm odjective outline which 
is peculiar to the Azstory as distinct from the 
treatise. At the same time he may select and 
arrange his materials so as to form an implicit 
polemic of great power. ‘The Word was made 
Flesh ” (John i. 14), contains in germ the refuta- 
tion of all errors, Cerinthian and Doketic (1 
John iv. 2, 3). Without accepting questionable 
statements of the prolonged existence of a 
sect, which called itself by the name of John 
the Baptist and made him the Messiah, the 
Gospel evidently refers to some exaggerated 
feeling about the Baptist’s office and ministry 
(John i. 6, 7, 8, 15, 20, 30, iii, 27—30, v. 
33). This implicit polemic of the Gospel may 
well be one of the references of ovx & 7@ 
Udrre povov, 1 Johny. 6. See Godet’s answer 
to Meyer, who denies all polemical intention in 
the Gospel, ‘Comment sur l’Evang. de S. 
Aad II. 715. Meyer’s view has been used by 

. Astié and others as a proof that the Gospel 
was written at a period when the heresies re- 
ferred to in the Z/ist/e had ceased to exist, and 
therefore, many years later. 


281 


nothing with perfect distinctness, and is 
dazzled by the effulgence. Certainly St 
John’s Epistle answers to this memorable 
passage—without address at the begin- 
ing ; without benediction at the close: 
without mention of one human name 
among his contemporaries—all that is 
merely personal apparently lost in the 
glory of the Eternal Word, of the Divine 
Love’. 

4. But the very passages which the 
conviction of the Church has always 
associated with the local and temporary 
controversies of Ephesus and of the first 
century have within them the “semina 
geternitatis.” Every Christian who is 
at once a thoughtful student of the 
Epistle, and a thoughtful observer of the 
times, must have felt that if these utter- 
ances were at first elicited by the spiritual 
needs of the Christians of Asia Minor, 
they have an unexhausted meaning for 
us also. Instances will readily occur. 

Men are attempting to make a shadowy 
ideological Christ—a spiritualized Christ 
who is not True Man, a human Christ 
who is not True God. St John tells us 
how to deal with such figments. ‘“Con- 
cerning the Word, Who is the Life, that 
which we have seen and heard declare 
we unto you. This is the True God and 
Eternal Life*.”’ 

A Philosophy, confident in its own 
strength, and arrogating to itself the 
title of spiritual, would give to a handful 
of haughty and self-sufficient thinkers, 
a God without a Christ, or it would 
offer to us the wretched and impossible 
compromise of retaining the ethical 
beauty of Jesus without bowing before 
the mystery of His Incarnation. Dd the 
old man of Ephesus really see through 
the storm and mists of ages? Did he 
know the law by which Deism (so called) 
is perpetually sinking, first to pantheism, 
then to atheism? At least he wrote— 
‘““Whosoever denieth the Son, the same 
hath not the Father®.” 

There are those who would gird in 
the love of Christ within the narrow rim 
of a human system, and limit the ex- 
tent of the redeeming Passion. St John 
declares that ‘‘He is propitiation for our 


1 Dante, ‘ Paradiso,’ xxv. quoted by Dean 
Stanley, ‘On the Apostolic Age,’ p. 242. 

2 1 John i. 1—3, v. 20, 

3 John ii. 23. 


282 


sins, and not for ours only, but for those 
of the whole world’.” 

There are those who imagine in one 
quarter that an assumed favour of God 
does away with the eternal distinction of 
actions, and makes sin not perilous to 
believers; those in another who go peril- 
ously near to thinking that a man may 
be “‘a very good Catholic and a very bad 
Christian.” The Church needs the sharp 
clear tone which tells us with its simple 
power that “whosoever committeth sin 
is of the devil. All unrighteousness is 
sin*.” 

There are times when the conscious- 
ness that sin is growing subdued within 
weakens the felt need of Redemption. 
Here is one who warns us that ‘‘the blood 
of Jesus keeps cleansing us from sin*.” 

There are times with individual souls, 
when the brooding consciousness of some 
particular transgression covers them with 
a horror of great darkness; or when the 
heart sinks down in utter prostration, as 
we look up at the unascended height of 
moral perfection. But it is written here, 
“if any man may have sinned, we have 
an Advocate with the Father*.” 


III. 


1. The connection of the Epistle with 
the Gospel of St John is a subject of the 
first order of importance. In our dis- 
cussion we shall endeavour to keep in 
view two ends—the establishment of 
resemblances in style and language of 
such a nature as could only be supposed 
to proceed from a single mind; and the 
precise relation which the writer in- 
tended the Epistle to bear to the Gospel. 

We venture to sum up the phenomena 
presented by the Epistle when read side 
by side with the Gospel under three 
heads — interpenetration, suggestion, ctr- 
cumscription. 

(a) By interpenetration it is not meant 
to lay exclusive stress upon such master- 
words as appear upon the very surface of 
the two documents (Adyos, $s, cxoria, 
Loy, adnOuwds, Koopos, pévery, ywooKeu, 
x.t..); nor, again, upon passages which 


1 |; John ii. 2. 
2 1 John iii. 8, v.17. 
3 3 Johni. 7. 
1 Job his Xe 


INTRODUCTION TO 


contain actually the same expressions 
(about wzzefeen in number)’. It is im 
tended to indicate such identical ex- 
pressions as proceed from an identical 
mould of thought and language. Identi- 
cal words or phrases in themselves might 
come from two writers trained in the 
same school, or from a forger making up 
a cento for the purpose of deception. 
Identical moulds of language are some- 
thing more, and indicate identity of mind 
and hand much more powerfully. 

The following instances are offered 
rather as specimens than as an exhaustive 
list :-— 

(1) The particle 6€ occurs in St John’s 
Gospel less frequently than in any other 
part of the New Testament, except the 
Epistles of St John, and the Apocalypse. 

(2) The zame of Jesus is more fre- 
quently anarthrous in St John’s Gospel 
than in the others*. In Tischendorf’s 
text of that Gospel it appears 233 times, 
83 times without the article. In the 
Epistles it is a/ways anarthrous. 

(3) ta referring to a pronoun and 


used as its complement. Compare 
Gospel. Epistle. 
iv. 34. 1 John iii. 8, 11, 23. 
vi. 29. 5) kV ani 
vi. 40. >... Wee 
XVil. 3. 2 John. 6; 3 Johnz. 4. 


(4) A peculiar use of the word Avew 
as equivalent to ‘evacuating of authority, 
depriving of force and efficacy, destroy- 
ing,” is found in St John’s Gospel alone 
(ii. 19, v. 18, vii. 23, x. 35). This use 
is found in the Epistle (1 John iii. 8). 

(5) The Gospel and Epistle occa- 
sionally employ zoey in the unusual 
sense of “declaring a thing or person 
to be so and so by word or deed.” Com- 
pare 


Gospel. Epistle. 
v. 18. 1 Johni. ro. 
Vill. 53. 99 eels 
X. 33: 

xix. 7) 22: 


(6) apaptiav éxev, in the sense of 
“contracting sin, having and holding it 
in its guilt and power.” 


1 See Introd. to Gospel, LXI—LXIII. 

2 “Ingots absque articulo 2 Foanne maxtme 
poni certum est.” Tischendorf, ‘Nov. Test 
Greec.’ Edit. vit. Preef. xxxiv. 


THE FIRST. EPISTLE OF JOHN. 


Gospel. Epistle. 
John ix. 41. 1 John i. 8. 
kV. 22. 
(7} Sentences beginning with d:a totro. 
Gospel. Lpisile. 
John v. 16, 18. 1 John iii. 1. 
Es Vi. OS. ivend Wade 
sy UTA 


(8) rereAciwyat, where we should ex- 
pect the adjective. 
Gospel. 
John xvii. 23. 


Epistle. 
1 John il. 5. 
go Vy n2;-57, 18 


(9) éav for orav. 
Gospel. Epistle. 
John vi. 62. 1 John iil. 2. 
m TRily Ze: 


(10) dkovew for éfaxovew, in the sense 
of ‘‘hearing and granting prayer.” 
Gospel. Epistle. 
John ix. 31. 1 John v. 14, 15. 
wort AT, Az. - 

To these peculiar uses of sige words 
or phrases may be added certain general 
forms of style which argue an identical 
habit of thought. 

(x) The generalizing use of the neuter, 
and especially of the article, to express a 
wider generality than the masculine. 


Gospel. Epistle. 
John i. 3. a John i. 1—3. 
peel Vn 22 Pee line. 
a Vix, 3.0,, 40. SVs 
Pe Ii. 25 1s sr rvelaeds 
Sg aes 3 Or 


ee RV a 20, 22,.22>, 

(2) Antithetic parallelism, i.e. repeat- 
ing in a megative form for greater impres- 
siveness propositions which, immediately 
before, had been enunciated Jositively— 
or inversely. 


Gospel. Epistle. 
Johni. 3, 20. 1 Johni. 5, 6, 8. 
»» lil. 16. 5 ii, Ay 7 
poe B2sh455- » oe 1 6: 

FE SNIIL) 20, iste iver Os 
 XKASK 


1 For the reason why the inferential of, so 
frequent in St John’s Gospel, is not found in the 
First Epistle (unless ii. 24, iv. 19 be exceptions), 
see note on 3 John z. 8. 

2 6 71—well explained by “‘ tout ce que,” M. 
Godet, i loc. 

2 Note the interesting Sinaitic reading of 
John xii. 32: “I, if I be lifted up from the 
earth, will draw a// (rdvra) unto Me.” ‘‘Non 
autem dicit omnes sed omnia.” Augustin. 


283 


(3) Accesstonal parallelism is a form of 
parallelism, in which the second member 
is always in advance of the first, and the 
third is occasionally in advance of the 
second. Of such a parallelism we may 
say with the critic just quoted—“ the 
heart has never said all; it has always 
something more to say.” It is not all 
the truth to say of the eagle of God— 
“itque reditque per orbem.” (Corn. a 
Lap. on 1 John iv. 16.) He circles, 
indeed, round his favourite thoughts ; 
but there is progress, and not mere spiral 
revolution. 

Let us see, in its best-marked instances, 
thisoppositio cum accessione—this rhetorical 
habit of making the second, or following, 
member of an antithesis overpass and 
add emphasis to that which precedes it. 
It will explain many “expressions which 
may seem strange to those who have not 
observed the reason of them.” 

1 John ii. 4,5. [To “keep Ais word” 
as one unbroken whole, goes far beyond 
“keeping As commandments” as isolated 


precepts. ] 
Ibid. wv. 4, 5,6. (“Know Him”—“are 
in Him”—“adideth in Him”—form the 


successive points of a grand climax. | 

Ibid. vv. 9, 10. [‘‘Addeth in the 
light” is a step beyond “zs zz the 
light.” 

Ibid. v. 11. [A long, dark progress is 
denoted, “‘zs in darkness”—“‘wadlketh in 
darkness”—“ noweth not whither”—and 
“ darkness hath blinded.” 

Ibid. vv. 13,14. [v. 14 completes and 
amplifies the idea of victory in v. 13. 
In v. 13 we have victory briefly,—“ Ye 
have overcome the wicked one”—in 
v. 14 the source of that victory—‘“‘ye are 
strong, and the Word of God abideth in 

ou.” 

; Ibid. v. 27. [This principle of ad- 
vance in thought, conveyed by subtle 
variations of expression, tends to con- 
firm the reading adopted by Tisch. and 
Reiche in the latter part of the verse. 
The authority of MSS. is almost equally 
balanced between ‘“‘The same anointing,” 
(ro atro xpiopa) and “His anointing” 
(ro avrod xpioua). But the latter is con- 
firmed by the marked advance of the 
thought conveyed by it. ‘The Anoint 
ing of H1m” shews the relation of Christ 
and the Spirit more dogmatically and 
essentially than the expression at the 


284 


beginning of the verse—“ The anointing 
which ye have received from Him’'.”] 

Ibid. vw. 27,28. [“ Adidein Him”—an 
advance upon “Ye shail abide in Him.” 
Compare in the inverse order the first 
and last clauses of v. 24.] 

See also i. 6, 7...7, 8, iv. 7, 8, v. 18, 
19, and compare in the Gospel, ¢.g. iii. 
17, 18, iv. 20, 21, vil. 37, 38, &c. 

The interpenetration, then, of the Epistle 
by the Gospel is not merely a community 
of words and expressions. It is some- 
thing much deeper. It is the proved 
existence of an identical mould of thought 
lying behind the words and expressions, 
and is often the strongest presumption in 
favour of the supposition that the two pro- 
ductions issue from one individual mind, 

(2) The second term which we em- 
ploy to express the relation of the First 
Epistle to the Gospel of St John is sugges- 
tion. This suggestion is twofold—of the 
Gospel as a whole, and of its separate 
portions. 

The Epistle suggests the Gospel as a 
whole. 

St John points in it to a certain type 
and historical representation of Jesus, 
which he assumes to be before the eyes 
of those to whom he writes. That type, 
however, is not within the compass of the 
Epistle itself, but lies somewhere outside 
it. The Epistle contains dogma and pre- 
cept, and it contains nothing more. But 
it also implies that this historical repre- 
sentation had been published—so far at 
least as in some way to be perfectly 
known to them—and that it had been 
published by St John himself. And 
he states that the object of this repre- 
sentation is to bring out the things which 
he himself and others had seen and 
heard*. There is, moreover, a quiet un- 
doubting reference, with perfect assurance 
of being understood, to a certain picture, 
mould, or type of the life and character 
of Jesus, existent and recognized—to a 
picture beside them, which they might 
gaze upon and consult. 


1 This (if there were no other reason) would 
€ause us to reject the once famous conjecture of 
Michaélis that xpicua slipt into the text by an 
fotacism for xpyopa, oracle. He uses it as an 
illustration of his doctrine that the true reading 
might never have been written in any manu- 
script, not even in that which came from the 
sacred author’s hand or dictation. 

3 |; Johni. 3. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


It is not, indeed, satisfactory to 
refer, with one critic’, tl.e threefold ypages 
to the Zfistle, the threefold éypaya to 
the Gospel (1 John ii. 12, 13, 14). - It is 
still less satisfactory, with another critic’, 
to apply all six to the Gospfe/. But we 
have no necessity for pressing question- 
able arguments into the service of the 
theory before us. 

When the Apostle urges upon his 
children the moral duty of walking con- 
tinuously, even as He made His one 
great life-walk, he points them to a definite 
representation of that Life®. 

Worthy of note is the way in which 
the present (éor)—zs—is applied to the 
moral characteristics of Jesus with what 
may be called an idealizing or presenti- 
ating shade of thought (“even as He és 
pure,” 1 John iii. 2; “in Him ¢s no sin,” 
ibid. v. 5; ‘even as He ¢s righteous,” 
ibid. v. 7). Christ, as He is in the fourth 
Gospel, is ever present to the eye of the 
Church; and, in his Epistle, the Apostle 
points to the picture which he himself had 
drawn, and which abides engraven upon 
the plate of the Gospel. 

The ideal of holiness is realized in 
the life of Jesus, and its realization neces- - 
sarily implies a history and a historian. 
It, therefore, becomes in the highest de- 
gree probable, that the writer of the 
Epistle points *to a Gospel written by 
himself—and the argument of interpene- 
tration heightens the presumption. 

But the phenomenon of suggestion as 
we lay the Epistle side by side with the 
Gospel carries us a great deal further. 
The Epistle is perpetually suggesting 
questions to the careful reader which 
he can answer from one book, and 
one book only, from one Gospel and 
one Gospel only. Each great leading 
word or idea in the Epistle is a latent 
reference, an asterisk pointing to the 
Gospel. Let us set down instances of 
this enough to leave no doubt upon the 
subject. 


Episile. Gospel. 
Concerning the Lo- 
£05. 
1 Johi. 1. 
Who is the Logos? Johniz. 
1 Hug. 


2 Ebrard. 
3 xaOus éxeivos mepiemarnoer kas avros obras wee 
piwareiy, 1 John ii. 6. 


THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN. 


Epistle. 
We havea Paraclete. 
ii, 1. 
What does that 
mean? xiv. 16. 


The word of God 
abideth in you. 
lly GA, Ve 4: 
How can this be 
true? what war- 
rants an assertion 
so amazing ? 


Whosoever is born 
of God. 

ill. 9, V. Ty 4. 

What is that? how 


xiv, 18, 23. 


comes it? iii. 3, 5, 6. 
New commandment. 
ii. 7. 8. 


What is that? 


The Saviour of the 
world. 
lv. 14. 
Why so called? 
This ts He that 
came by water and 
blood. 
v. 6, 8. 
How so? 
We receive the wit- 
ness of men. 
Vv. 9. Baptist, i. 15—36, 
Who are the men iil. 27—36; An- 
whose witness we drew, i. 41; Philip, 


xiii. 34, XV. 72. 


iv. 42. 


xiX. 34. 


receive ?' i 45; Nathanael, 
i. 49; Nicodemus, 
lil. 2; Samaritan 
Woman, iv. 29; 
Samaritans, 42; 
Peter, vi. 68, 69; 
officers, vii. 46; 
blind man, ix. 38 ; 
Martha, xi. 27; 
Pilate, xviii. 38, 
xix. 5, 6; Thomas, 
xx. 28. 
The Begotten of 
God keepeth him. 
I John v. 18. 
Why does St John 
promise this ? rvii 12. 


1 A reference to tne notes on v. 6—11, will 
shew that the section is nothing less than an 
exhaustive analysis of the Gospel of St John as 
the Gospel of witsess. 


285 


Epistle. 

Ye have an unction 
JSrom the Holy One, 
and know all 
things. 

li. 20. 

How this? 

The world lieth 
wholly in the wick- 
ed one. 

VELT@: 

How this? 

This is the confi- 
dence...that if we 
ask anything...He 
heareth us. And 
if we know that 
He heareth us, &ce. 

v. 14—16, 

How do we know 
and why have we 
confidence ? 


(c) Finally we have used the word 
circumscription to express another phe- 
nomenon of the relation of St John’s 
Epistle to his Gospel. While writing 
his Epistle, he purposely arcumscribes 
his pen and thoughts within the circle 
of the Gospel. Few words indeed are 
found at all in the letter’ which are not 
either in the history or in the discourses, 
and of these few none which are of 
capital importance in the vocabulary of 
Christians, with the solitary exception 
of tAacpyos*. This explains to us the 
reason of the otherwise singular fact that 
the four great words—gospel, church, 
grace, repentance—are not found in St 
John’s First Epistle. It did not suit 
the purpose of the Spirit that any of 
these words should be in the discourses 
of Jesus recorded in the fourth Gospel*. 


Gospel. 


xiv. 26. 


xiv. 30. 


XV1. 23, 24. 


1 Z.g. adafgovela (1 Johnii. 16), Blos (1 Johnii. 
16, iii. 17), el6wAov (1 John v. 21). ’AvriypicTos. 
(1 John ii. 18, 22, iv. 3) does not occur in the 
Gospel. But St John in his Epistle merely 
names him of whom Jesus had said with such 
emphasis édv GANos €\Oy év T@ ovouare TH idly 
(John v. 43. Observe the almost technical term 
€Oy. See on Antichrist cometh, note 1 John ii. 
18). The substantive miorits does not occur in 
the Gospel; it is found once in the Epistle 
(1 Joh. v. 4), but the verd (aicrevew) is in every 
page of the Gospel. 

2 1 John ii. 2, iv. to. 

3 xdpts is found in the proemium of the Gospel 
three times, i. 14, 16,17. It occurs in 2 John 3. 
See note. 


286 


St John scarcely takes a step outside 
the circle of the Gospel; he will hardly 
write down a word about the spiritual 
life, however precious in itself, which is 
not somewhere within its boundaries. 

2. But while the First Epistle of St 
John is thus connected with the Gospel, 
interlaced through and through at every 
point—while the connection is not only 
superficial, but one of interpenetration, 
suggestion, and circumscription—there is 
no ground for supposing that the Epistle 
is a bit of theological marqueterie, cun- 
ningly fabricated by piecing together 
fragments of the Gospel. Such a mode 
of fabrication must have aimed at a pur- 
pose quite inconsistent with the vrerzcence 
and veiled personality of the Epistle from 
beginning to end. For it omits precisely 
everything which such a forgery would 
be sure to have contained. It does not 
give us, like one of St Paul’s Epistles, 
either the name of the Apostle, or the 
names of those to whom it is addressed. 
It has no salutation at the commence- 
ment or at the close. It does not ex- 
pressly state a single circumstance of the 
writer, or designate by name any of the 
heretics whom it is written to refute. 

The so-called Epistle to the Laodi- 
ceans enables us to estimate with exacti- 
tude the inevitable characteristics of such 
_a cento. The lost Greek original of 
that document may be read in the sub- 
stantially identical Greek translations of 
the Latin rendering, given by Elias Hut- 
ter’ and quite recently by Bishop Light- 
foot*. The most efficacious argument 
against the authenticity of the Epistle 
is, as Erasmus said, simply to read 
it. The words, indeed, are Pauline; 
for thirty-six verses, chiefly from Philip- 
pians, are quoted more or less in a piece 
which is itself divided into twenty verses. 
But this fortuitous concourse of Pauline 
atoms, brought into juxtaposition in 
space, is destitute of life and purpose. 
The image of St Paul conjured up for a 
moment has no heart beating within it. 
The voice is as the voice of an automa- 
ton*®. But the Epistle of St John has 

1 See ‘Codex Apoc. N. T.’ by Fabricius. 
Tom. I. 873, 879. 

2 «Colossians and Philemon,’ pp. 293, 294. 

8 «Non est cujusvis hominis Paulinum pectus 
effingere. Tonat, fulgurat, meras flammas lo- 


quitur Paulus—at haec...quam friget, quam ja- 
eet!” Desid. Erasmus, ‘ad Coloss.’ Iv. 16. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


its own life and characteristics, not 
withstanding its intimacy of connection 
with the Gospel. It developes freely the 
central dogma and the central moral 
principle of the Gospel—the Word made 
Flesh for the love of man; men loving 
one another as Christ has loved them. 
The writer does not fear to be inde- 
pendent when necessary; to concentrate 
the whole work of Christ into a word of 
his own’; to designate the great human 
enemy of Christ and his Church bya name 
absolutely original*; to change the histo- 
rical order of the blood and water upon 
the Cross into the mystical order of 
the water and blood in the sacraments* 
Nay, above all, he does not shrink from 
giving to Jesus the highest and loftiest 
of all His titles, which yet our Lord does 
not ascribe to Himself in any of His 
recorded words*. The great dogmatic 
words of Christ with which he arms 
himself do not hang unnaturally about 
the Apostle in the battle of the faith. 
They are wings to lift him above the 
earth, not a burden to cumber him as 
he moves*. 

3. This seems to be the proper place for 
adverting to one often-repeated objection 
to the historical truth of the discourses 
of Jesus recorded in the Gospel, which 
has been derived from the Epistle. The 
teaching of St John in the Epistles, it is 
said, is not only the same in substance 
but in style, in turn of language down to 
the minutest particular, with the teaching 
of Jesus in the Gospel. It is evident, 
therefore, that the writer of the Epistle 
invented those discourses and placed 

1 The doctrine of propitiation and purifica- 
tion by the blood of Christ is stated with less 
reserve in the Epistle than in the Gospel. Cf. 
1 John ii. 2, with Gospel iii. 16. 

2 *Avrixpioros, 1 John ii. 18, x.7.d. 

3 t John v. 7, 8; Gospel, xix. 34. 

* The Logos, Gospel, i. 1—14—also in Rev. 
xix. 13. Hengstenberg argues, with consider- 
able force, that light and darkness are used 
with a different modification in the Epistle and 
Gospel—signifying in the second, the regien of 
salvation, and the unlit tract beyond; in the 
first, moral good and evil. 

5 metpnOy.<cecexssnanavenne Stos ’AxcAAeds, 

el of épapudceee, xal évrpéxor dyhad -yuia* 
TQ 8 ebre wrepa ylyver’, deipe 52 wouéva 
adv. 
‘Tliad,’ xix. 384—386. 

Cf. 7d Tov Grrwv dbpnua mreEpois 
éorxévar 7 poprly. 

Xenoph. ‘Cyrop.’ Il. 3. 14. 


THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN. 


them in the lips of Jesus’. Considering 
the undeniable likeness between the 
language of our Lord in the Gospel and 
that of St John in his Epistle, are we 
forced to recognize “the monotonous 
tone” of St John’s own style—its “ ob- 
scure gnosis and contorted metaphor”— 
in the discourses, which can, therefore, 
lay no claim to historical accuracy? ‘The 
following considerations enable us to 
answer this question in the negative. 

(a) The opening words of the first 
Epistle shew us that St John would have 
found an insuperable moral objection to 
placing discourses in the mouth of Jesus. 
“That which was from the beginning— 
which we have feard*.” This at once 
recalls to us the words of Jesus, more 
especially His discourses in St John’s 
Gospel. The very place of this clause 
in the sentence, where Aearing stands 
out above sight and handling, shews us 
the reverence with which he regarded 
the words of the Word. It indicates 
that he would have shrunk from the pro- 
fanity of turning his Gospel into a fiction 
or a drama, and inventing language for 
the Incarnate Wisdom of God. 

(6) But, if the similarity between the 
style of the discourses and that of the 
Epistle is exaggerated by many, it is, at 
least, after all deductions, very vemark- 
able. And, if we reject with indignation 
on behalf of the lie-hating* Apostle, the 
supposition that he would invent lan- 
guage, and place it in the lips of his 
Master, can we find a satisfactory solu- 
tion of the difficulty? Assuredly we 
can. Christ, in the days of His flesh, ex- 
pressed His divine knowledge in words. 
Ir His teaching there were two elements, 
referred to by Himself in the antithesis— 
“if I have told you of earthly things... 
if I tell you of eavenly things*.” The 
contras* between “‘earthly and heavenly” 
is not equivalent to that between “easy 
and dificult.” But “ heavenly” compnises 
dogmatic objective truths, connected with 
the nature of God, and the counsels of 
His grace. “ Earthly,” again, assuredly 


1 Do not the Epistles of John, so entirely 
like the fourth Gospel, prove that this Gospel is 
full of discourses invented by the same author?” 
(Strauss, ‘Leb. Jes.’ 313.) 

2 ; Johni. 1. 

3 1 John i. 6, ii. 22. 

4 John iii. 12 


Cf. Rey. xxi. 8, xxii. 15. 


287 


does not mean earth-born; for the 
original word is quite different’. To 
that Soul whose home was in the bosom 
of God, things which seem to us the 
most heavenly, are on earth after all*. 
They are of heaven indeed — from 
heaven—even now “iz margine celi,” 
on the line which seems to blend with 
the heaven beyond. But they have for 
their subject-matter the teaching of truth, 
not as it is in itself, but as it meets with 
a creature like man, as it is capable of 
being morally tested and experienced by 
us. Others, then, recorded those words, 
which rather belonged to the circle of 
things on earth, or which made a greater 
impression at the time of their delivery. 
The Sermon on the Mount, spoken upon 
a height in Galilee to a great assemblage, 
sank into a thousand hearts, and found 
its way into the earliest memoirs. The 
conversation with Nicodemus by night, 
the dialogue with the Samaritan woman, 
the discourse in the Temple, the High 
Priest’s prayer, would not lie so near 
the surface of Christian recollection. 

Of these two elements, then, in the 
teaching of Christ, there was one with 
which the mind of St John had a consti- 
tutional affinity*. He appropriated *‘the 
things zz heaven*.” They sank into his 
soul. They were taken up into the 
substance of his intellectual and spiritual 
being. Those who have been much 
with the great masters of thought and 
language, though only through the 
medium of their books, shew by their 
words and ideas the high company 
which they have been keeping. Tenny- 


1 ériyera not yiva. 

2 ériyeca. 

3 “<Tf we are surprised at these different ways 
of comprehending Christ on the part of His 
immediate disciples, we must not forget the con- 
siderable influence of moral affinity in all forms 
of religious knowledge.” (Pressensé, ‘Hist. des 
prem. siecles,’ 11. 385.) ‘* There are different 
forms of the Word under which He manifests 
Himself in proportion to the degree of the indi- 
vidual understanding, and the progress of the 
soul in holiness. If He revealed Himself upon 
the holy mount in a form far more sublime than 
that which was seen by the disciples who re- 
mained below, the reason was that they had not 
yet their sight sufficiently strong to contemplate 
the glory and the divinity of the Word in His 
Transfiguration.” (Origen ‘c. Cels.’ Lib. v1, 
quoted by Deramey, ‘ Défense du 4™° Evangile, 
35, 36-) 

4 +a éxoupasa, John iii. 12. 


288 


son, Browning, Arnold, Carlyle impose 
the very faults of their diction upon a 
generation of poetasters and sciolists. 
In truth, every founder of a _ school 
leaves a peculiar impress upon the style 
of his disciples. The generation in 
which we are living abounds in exam- 
ples. A thoughtful theologian wrote not 
very many years since:—‘‘I trace so 
distinctly to Bishop Butler the origin 
of the soundest and clearest views that 
I possess upon the human mind, that 
I could not write upon this, or any 
kindred subject, without a conscious- 
ness that I was directly or indirectly 
borrowing largely from him*.” Common 
studies, and schools, and tutors, impress 
subtle similarities of literary form and 
colour. Modern Oxford men, for instance, 
are liable to sudden conversions, and are 
drifted to havens upon the most distant 
shores of thought. But there is the old 
trick of voice. ‘‘ Coelum non animum mu- 
tant.” A curious family likeness may be 
traced where we should have least ex- 
pected to find it. But much more 
is this the case, where the charm of 
personal influence is added. “I may be 
allowed,” says an eloquent writer, ‘to 
take this opportunity of claiming, omce 
for all, for the pupils of Arnold, the 
privilege and pleasure of using his words, 
and adopting his thoughts, without the 
. necessity of specifying, in every instance, 
the source from which they have been 
derived’*.” Those who, now many years 
ago, on Sunday afternoons, used to 
listen with spell-bound interest to the 
calm, sweet voice of the remarkable 
man who was then Vicar of St Mary’s 
—who told his hearers of 
‘this misery’s signs, 

And how the dying spark of hope was fed, 
And how the heart was soothed; and how the head, 
And all his hourly varied anodynes—” 
will sometimes find a phrase, a word, a 
sentence coming to their lips, or hear 
them in the sermons and recognize them 
in the writings of others, which they can 
trace to a teacher, from whom they are 
now separated by the whole breadth of 
the spiritual world. 

These analogies, drawn from our own 


1 Bishop O’Brien, Preface to ‘Two Sermons 
upon the Human Nature of our Lord.’ 

2 Dean Stanley, Preface to ‘Essays on the 
Apostolic Age.’ 


INTRODUCTION TO 


days, and from men now or lately living, 
may enable us to feel more vividly how 
probable it is that the style of St John 
in his Epistle should be like that of the 
discourses in the Gospel. It is always 
to be remembered that the disciple was 
John, and the Master Jesus. Those 
favourite words—‘“‘light and darkness, 
life and death, love and hate, truth and 
witness, world, abiding ”—were not terms 
which he had taught himself to apply 
to the designation of his own ideas. 
He had heard them in the long golden 
hush of the summer evenings by the 
shore of the lake of Galilee; in the 
sorrow of the guest-chamber; between 
the brook of Kedron and the garden 
of the Agony; during the days when 
the Risen Lord spoke to them “of the 
things pertaining to the kingdom of 
God.” He had not only enshrined 
them in his memory. He had made 
them so livingly as if his own, had 
appropriated them so profoundly, that 
he could use them with unerring pre- 
cision and definiteness. Expressions. 
which occur in the Gospel’ historically 
and occasionally were taken into the 
Apostle’s soul. Rounded and smoothed 
like stones by the continual friction of the 
water, they appear in the Epistle, in a 
sententious, aphoristic form. “The Jesus 
of the three Synoptics,” it has been said, 
“is a hundred miles away from the 
metaphysical being described by the 
Philonian Gospel alone’.” “Is it John, 
the son of Zebedee,” it has further been 
asked, ‘‘ who could write these lessons of 
abstract metaphysics, to which neither 
the Synoptics nor the Talmud present 
any analogy?” Certainly, for he had 
heard them from Christ. In one in- 
stance, at least, he shews that he knew 


1 Two more instances may be given. (a) Con= 
sider how the grand note struck by our Lord in 
the phrase év éuol pévet, ‘abides in me” (Gospel, 
vi. 52, cf. xiv. 10, 17), is taken up and ated 
again and again in the Epistle (1 John ii. 6 sqq., 
iii. 15, 17, iv. 12, 13,15, 16); (4) Observe also the 
use of rexvia, tasdla. The memory of the writer 
of the Epistle is haunted by those tender words 


- in the Gospel (rexvla, xiii. 33, wasdia, xxi. 5). 


Compare rexvla, ‘taken indiscriminately as a 
generally fatherly address to all’ [so Liicke, De 
W., Diistd. Huther, Reiche], 1 John ii. 1, 12, 
28, iii. 18, iv. 4, v- 21; and the simply endear- 
ing waidla, 1 John ii. 13, 18, iii. 7. 

A. Réville, ‘Rev. des deux Mondes,’ Juin, 
1866. 


* 


THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN. 


words previously recorded in the Synop- 
tics’. Sometimes we can see that the 
thought latent in an expression in the 
Synoptics is present to him* “He 
spake of the Temple of His Body”— 
‘He dwelt among us’*,” is but the com- 
mentary upon the word in St Matthew— 
“there is something here greater than 
the Temple*.” We conclude that John 
did not endow Christ with language, but 
learned it from Him’. 


IV. 


We may now examine the more posi- 
tive and essential characteristics of the 
style of St John’s Epistle from a Uterary 
point of view. 

Some critics accuse these simple, yet 
profound pages, of a lamentable want 
-of eloquence®. Spirits, which have been 
quickened into earnestness, may be re- 
minded by such complainers of one, 
who, when apparently dying, angrily 
pushed away from him an ordinary cru- 
cifix, and called for another which was 
superbly carved, exclaiming that “he 
should otherwise die in despair, abhor- 
ring, as he did, all ill-made works of art.” 
Others, who can read between the lines, 
will remember that these solecisms’—if 


1 John iv. 44. 
Luke iv. 24. 

2 Sentences are not wanting in the Synoptics 
which have quite the tone and structure of the 
words of Christ in St John; ¢g. Matt. xi. 25, 
27; Mark viii. 35; Luke x. 21, 22. 

3 éoxnvwoev, John i. 14, ii. 21. 

4 rod lepod pelfwv éorly woe, Matt. xii. 6. 

5 The writer has ventured to make free use of 
some pages in a volume of Sermons preached 
by him before the University of Oxford in 
1870—71. ‘The Leading Ideas of the Gospels,’ 
pp: 133—141 (Macmillan). The probable in- 
fluence of the philosophical and religious lan- 
guage of Ephesian speculation upon St John’s 
style is also to be taken into account. (For a 
similar influence exercised upon the style of St 
Paul, see Introd. to Colossians, Vol. 1x. 649.) 
St John, very early in his apostolic career, was 
brought into contact with Gnosticism. (Acts 
Vili. 9, 10, 14, 25.) 

6 Lange, on the contrary, sees in the First 
Epistle of St John ‘‘a suitable appendix to the 
Fourth Gospel, a disposition occasiorally rising 
to lyric fervour, a penetration descending into 
the depths of speculative contemplation, united 
to the ardour, which naturally bursts forth at 
intervals in such a mind, and the acuteness 
which is peculiar to a sublime purity.” ‘Life of 
Christ,’ 1. 216. 

7 6 Se drypapparos ovTos, o liudrns... Kav pv- 

$ KarayeNoow “EAnves THs TOY dvoudruy 


New Test.—Vot. lV. 


Cf. Matt. xiii. 57; Mark vi. 43 


289 


such there be—are among those “ vulgar 
isms of the fishermen, which have over- 
thrown the syllogisms of Athens.” 

The want of variety and of connection 
is another ground of objection. 

1. The want of variety. 

(2) To St Paul the Providence of 
God appears to have committed the 
task of defence and discussion. St John 
does not discuss, so much as afirm'. 
This feature in his writings has been 
shewn by Coleridge to arise at once 
from the oriental genius, and from the 
nature of the doctrines which he was 
inspired to enunciate. ‘St John’s logic,” 
said that great thinker, ‘‘is oriental, and 
consists chiefly in fosztion and parallel, 
while St Paul displays all the intricacies 
of Greek system*.” And elsewhere } : 
has observed —‘“‘ the imperative ar | 
oracular form of Scripture is the form 
of reason itself in all things purely ra- 
tional and moral.” 

(2) To many these isolated and ap- 
parently disconnected propositions, with 
their almost lapidary brevity and inci- 
sion, sound like mere moral and theo- 
logical axioms. And thus they fall un- 
der the contempt which, since Locke’s 
celebrated argument, has, more or less, 
attached itself to axioms, on the ground 
that they are frivolous, because they are 
identical propositions. But it was irre- 


aypoxtas. Chrysost. ‘in Joann. Homil.’ 1. 2. 
Cf. Acts iv. 13. ‘‘Quales ipsi fuere, tale et 
loquendi genus, ergo stylus eorum zdoticus. 
Tdiwrixéds sermo est idem cum kouwos et vulgaris. 
Nam léudéra: proprie dicuntur homines de plebe, 
indocti, et solo sermone utentes quo vulgus uti- 
tur, quemque pueri 4 nutricibus suis imbibe- 
runt.” (Salmas. ‘De Hellenistic.’ 260.) 

1 eldes rappynolav Kal éEovolav pypdrwy modAnPs 
mas ovdev audiBarAwy orvdé elxatwy, adda ravTa 
dropawopevos pbéyyerat; ...... mo\Nav yéuee 
Soyudtur, Kal rovTos évdiarplBer waddov 7 érépas 
(S. Joann. Chrysost. ‘in Joann. Homil.’ 11. 
3—5- PER Tom. VIII. 30—36, edit. Migne). 
‘*Some of the greatest books in the worla, 
as, for instance, Bacon’s ‘Novum Organum,’ 
and, in the Azehest sphere, St Fohn’s Epistles, 
are not so much chains of reasoning as a succese 
sion of observations on facts, the connexion or 
which is supplied, not by the mind which ob~ 
serves them, but by the facts themselves. To 
understand such writings we must be at the 
point of view from which the observations were 
first made, or, in Dr Campbell’s favourite lan- 
guage, we must be ‘in the light’ of the truths 
observed.” ‘Times’ of May 17th, 1875, on 
Dr Campbell’s writings. 

2 *Table Talk,’ p. 12. 


T 


290 


sistibly provej against Locke that pro- 
positions which he derided as frivolous 
because “identical,” deserved no such 
treatment. “hus, to take one of his own 
examples— “gold is fusible’—Cousin has 
observed that ‘the first who said—gold 
is fusible—far from being guilty of tau- 
tology, expressed the result of a dis- 
covery, and a discovery not without 
difficulty and importance.” We may 
well apply this principle to such axioms 
as “God is Light,” “God is Love.” 

(c) Yet there are, after all, elements 
of quiet beauty and power in St John’s 
Epistle which will “requite studious re- 
gard with opportune delight,” and redeem 
it from the charge of “mere cycloidal 
composition, and monotonous movement 
of thought.” 

A kind of occasional picturesgueness is 
not utterly wanting in this Epistle. We 
should expect this from one so entirely 
taught by Him whose language shews 
that He answered the thoughts in the 
mute heart of nature*—from one whose 
record of the words of Jesus includes 
those which speak of the “leaping 
water®” and of the “whiteness*” of the 
Eastern harvest—whose picture of Judas 
“going out” expresses more than was, 
perhaps, ever expressed in words so few’. 

The force of accessional parallelism has 
already been discussed. 

Let us observe another secret of this 
unearthly rhetoric—freparatory allusion. 

St John frequently indicates with deli- 
cate touch some subject, transcendently 
sacred, or peculiarly dear to him. He 
passes by it tenderly and reverentially for 
a while; then, after a pause, takes it up 
again and exhausts it more fully. 

So the birth from God first indicated ii. 
29, is resumed and expanded, iii. 9, v. 4. 

So the hallowed boldness of God’s 
children in saying out all to Him (zap- 
fyoia), first mentioned in iii. 21, is taken 
up again and unfolded in v. 14. 

But the most important and beautiful 


1 See Locke, ‘ Essays,’ Book IV. Chapter VIL 
of Maxims; Chapter viil., of Trifling and Iden- 
ical Propositions ; Cousin, ‘ History of Modern 
Philosophy,’ Lecture xxIv. 

2 léay cuKny ... EAOdv ex’ abrhy ... aroxpiHels 
elmev arp. Mark xi. 13, 14. 

5 any vdaTos dAdouévov. John iv. 14. 

4 Tas xwpas, Ore AevKal elor. John iv. 35. 

5 eéndOev: jv dé we John xiii. 30. See Notes 
on 1 John ii. 8, v. 19. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


illustration remains. It would almost ap- 
pear as if St John did not venture to 
introduce the Holy Spirit abruptly. So 
he writes allusively—“ye have an unction 
from the Holy One,” chrism from the 
Christ! Then, after an interval, the 
same chord is struck with a bolder hand 
—‘we know that He abideth in us, by 
the Spirit which He hath given us%” 
And, finally, the notes are reiterated with 
added clearness, again and yet again— 
“we know that we dwell in Him, and 
He in us, because He hath given us of 
His Spirit.” ——“ it is the Spirit that beareth 
witness.” —“they who continue witness- 
ing are three, the Spirit and the water 
and the blood*.” 

2. The kind of connection which may 
be traced in St John’s Epistle is deserv- 
ing of special notice. 

At first sight, indeed, St John’s 
Epistle is but a collection of isolated 
divine yvapa, carved out in brief, ora- 
cular, sentences as if on stone. Yet a 
connection there is, though the com- 
mentator may easily overlook, and easily 
exaggerate it. The peculiar eloquence 
which it possesses is spiritual rather than 
logical, veaZ rather than verbal*. It has 
been asserted by Coleridge that the con- 
nection between the different parts of 
a great lyrical ode is stronger and more 
real than that which subsists between 
the various portions of many treatises 
which profess to be written with perfect 
logical sequence. The same may be 
said of St John’s Epistle. The reader 
must keep his mind intent, not only 
upon the words themselves, but upon 
that which precedes and follows, and 
the association which links one with 
the other. To take one instance of a 
principle illustrated in almost every 
section: “If we walk in the light...the 
blood of Jesus keeps cleansing us from 
all sin. If we say that we have no sin, 
we deceive ourselves.” What is the link 

1 y John ii. 20. 

? Ibid. iii. 24. 

3 1 John iv. 13, v. 6, 8. 

4 Every student and commentator on St 
John’s Epistle should impress upon himself the 
remarks of Heumann. (1) ‘‘ Animadvertendum 
—realem magis quam verbalem esse Ioan. elo- 
quentiam. (2) Is qui legit non tam ad tsa verba 
quam ad scopum ejus, ad antecedentia et con- 
sequentia, ad rem ipsam que tractatur, intentis- 
simam tenere debet mentis suze aciem.” (‘ Nova 
Sylloge,’ Pars 4.) 


THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN. 


by which the last proposition is joined 
to the first? There was something in 
the first statement so humbling as to 
cause an abasement which is almost too 
intense, even for redeemed men. ‘What! 
those who have joined the glorious pro- 
cession of the sons of Light! Must it 
be said of them that they are stained by 
a constant defilement which needs this 
perpetual cleansing?” Yes—for “if we 
say that we have no sin, we deceive 
ourselves’.” 

If the style is the man, the style 
of St John is the express image of the 
unhesitating assurance of his belief. 
He writes with confidence like one who 
feels that his feet are on a rock. His 
language has the ring of the earnest- 
ness which speaks because it has be- 
lieved, and the power which springs 
from unhesitating conviction. It has 
none of the hesitations—of the half 
apologies—of conjecture or of doubt. 
It asserts, because its writer is sure. It is 
dogmatic, because he is divinely sure. 
His belief is transparent. ‘ With bared 
head he tells the bare truth’.” He is 
the most sublime of writers. What 
Chrysostom has so grandly said of the 
first verse of his Gospel is almost equally 
true of the first verse of his Epistle. 
“See, therefore, how forthwith from the 
prelude having lent wings to the soul of 
his hearers, he has elevated their thought 
also. For having caused it to take its 
stand before all created things, he con- 
ducts it up above cherubim and sera- 
phim, and over angels, and wins it to 
wing its way above every created thing. 
What then? After having exalted us to 
such a height, is he able to stay us 


1 Chrysostom points out a beautiful associa- 
tion of this kind, a subtle connection in St John’s 
Gospel, i. 14 with vv. 12, 13. ‘‘ Having stated 
that they who received Him have become and 
are the sons of God, he lays down the cause and 
the foundation of this unspeakable honour. It 
is that the Word has become Flesh. for He 
who is God’s very Son became Son of Man that 
He might make the sons of men children of 
God” (‘in Joann. Homil.’ x1. 1). So John iii. 
14, 15 gives the cause of the new birth spoken 
of, :pra vv. 3, 5. (Ibid. ‘Homil.’ xxvii.) For 
another remarkable instance of this vea/ connec- 
tion, latent in the swbstance of the thought, see 
note on 1 John v. 3, 4. 

2 yuuy TH Kepady yuurhy dmayyAdev Thy 
@\#Peaay. S. Joann. Chrysost. ‘Homil. in Joann, 
Li. 


291 


there? Notso. But even as one taketh 
a man standing on the sea-beach, and 
gazing on towns, shores, ports—and hath 
brought him far out into mid-ocean; as 
such an one hath removed the voyager 
indeed from the former objects which he 
surveyed, yet hath he not stayed his 
eye from seeing, but led it on to a 
spectacle which is immense ;—even so 
John, leading us above creation, and 
sending forth our thoughts to the ages 
beyond it, lifts the eye to illimitable 
heights, not causing it however to find 
any end—for end is none. For when 
the reason has ascended to the begin- 
ning, it asks—what beginning? Then 
finding that was ever outstripping its 
thought, it knows not where to stay its 
cogitation, but gazing intently and ever- 
more unable to stop, it falleth wearied 
again to things below’.” 

With all its reticence and apparent 
impersonality, who can doubt, after all, 
that there is in this Epistle a picture of 
Christian perfection? It is a reproduc- 
tion of the image of St John’s soul. It 
does not tell us what he did, it does tell us 
what he was. In it he has left us an idea 
of the Christian life, believing, loving, 
beautiful, victorious, peaceful, perfected. 
Above all the degenerations of history, 
above all the bitter disappointments of 
experience, it hangs undimmed. And it 
stimulates souls within the Church to 
a summit of unattained perfection. St 
John, in this Epistle, thus performs a third 
work, not inferior in importance either 
to the organization of the Church, or to 
its controversial defence against error. The 
mere controversialist often draws so many 
lines and bastions round Jerusalem that 
the temple is hidden from view. This 
Epistle was, above all, intended to un- 
fold the zxner Uife, to help forward a 
growth in practical holiness*. No spiritual 


1 S, Joann. Chrysost. ‘ Homil. in Joann.’ It. 4. 

2 Ignatius, without speaking in so many words 
of St John’s Epistle as he does of St Paul’s to 
the Ephesians (‘Epist. ad Ephes.’ x11.), draws a 
picture of the Christian life which is conceived 
in the very spirit of St John, and represents the 
quiet, real, undemonstrative character which it 
was intended to form. ‘‘It is better to keep 
silent and yet fo de, than to talk and not to be. 
Good is it to teach, if he that sayeth doeth. © 
Aéywv, 1 John ii. 4, 6, 9.) For one Teacher 
there is who spake, and it came to pass (Gospel, 
passim). And what things He did in silence are 


T2 


292 


book can ever be greater than its author. 
And so this Epistle is the very reflection 
of the inner life of the érurjOus. A 
great statesman (Prince Bismarck) has 
said of ambassadors that “they are 
vessels, which are only valuable so far 
as they are filled with the spirit and will 
of those who sent them, and should, like 
crystal, at once show, by their tinge and 
colour, what liquid is in them.” And 
so St John constantly repeats and repro- 
duces the very words of Jesus, and ap- 
plies them to mould and develope the 
spiritual life of the Church’. 


v. 


1. We pause here, and attempt to 
draw to a point the converging lines of 
evidence upon (a) the authorship of the 
Epistle, and (4) the “me and place to 
which it belongs. 

(a) We believe that the three phe- 
nomena presented by the Epistle when 
read side by side with the Gospel— 
interpenetration, suggestion, circumscrip- 
tion, amount to a practical demonstra- 
tion of a common author. Whoever 
wrote the Epistle wrote the Gospel also. 
This connection has been differently 
expressed by modern critics. 

The view that the Gosfel is an his- 
torical commentary on the Zpistle has 
found little favour. The very shorter 
and more succinct shape which the sen- 
tences assume in the Epistle, as if written 
by one who had fully expressed his 
thought elsewhere and was now disposed 
to contract it, makes a careful reader in- 


worthy of His Father. He who hath got to 
himself the word of Jesus (1 John ii. 5) is also 
able to hear His very silence that he may be 
perfect, that he may act through his speech, and 
be known by his silence. Nothing is hid from 
the Lord, but even our secrets are near to Him. 
Let us, therefore, do all things, as in His pre- 
sence who is dwelling in us, that we may be 
His temple, and He may be in us our God 
(1 Joh. ii. 14, iv. 43 ch 7 dyarn ped” nuGr, iv. 
17; 4 aydarn Tod Geod év nuiv, iv. 9), which He 
both is and will appear before our face” (1 John 
iii. 2), This is deeply interesting as coming 
from one who must have been at Ephesus with 
St John, and who wrote not very many years 
after the Apostle’s death. 

1 For similarities in theological thought, feel- 
ing, and language, between the Apocalypse and 
6 First Epistle of St John, see Notes on Reve- 

on. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


stinctively feel that the process must be 
reversed. By very many it has been 
looked upon as an encyclical letter accom- 
panying the Gospel. 

Whether we are to look upon it pre 
cisely as this, as a postscript, or as 
preface to the Gospel, may be rather a 
question of words. Bishop Lightfoot, 
however, shews with unrivalled clearness 
the reasons for considering it practically 
a postscript’. 

It should be remembered that the 
Gospel was dictated. Hence the sudden 
transitions; the passages at the close 
where the narrator looks towards or 
round a group of gathered witnesses * 
Immediately after the history itself, 
comes its postscripft, in the form of this 
Epistle. The use of the plural links the 
close of the Gospel with the beginning of 
the Epistle. Thus, the first lines of the 
Epistle are in harmony with, and directly 
refer to, the first lines of the Gospel. 

But this view, derived from a thorough 
and impartial comparison of the Epistle 
and Gospel by themselves is remarkably 
confirmed in the very ancient fragment 
on the Canon of the New Testament 
known as the Canon Muratorianus. The 
writer says, “Fourthly, the Gospel of 
John from among the disciples. His 
fellow disciples and Bishops exhorting 
him, he said: ‘Fast with me from to- 


1 Is not every preface really a fpustscripi in 
everything but Zosz/ton in a volume? 

26 éwpaxas weuapripnxev...tva Kal dpels mo- 
tevonte (John xix. 35). Tadra dé yéyparrat, va 
mioTevonte...Kal wa miorevovTes Swhv Exnre (xx. 
31). Ovrds éorw 6 pabnrhs 6 maprupar...xal 
oldapev x. T-X. (xxi. 24). St John lays down his 
pen, or ceases to dictate. The Bishops or dis- 
ciples who have heard or read, St Andrew pro- 
bably (vrevelatum est Andree ex Apostolis. ‘Canon 
Murator.’), and the rest, write these few words, 
this single formulated text of attestation. Then 
in v. 25 the amanuensis (or possibly the Apostle) 
returns to the singular—‘I suppose.’ An inter- 
esting illustration of this kind of testimony to 
a narrative may be found, in a somewhat similar 
form, in the singular book which for centuries 
was amongst the most popular in Europe. 
Marco Polo speaks throughout in the first person 
—/. But in the last sentence the secretary to 
whom he dictated gives his attestation to the 
truth of the whole narrative. Mr Murray—the 
translator and editor—remarks, ‘‘We may ob- 
serve a curious change in the last sentence, from 
the first to the third person. This arises from 
Rustician’s first writing as an amanuensis, ther 
in his own person.” (‘Travels of Marco Polo, 
Edinburgh Cabinet Library, p. 361.) 


THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN. 


day for three days ; and let us tell one 
another what shall have: been revealed 
to each.’ The same night it was revealed 
to Andrew from among the Apostles, 
that by consent of all John should narrate 
all things in their stead. And therefore 
though each Gospel has a different start- 
ing-point, there is no variation for the 
faith of believers, since by one over- 
ruling Spirit all things are told in all the 
Gospels concerning the Nativity, the 
Passion, the Resurrection, the conversa- 
tion of the Lord with His disciples, and 
concerning His twofold Advent—the 
first, as He is despised in His humilia- 
tion; the second, as He is conspicuous 
in royal glory which is future. What 
wonder is it, then, if John so constantly 
brings forward each of these things in his 
Epistles too, saying for himself also— 
‘what we have seen with our eyes and 
heard with our ears, and our hands have 
handled, these things we have written 
unto you’? For thus he professes himself 
not only a beholder but a hearer also— 
nay, and further a writer of all the mar- 
vellous things of the Lord in order’.”’ It 
will be best to let Bishop Lightfoot draw 
his own inference in his own words. 

“YT shall have something to say 
presently about the coincidences with 
Papias in this passage. For the moment 
I wish to call attention to the account 
which the writer gives of the origin of 
St John’s Gospel. There may be some 
legendary matter mixed up with this 
account; the interposition of Andrew 
and the dream of John may or may not 
have been historical facts ; but its general 
tenor agrees remarkably with the results 
yielded by an examination of the Gospel 
itself. Yet it must be regarded as 
altogether independent. To suppose 
otherwise would be to ascribe to the 
writer in the second century an amount 
of critical insight and investigation 
which would do no dishonour to the 
nineteenth. But there is also another 
point of importance to my immediate 
subject. Zhe writer detaches the First 
Epistle of St John from the Second and 
Third, and connects it with the Gospel. 
Either he himself, or some earlier autho- 


1 ‘Fragm. Anon. de Canone S. Scripture,’ 
Routh, ‘Reliquiz Sac.’ Tom. I. 394, 395, first 
edited by Muratori, ‘ Antiq. Ital. Med. Avi.’ 
Tom, U1. p. 854, Dissert. XLIIL 


293 


rity whom he copied, would appear te 
have used a manuscript in whith it oe 
cupied this position’.” 

Thus internal and external evidence 
alike point to the thorough and imme- 
diate connection of the Epistle with the 
Gospel, and to the common authorship 
of the two documents. 

(2) The connection of the Epistle 
and Gospel with Ephesus and Asia 
Minor, and with the close of the first 
century, has been attested by satisfac- 
tory arguments, which it is well to reca- 
pitulate. St John’s relation to Ephesus 
is necessarily implied in the three open- 
ing chapters of the Apocalypse, what- 
ever view is taken of the origin and 
character of that wonderful book. If it 
be St John’s, the question is decided. 
If it be spurious, the forger knew that 
St John’s prolonged residence in Asia 
Minor was an accredited and accepted 
fact in the Church. From St John to 
Irenzus, through Polycarp, Christian 
tradition goes on without a break. It 
is composed of two rings only, closely 
welded together, and of adamantine 
strength. Polycrates, Bishop of Ephesus, 
writing probably not much more than 
eighty years after the death of St John, 
speaks of his burial at Ephesus. Nor is 
this all. Special forms of error, foreseen 
by St Paul, floating in the very air of 
Zphesus*, known, as certainly as any- 
thing of the kind can be known, to have 
acquired an enormous development in 
Asia Minor towards the close of the 
first century—the heresies of Cerinthus 
and others, doketic and dualistic; the 
Nicolaitan heresy; certain mystic forms of 
oriental magic—are, beyond all rational 
doubt, referred to in the First Epistle of 
St John. But the reference to local 
heresies in local shapes attests St John’s 
local interest in Asia Minor. Further 
still, such few indications as appear 
clearly to the attentive eye coincide 
perfectly with an Zphesian atmosphere. 
The mystic awe, the quickening of 
spiritual life, the strangely opening 
glimpses into the spirit world, the com- 
munion with supernatural powers, which 
Scripture and history alike connect with 


1 Bishop Lightfoot on ‘Supernatural Religion 
in ‘Contemporary Review’ (1878, p. 837). 
2 Acts xx. 30; 1 Tim. i. 4, vi. 20. 


294 


Ephesus, are perceptible in the Epistle’. 
The glittering and magnificent worship 
of Zphesus—the fierce dogmatic and in- 
tolerant idolatry of the cudtus of the 
image of Artemis’, made of boxwood 
or vine, which was said to have fallen 
from heaven, to have lasted through 
seven restorations of the temple, and to 
be eternal—give force to the closing 
words of the First Epistle. Yet again. 
Those personal circumstances, which 
escape from the most reticent document 
—those traits of feeling and character 
which we divine as we hang in the silence 
of prolonged study upon the words we 
revere—perfectly fit into the traditions 
of the Church about St John’s history, 
while they are too latent to have sug- 
gested them. 

And here we enlarge the circle of 
witness so as to include the Second 
and Third Epistles. Every critic of 
note has /é/¢ that all three Epistles are 
the works of an old man*—above all 
those who accuse them of “senile itera- 
tion.” The characteristics of old age 
are especially marked in the second and 
third Epistles. The frequent repetitions 
of the first Epistle, their pervasion by 
the same ideas and language, make us 
feel that we are listening to a very old 
man. The fires of youth and manhood 
have long passed, and burned away all 


1 Ephes. ii. 20—22, vi. 20—22; Acts xix. 
1—8, 11—19; Ephes. i. 13, 14, iv. 30; cf 
1 John ii. 2o—27. 

2 Note the complacent and unquestioning bigo- 
try of the secretary of the city-council of Ephesus 
—‘‘seeing that these things cannot be spoken 
against” (Acts xix. 36). The 7d diomerés (sc. 
d@ya\ua, v. 35) cannot, perhaps, with absolute 
certainty be identified with the image of Artemis, 
described by Pliny (‘ Nat. Hist.’ XvI. LXxXxIx.). 
Pliny says that the artificer of the image was 
named by some. (The various names given in 
different edd. seem to be mere guesses.) This, 
of course, would exclude, if locally believed, the 
idea of the image having ‘‘ fallen from heaven.” 
But Pliny fossibly hints at the legend of a much 
greater untiquity. At all events Pliny’s anec- 
dote well illustrates the idolatry of Ephesus. 
(See the interesting discussion and notes, Pliny, 
‘Nat. Hist.’ Vol. v. pp. 2604—2607, edit. 
G. Brotier. Cum Not. Var. 1826.) 

3 See Michaelis, ‘Introd. N. T.’ 1. 394— 
396. May we not add the Apostle’s love of the 
perfect tense in speaking of the regenerate life 
(x John iii. 9, v. 1, 18) as another indication of 
an aged Christian? He Jooks to a present state 
as the result of a great act that is past—what 
has lasted long and wears well. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


in the soul that is not made of asbestos 
—all that cannot be reduced to the few 
ideas which have been the directors of 


the life. St John was, possibly, an exile in - 


Patmos, and despatched the first of these 
two short letters from thence. While no 
ancient writer, as we have seen, ever 
placed the Gospel and First Epistle out- 
side the circle of Ephesus and an inti- 
mate relation witht, opinion was divided 
as to the spot from which they issued. 
Ephesus was, indeed, generally accepted 
(as to the Gospel’), but Patmos was 
mentioned by others*. In the valu- 
able synoptical epitome of the Old and 
New Testament (wrongly attributed to 
Athanasius) a statement is made which 
appears intended to reconcile the two 
accounts. ‘‘The Gospel according to 
John was dictated by him, St John the 
Apostle and the beloved, when he was 
an exile in the Isle of Patmos—and was 
published at Ephesus by the same 
through the agency of Gaius the beloved 
friend and hospitable receiver of the 
Apostles, concerning whom Paul also 
wrote to the Romans—‘“ Gaius, mine 
host, and of the whole Church, saluteth 
you’.” The character of the first Epistle 
would be consistent enough with this. It 
might well have been written, as the 
second Epistle must have been written, 
during some period of separation from 
the Churches over which the Apostle im- 
mediately presided. One expression in 
the third Epistle might certainly seem to 
give considerable support to the account 
of the author of the ‘Synopsis.’ The 
phrase—‘“‘ and ye know that our record 
is true”—points evidently to the attesting 
appeal towards the close of the Gospel 
with which (if Gaius published it) he 
was sO intimately connected*. The in- 


1 So Irenzus, ‘ Heres.’ 111. 1; so also the 
subscriptions to the Syriac and Arab translations, 
cited by Hug, ‘Introd. N. T.’ 11. 69. 

2 The curious manuscript in the convent at 
Patmos, containing a narrative of the journeys 
of St John in the island (Al zepioda tov Geodd- 
you), and attributed to Prochorus, one of his dis- 
ciples, has one section of some beauty and inter- 
est, which tells how the Apostle before leaving 
for Ephesus was miraculously led to dictate hig 
Gospel. The extract is fully given in ‘ Descri 
tion de l’ile de Patmos,’ par V. Guérin, pp. 24 


—3!1. 

i Romans xvi. 23. ‘Synop. S. S.’ 76. [Ap 
Athan. Opp. Tom. Iv. 433, edit. Migne.] 

* 3 John w. 12; cf. John xxi. 24. 


THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN. 


veterate tradition of the Church was that 
- St John was exiled in the later years of 
the reign of Domitian (A.D. 95—96)’. 
The short reign of Nerva promised better 
days forthe Church. The tidings of this 
would make it natural for St John to 
express to Kyria the hope of a speedy 
meeting®. 

2. In this part of our task it only 
remains to shew the importance for the 
defence of St John’s Gospel of grasping 
firmly the connection of the Epistle with it. 

The Gospel of St John will be recog- 
nized “by all competent judges as the 
centre of the Christian position ; and in- 
dissolubly connected with it is the First 
Epistle of St John. 

The latest accepted theory of unbe- 
lieving criticism at the present date is as 
follows :— 

About a.D. 125 the Church first heard 
of a mysterious book, heralded by an- 
nouncements well calculated to excite 
the curiosity of Christians. A forgery of 
unusual ability was launched as a pre- 
cursor, the document known to us as the 
First Epistle of St John. This mys- 
terious book was nothing less than a 
new Gospel, deeper and more spiritual 
than any of its predecessors, which was 
bold enough even to rectify the previous 
Evangelists in some not unimportant 
particulars, and which professed to be 
written by the beloved disciple of Jesus. 
This record affected a wider authority 
and a more spiritual texture than the 
humbler narratives, more on a level with 
ordinary humanity, which had up to this 
time converted, soothed, edified, con- 
tented, the souls of Christians. 

It can scarcely be denied that the new 
book came from Asia Minor—from 


1 ** Quarto decimo anno secundam post Nero- 
nem persecutionem movente Domitiano, in Pat- 
mon insulam relegatus scripsit Apocalypsin... 
Interfecto autem Domitiano sub Nerva principe 
rediit Ephesum.” (S. Hieron. ‘Cat.’ 1x.) This 
would make St John’s exile to Patmos last 17 or 
18 months. 

2 2 John z. 12. See Wallon, ‘De la Croyance 
due 4 l’Evangile,’ pp. 211—213. Demetrius is 
(3 John v. 12) another link connecting these 
Epistles with Zphesus. It was certainly an 
Ephesian name, Acts xix. 24, 38. A famous 
architect of the name was honourably connected 
with the completion of the temple at Ephesus. 
By Vitruvius he is said to have been “servus 
Diane.” He lived B.c. 340. See ‘Dictionary 
of Greek and Roman Biography,’ s. v. 


295 


Ephesus—one of the pullulating hot- 
beds of the dogmatic vegetation of 
Christianity. The party-spirit, which is 
inseparable from earnest conviction in 
religion, had long divided Christians 
under the banners of various Apostles. 
A group of Churches, gathered in by the 
ardent missionary labours of St Paul, 
clung to the glory which they felt to be 
their right from their association with the 
great Apostle of the Gentiles. Other 
communities turned to St Peter in the 
West, to St James in Syria. There were 
not a few who were fiercely jealous of 
the movement of thought and feeling, 
not without some foundation in the 
synoptical Evangelists, which tended to 
make St Peter the Prince of the Apostles. 
The existing Gospels, as it seemed to 
them, afforded no counterpoise to the 
pretensions of this widely-diffused Petrine 
party. A pious fraud was therefore con- 
templated, of a character which would 
not shock the susceptibilities of the day. 
Thus from the obscurity which gathers 
round the Church at the close of the 
Apostolic age there issued a Gospel 
which was destined to obtain a pre- 
eminent place in the sacred Canon of 
the New Testament, and an Epistle 
which has influenced Christian thought 
and practice as the profoundest and 
gentlest delineation of Christian cha- 
racter sketched upon the lines of the 
great model in the Gospel. It is denied, 
peremptorily, that these two books were 
written either by St John himself, or by 
disciples informed and prompted by him 
during the closing years of his prolonged 
life. It is conjectured as probable, how- 
ever, that they came from some disciple 
of the great master about twenty-five or 
thirty years after his death. For three 
or four decades there had been a peculiar 
tradition of the life of Christ floating 
through the Asiatic Churches, a Gospel 
according to the use of Ephesus. Two 
individuals had a very large part in this 
work ; one, a homonym of the Apostle 
St John, the Presbyter John; the other, 
Aristion, who knew by heart many as 
yet unwritten discourses of Jesus. These 
two men were consulted by Papias as 
oracles upon the origin of Christianity 
and the life of its Founder. 

The fourth Gospel, then, represents 
the traditions of this “‘ Ephesian school.” 


296 


It boldly fixed and stereotyped in writing 
in a concrete shape, in a form which the 
world has never forgotten, the memories 
of the Presbyter John and of Aristion, 
which, no doubt, did go back to the 
Apostle St John. It was to prepare for 
this “ pious fraud,” and to accustom the 
ears of Asiatic Christendom to an en- 
tirely new cast of theological language, 
that a Catholic Epistle, attributed to St 
John, was spread about as a preparatory 
essay. The dexterous author very pos- 
sibly imitated what he had heard or re- 
membered of the tone and style of the 
Apostle’s preaching and conversation. 
The writer, whoever he may be, has a 
feverish desire to obtain credence by 
repeated asseverations; an excited style, 
as if he expected angry contradiction or 
contemptuous incredulity. The name 
of St John, it will be remarked, is never 
anequivocally adopted, as if the writer 
did not wish to burn all his boats and to 
commit himself irrevocably. 

The object of the new Gospel is two- 
fold: to prove the mission of Jesus as 
Saviour to unbelievers; and still more, 
to endow Christendom with a new and 
higher conception of His Person. Thus 
we have in the Gospel fraudulently 
named from St John a life of Jesus, 
different from, nay contradictory to, that 
which is given by the three synoptical 
Evangelists’. 

It will be seen that in this important 
controversy it is felt to be absolutely 
necessary to get rid of the Epistle as an 
authentic document, and discredit it in 
every particular. For this purpose it is 
considered convenient to suggest that 
the First Epistle may have been an 
essay, thrown off in advance to prepare 
the Christian public for a new Gospel and 
for an audacious development of Chris- 
tian dogma. How long this process 
would have required, within what com- 
pass of time this taste would have been 
created, we are not told. But a careful 
and constant comparison between the 
Epistle and Gospe! shews that the Gos- 


1 See ‘Church Quarterly Review,’ January, 
1880—‘ The Four Gospels and Modern Scepti- 
cism.’ The theory here traced is a representa- 
tion, which the writer has tried to make fair and 
candid, of the fourth chapter of M. Renan’s 
, . *L’Eglise Chrétienne.’ Les &rits Fohannigues, 

PP: 45—62. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


pel must have been the avant-courier of 
the Epistle, not the Epistle of the Gospel 
We see in every form and in every direc- 
tion some indication of the subjective, as- 
suming, pointing to, commenting upon 
the objective. It is so in dogma, in po- 
lemics, in general application. The open- 
ing verses of the Epistle are the opening 
verses of the proewmium of the Gospel in 
a subjective form. The Jolemical topics 
just indicated by a certain emphatic ar- 
rangement of subjectsand choice of words 
in the Gospel are more broadly dealt with 
in the Epistle. The Gospel closes the 
procemium with the “Word made Flesh” 
—and then, starting from the Aumanzty, 
ascends step after step to the full Godhead. 
It asserts and makes permanent the cries 
of confession wrung from the hearts oi 
men. It writes down the wonderful music, 
elicited by a hand that runs up the scales 
from its first notes expressive of recogni- 
tion of human sanctity—“ Thou art the 
King of Israel” —to the grandest and 
richest harmony which ascends to Jesus 
as God—“my Lord and my God” 
Thus the Gospel proper starts from the 
Humanity, and ascends to the histori- 
cal confession of the Divinity. The 
£pistle, on the contrary, with the objec- 
tive historical order before it in the 
Gospel, starts from the true and proper 
Divinity’, and descends to the dogmatic 
declaration of the true and proper Man- 
hood*. It is impossible, from the nature 
of the case, to have any more complete 
proof that the Epistle cou/d not have 
been launched as a separate venture, 
apart from the Gospel and preparatory 
to it. 


Vi 


The external testimony is consider- 
able. All three Epistles are recognized 
in the ‘Canon Muratorianus‘*.’ Eusebius 
says of Papias—‘“‘he used passages as 


1 John xx. 28. 2; Johni. 1. 

3 1 John iv. 2, 3, v- 6. Special attention 
should also be paid to 1 John v. 6—11, which is 
really an exhaustive analysis of the Gospel as an 
existing document from the special point of view 
of its being a gospel of witness. 

4 The passage in ‘Can. Mur.’ seems to treat 
1 ¥ohn as an appendix to the Gosfel—and to 
mean 2 and 3 Sohn, when it s of ‘*twe 
Epistles” farther on, (See Westcott, ‘On the 
Canon,’ p. 191. 


THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN. 


witnesses from the First Epistle of John, 

and likewise of Peter.” (‘H. E.’ 111. 39.) 
The quotations, or allusions, in the 

Apostolic Fathers are as follows: 


t John iv. 4, 5 (or 
John xvii. 11, 14, 
16). 

t John i. 1. 


t John v. 15. 


«John v. 3—15. 
[Thesereferences 
are given by Hu- 
ther, ‘ Krit.-exeg. 
Handbuch iiber 


die Briefe des 
Johannes,’ pp. 
17, 18, but the 
list is incomplete. 
Add] 

t John i. 4. 

t John ii 4. 


t John iii. 24. 
Eo? An EA. 
1 John iv. 2, 3. 


1 John iv. 3. 


t John iv. 9. 


‘Anon. Epist. ad 
Diogn.’ v1. (The 
Logos). 

Ibid. vu. Lid. x1. 
(five times). 

‘ Herm. Past.’ Man- 
dat. Ix. 

Lbid. 


Barnab. ‘ Epist.’ 1. 
Ignat. ‘Epist ad 
Ephes.’ xv. 


‘ Herm. Past.’ Man- 
dat. v. 

Ignat. ‘Epist. ad 
Smyrn.’ v. 

Polycarp, ‘Epist. 
ad Philipp.’ vit. 
Polycarp alone 
among the Apos- 
tolic Fathers men- 
tions Antichrist. 


’ Polycarp, ‘Epist. ad 


Philipp.’ viii. 


The quotations in Justin Martyr’s 


writings are: 
1 John v. 9. 


t John iii. r—7. 
» iil 8 
a Sa 


ies Aa | 


(cod paprupia. ‘Di- 
alog.c. Tryphon.’ 
123, 0. 12). 

Ibid. 123, n. 26. 

Ibid. 45, D. 13. 

‘Epist. ad Diognet.’ 
XI. n. 7 (not Jus- 
tin’s, but proba- 
bly very early). 

Ibid. X. n. 2. 


To these may be added: 


g John v. 8. 


i 18—22. 


The mystical order 

preserved in o 
éxxéas x THS TAEv- 
pas avtod vdwp Kai 
aiva. S. Claud. 
Apollinaris Frag. 
apuc Routh, ‘Re- 


297 

iv. 1, 2 liq. S? 1 161. 

(A.D. 160—180.) 

1 John v. 1 Tren.‘ adv. Heeres.*’ 
11. 18. 

1 John v. 16. Clem.  Alexand. 


‘Strom.’ 11. 14. 


Origen complained of the abuse made 
of the text, 1 John v. 19. ‘‘ Certain 
heretics,” he says, “suppose that by 
world here John means to speak of 
things on earth and human affairs. 
From a mistaken notion that world, 
according to their reading of it, means 
the whole system consisting of heaven 
and earth and the things therein, they 
utter bold and impious things concerning 
God.” He seems to say that they do so 
“from having no word to form an exact 
equivalent for xocmes, and fall into im- 
pious thoughts concerning the demi- 
urgus*.” The First Epistle must have 
been well known at that time. 


VIL. 
Ana’ysis of the First Epistle of 
St John’. 


i, I—4. 
Personal impression from the historical 
manifestation of the Word, Who is the 
Life. (vv. I, 2.) 


1 See Hieron. ‘de Vir. Illust.’? 1x.; Euseb 
*H. Eccles.’ 111. 24, for ful! testimony to the 
universal reception of the First Epistle of S 
John in the Church. 

2 Origen, Opp. Tom. 11. ‘Comment. in Gen. 
 25e 
Ps In the interesting ‘ Practical Exposition’ 
dictated by Neander, when almost blind, the 
whole Epistle is divided into the following sec- 
tions from a somewhat different point of view : 

1. St John witness of Jesus, and announcer 
of the Gospel, i. 1r—4. 

2. The Nature a God—resulting conse- 
quences for us, i. 5—I0. 

3. The sinner’s welcome, ii. 1, 2. 

4. The knowledge of God, ii. 3—6. 

5. The old and new commandments, ii. 
7—I1. 

6. The unity and diversity of Gospel wit- 
ness, ii. 12—14. 

7. The love of the world, ii. r5—17. 

8. The Antichrist, ii. 18—23. 

. The inner treasure, ii. 24—28. 

1o. The child of God: 

(z) His privileges, ii. 29—iii. 2. 
(4) His vocation, iii. 3—r10. 

11. Brotherly love, the summary of the 
Christian life, iii. 11: —18. 

12. The Christian’s confidence before God, 


iii. 19—22. 


298 INTRODUCTION TO 


Great practical objects o the declaration 
of St John in the Gospei and Epistle— 
(a) fellowship with “us.” (v. 3.) 
And that, too, a fellowship with the Father 
and with His Son.) (Jbid.) 


(6) joy fulfilled. (wv. 4-) 


II. 
I. 5—II. 2. 


The Great ANNOUNCEMENT — God 1s 
Light. (wv. 5.) 
Practical character of the result of false pro- 
fession. (v. of 
Result of walking in the light— 
(a) true mental communion, 
(4) constant purification by the blood of 
Jesus. (v. 7.) 
Two warnings (vv. 8—1o0) with a promise 
enclosed. (v. 9.) 
The whole object of this teaching—‘ that 


ye sin not.” (ii. 1. 
Yet it includes a ‘‘comfortable word.” 
(Ibid.) 


A propitiation for us and the whole world. 
Cu. 2.) 


III. 
(A) Il. 3—6. 


The test of knowledge of Christ. (wv. 3.) 

The test of vital communion with Him: 

1. Observing His commandments severally. 

Vv. 4. 

2. Heh ce His word as “ one entire and 
perfect chrysolite.” (wv. 5.) 

The Christian’s objective standard—the one 
great life-walk traced in the Gospel of St 
John. (wv. 6.) 


(B) WW. 7-11. 


The commandment in a sense new, in a 
sense old— (wv. 7.) 

true and attested in the Christ of the 
Gospel and in their own experience. (wv. 8.) 

The darkness is passing away, and the Very 
light enlighteneth. (Jéid.) 

‘Tn light,” ‘¢ in darkness,” contrasted. (vv. 


9, 10, II.) 


13- The Commandment of God, iii. 22—24. 

14. The spirit of truth and error, iv. 1—6. 

15. God is Love, iv. 7—18. 

16. The love of God the basis of brotherly 
love, iv. 19—v. I. 

17. The victory over the world, v. 2—5. 

18. The triple witness given to Jesus Christ, 
v. 6—10. 

19. Christ the Life of the faithful, v. rr—13. 

20. The efficacy of prayer, v. 14, 15. 

21. The sin unto death, v. 16, 17. 

a2. Union with Christ, the source of sanc- 
tity, v 18—2r. 


(C) vv. 12—17. 


Why he is writing and has written. (ow 
12, 13, 14.) 

Warning against the love of the world. 
(wv. 15, 16, 17.) 


IV. 
Il. 18—28. 


The last hour—Antichrist. (wv. 18, 19.) 

Their chrism from the Christ. (v. 20. 

The Antichrist, and the chrism whi 
teaches and is permanent. (vv. 20—28.) 


V. 


Il. 29—III, Io. 


It we know theoretically that He is righteous, 
we know practically soe continue to be His 
true children. (ii. 29.) 

Our sonship: 

in the present, (iii. 1.) 
in the future, (v. 2.) 

a very practical and purifying truth. (~. 3. 

Sin subjective is ever sin objective. Me 4 

The removal of sin the purpose of His 
manifestation. (wv. 5. 


ce of being God’s or Satan’s. (vv. 6—. 
Io. 
VI. 
Ill. II—24. 


The message of love announced to be ful- 
filled. (wv. 11, 12.) 

Illustrated by its opposite—parenthetic and 
pathetic words. (v. 13. 

Translation from death to life attested by 
the existence of the love as an effect. (wv. 14.) 

The opposite of that blessed translation. 
(wv. 14, 15.) 

Our love only measurable by the self-sacrifice 
of Christ. (wv. 16.) 

A fortiori is sacrifice of “this world’s good * 
demanded. (v. 17. 

The test of solid spiritual comfort. (vv. 
18, 19.) 

Of true self-condemnation and self-acquittal 
(wv. 20, at 

Relation between keeping His commands 
ments (v. 22) and His great all-inclusive come 
mandment (v. 23), and answer to our prayers. 


(wv. 22, 23.) 


Knowledge of the fulfilment of Christ’s 
promise in the Gospel (xiv. 23, xvii. 23) Come 
municated by the Spirit (according to xiv. 20). 
(v. 24.) 


VIL. 
Iv. 1—6. 


The spirits are to be tested. 
Test of Antichrist. (vv. 2, 3. 
Assurance of victory. (vv. 4, 5, 6.) 


v. I.) 


THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN. 


VIII. 
Iv. 7—V. 2. 
Love— 
(a) in its ideal essence (vv. 7, 8). 
(2) in its Divine manifestation (vv. 9, 
20). 

¢) as our duty (v. 11). 
d) in God and His people (vv. 12— 


16). 
e) perfected (wv. 17). 
2 love and fear (v. 18). 
(g) of God and man inseparable (vv. 
19, 20, 21). 
He that loves the Father loves the Father’s 
children. (v. 1, 2.) 


IX. 
Vv. 3—21. 

The conquest which 4as conquered the 
world. (vv. 3, 4, 5-) 

Results of the Incarnation. (wv. 6.) 

The idea of fivefold witness in the Gospel— 

Witness of Spirit, 
Witness of water, 
Witness of b/ood, 
a threefold witizss— (wv. 6, 7, 8.) 
Add the witness of men (v. 9), 
the witness of God (wv. 9). 

This fivefold witness crowned and perfected 
by the izner witness (v. 10). 

Summary ofits purport. (v. 11.) 

Warning. (v. 12.) 

Object of his writing. (v. 13. 

Prayer ; boundless confidence in it (wv. 14, 
15), except in the case of sin unto death. 
(wv. 16, 17.) 

Three primary points of Christian know- 
ledge, which are also general principles of the 
Epistle. (vv. 18, 19, 20.) 


Guard yourselves from the idols. (wv. 21.) 


Such, then, the Epistle stands before 
us. It may originally have been com- 
municated to the cycle of Johannic 
churches. But it was not intended to 
be restricted to their use. It is not 
merely the charge of a Bishop or 
Metropolitan, choked and cumbered 
with local and transitory details. It is 
the voice of an Afost/e—calm, indeed, 
and simple, yet ringing on through the 
ages, and speaking to successive genera- 
tions in a language that is for all time. 
It represents the permanent as opposed 
to the ¢ransient principles and feelings 
of the Church; because it represents 
more closely than even the writings of 
St Paul the very words and thoughts of 
Jesus. The Epistle is second in im- 
portance, we may almost say, only to the 
Gospel with which it is so inseparably 
connected. Itis that Gospel’s best expo- 


299 


sition and invaluable defender. It is an 
arsenal in which weapons will be found 
against forms of error which are ever 
arising. It is also the loveliest image of 
a human existence, which we may well 
conceive to have been as truly conformed 
to the one perfect life as any which has 
ever been passed upon the earth. It 
has been said that the nearer the style 
is to the thought, and the thought to 
God, the better it will be. This highest 
merit St John’s style possesses. Viewed 
in its external circumstances and earthly 
moulding it was influenced by two 
elements. For the language of the 
Galileans was Syro-Chaldaic. Greek was, 
however, much spoken in Galilee of the 
Gentiles. Not the exquisite Greek of 
Athens, or even of Alexandria, but 
“common,” with a touch of barbarian 
and foreign forms, yet not quite without 
Hebraic force and Hellenic splendour’. 
Every fibre of language is a fibre of 
mind; every fibre of Greek of the 
finest and subtlest of minds. Some 
ancient Christian writers did not doubt 
that contact with the school of Ephesus 
and the Ionian reflection of Hellenic 
culture added something of grace to 
St John’s style’. This may be an ex- 
aggeration®, yet in truth there is in 
it something of both his countries— 
much of Galilee, a little perhaps of 
Ephesus. To Galilee and its influences 
belong the ineradicable Hebraic tinge, 
the alternate beat of the wings, the dou- 
ble, triple or quadruple advancing wave of 
parallelism*. To Greece may perhaps be 
attributed its elevation, its distinction, 

1 *Sur le texte et le style du N. T.’ M. Berger 
de Xivrey. 

2 auorépous ait@ xapicapévov Tod Kuplov, 
Tov TE Tis yvuaoews, Tov Te THS Ppdcews. Dionys. 
Alex. (ap. Euseb. ‘ Hist. Eccles.’ vii. 25). 

3 Herder, however, is not afraid to say of the 
fourth Gospel, ‘‘an angel’s hand has written it.’” 

4 M. Renan, indeed, says of St John’s style 
that ‘‘it has nothing Hebrew, nothing Jewish, 
nothing Talmudic.” Ewald, however, one of the 
most competent of later Hebraists, gives a very 
different judgment. ‘‘ No language,” he says, 
“as to its spirit and the whole feeling which 
animates it (Gest und Ankauche), can be more 


thoroughly Hebraic than that of our author.” 
**The rabbinical style is the caricature of the 


Jewish,” says M. Godet, ‘“‘and the further we go 


back in Hebrew antiquity the more we meet the 
two phenomena—of Zoverty in forms and terms, 
and plenitude of intuition, which are the two 
characteristics of the style of St John.’ ‘Come 
mentaire sur l’Ev. de S. Jean,’ 11 713, 


300 INTRODUCTION TO THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN, 


its incision’. We have all too little 
among modern scholars of that enthu- 
siastic delight in Scripture which existed 
in their predecessors. If Sir Philip 
Sidney could say, “I never heard the 
old song of Percy and Douglas that I 
found not my heart more moved than 
with a trumpet;” the great Archbishop 
of Constantinople exclaims over one of 
St Paul’s Epistles, ‘I rejoice with joy 
exceeding in my delight at the sound 
of that trumpet of the Spirit.” Such 
thrilling elevation is scarcely the effect 
to be expected from the letter of the 
Apostle of love *. But here, if anywhere, 


1 “Jn St John’s style the vesture alone is 
Greek, the body is Hebrew.” M. Godet, zdid. 

% Yet of the beginning of St John’s Gospel, 
ehrysostom also says—é T7}s Bpovris vids "Iwavyns, 
@ dwd ris cddmiyyos XG THs TrevLaTixys Td, "Hy, 


we may find the utterance of the Wis- 
dom that is ‘‘suaviter fortis, et fortiter 
suavis’.’’ One who has spent years in 
the study of these chapters, and with un- 
willing haste piles together in a few 
broken months the materials which he 
has long amassed, can humbly sympa- 
thize with the great Augustine, at least 
in one thing—the love with which he 
lingered over the Epistle of love, his un- 
willingness to have donewithit— “ quanto 
libentius de charitate loquor, tanto minus 
volo finiri Epistolam istam*.” 


(‘In Joann. Homil.’ vit.) 

1 “Plus une parole ressemble 4 une pensée, 
une pensée 4 une 4me, une 4me a4 Dieu, plus 
tout cela est beau.” Pascal. 

2 S. Augustin. ‘in Epistol. Joann. ad Parthos,’ 
Tractatus VIII. 14- (Tom. 111. Pt. 2. 2044, edit. 
Migne.) 


THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF 


JOHN. 


CHAPTER I. 


1 He describeth the person of Christ, in whom 
we have eternal life, by a communion with 


God: 5 to which we must adjoin holiness of 


life, to testify the truth of that our commu- 


nion and puofession of faith, as also to assure 
us of the forgiveness of our sins by Christ's 
death. 


HAT which was trom the be- 
ginning, which we have heard, 





Cuar. I. 1—4. ‘That which was con- 
tinually from the beginning, before the world 
was, from all eternity; that which we have 
heard, which we have seen with our eyes, and 
the impression of which is still present with 
us; that which during the time of Christ’s 
walk upon earth we contemplated, and which 
our hands once handled—I speak concerning 
the Word whose Divine attribute is Life, 
Who is the Life—(and that Life was once 
manifested upon earth; and we have seen, 
and consequently are witnesses, and announce 
to you from Him who sent us that Life, that 
eternal Life whose peculiar attribute it is to 
have been with the Father and manifested to 
us)—that which we have seen and heard 
declare we from Him who sent us unto you, 
to the end that you too may have fellowship 
with us. And then that fellowship of ours 
is with the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ. 
And we are writing unto you these things 
that His words in the Gospel may be 
fulfilled, and that our joy may continue full.” 
The peculiarity of St John’s mode of ex- 
pression here is well observed and accounted 
for by Neander. ‘It may seem surprising 
that, instead of clearly designating the Divine 
Person, who was from the beginning and was 
manifested to him in visible form, St John 
uses indeterminate expressions, such as—‘ that 
which was ’—and—‘that which we have heard,’ 
&c. But this language is connected with the 
deepest part of the Apostle’s method and 
doctrine. In fact, Christ is with Him the 
beginning and end of all Christian preaching. 
In his thoughts and in his life there is no other 
subject. The indeterminate expressions which 
he employs correspond, not to abstract ideas, 
but to this Living Person, the centre of his 
teaching and of his life. Hence it is that he 
uses indifferently to designate Him either 
personal pronouns (‘He Who’) or impersonal 
pronouns (‘that which’). ‘That which’ St 
John announces is the coming in the flesh of 
‘Him who’ was from the beginning. St John 
does not at once complete his thought. He 
interrmpts himself to explain the subject which 


as yet he has only indicated in vague terms, 
but which fills his whole soul. It is the Word 
of Life.” (Neander, ‘Comment. on First Epist. 
of St John.’) 


1. That which| The neuter which for the 
masc. He who. St John frequently uses the 
neuter to express a collective whole. See in 
St John’s Gospel i. 11, iv. 22, vi. 37, XVil. 2. 
‘The neuter is naturally used, when the most 
comprehensive term is wanted.” (Cf. Gal. 
ili. 22; 1 Cor. i. 27; Eph. i. 10; Col. i. 20.) 
Bp Lightfoot, ‘ Galatians,’ p. 148. 

was| The word shews that, before His 
manifestation, He existed with the Father. 

from the beginning| It is not, perhaps, as 
decisively true here as in the Gospel (i. 1) that 
‘no one who takes words in their natural 
sense can suppose that the beginning means the 
commencement of the Ministry of Christ.” 
(‘Essays and Reviews,’ p. 355.) But the 
balance of argument certainly inclines to the 
higher interpretation of the words. So far, 
indeed, as the language alone is concerned, 
from the beginning may mean one of two 
things: either (1) from eternity, or, at least, 
Srom the beginning of the world (Matt. xix. 4, 
8; John viii. 44; 2 Thess. ii. 13, 14; 1 John 
ii. 13, 14, iii. 8; cf. also in LXX., Micah v. 
2; Prov. viii. 23; Ecclus. xxiv. 14); or (2) 
it may mean, from the beginning of the 
Ministry of Christ, the initium rei Christiane 
(cf. John xv. 27; 1 John ii. 7, 24, iii. 113 
2 John vv.5,6). In favour of the first inter- 
pretation are the following: 

(a) The analogy of the prowmium of the 
Gospel. ‘‘The Gospel and the Epistle of 
John,” says Dionysius of Alexandria, ‘are in 
harmony and begin similarly. The former 
says, In the beginning was the Word; the latter, 
That which was from the beginning. ‘These 
are the first notes of the strain.” According to 
this interpretation, ‘‘all is perfectly balanced 
and self-consistent, and nothing wanders from 
the theme, in these preludes which he plays.” 
(Ap. Euseb. ‘Hist. Eccles.’ vil. 25.) ‘This 
view becomes certain, if, as we contend, this 


302 


which we have seen with our eyes, 
which we have looked upon, and our 


Epistle accompanied the Gospel and pointed 
toit throughout. It is an undeniable instance 
of the connection of suggestion. (See Introd. 
to this Epistle.) 

(6) The elewatea tone of the whole context. 
We have here a passage strangely unlike St 
John’s general mould of composition. Least 
of all does the Apostle’s structure of words 
generally resemble the description quaintly 
given of Hooker, that his style was ‘‘ long and 
pithy, driving on a whole flock of several clauses 
before he comes to the close of a sentence.” 
We have here a passage “‘ prefaced and brought 
in with more magnificent ceremony than any 
one passage of Scripture” (Hammond). The 
very length of the sentence, so unusual with 
St John, testifies to the emotion with which 
it was written. ‘The sublimity of the passage 
as a whole gives a proportional elevation to 
each single clause, and makes the highest sense 
also the most natural. 

(c) The context seems to be almost incon- 
sistent with the second interpretation. How. 
could the Apostles be said, not only to have 
eard, but to have seen and handled the com- 
mencement of the Gospel message? (Bp Bull, 
¢ Judic. Eccles. Cathot.’ p. 43.) 

We therefore conclude in favour of under- 
standing he beginning here as in St John’s 
Gospel, i. 1. 

“It is toa fact, not'to a principle, or a sen- 
timent, that we are here directed as containing 
the ideal essence of the Gospel.” (Dr Mill.) 
“« Whilst the three other Evangelists begin the 
Life of Jesus from dates which belong to 
earth and time, St John, in the very first 
words of his Gospel, transports himself be- 
yond the commencement of the earthly life of 
the Son of God; he elevates himself to the 
contemplation of the Divine type of which 
the visible life is but the earthly impress. He 
follows precisely the same process in his 
Epistle. St John could not proceed other- 
wise; he could not relate the Life of Christ 
without first ascending to His pre-existence ; 
for the fulness of the Divine Nature which 
had gloriously appeared in Jesus was indis- 
solubly linked in his mind with the human 
manifestation of that Nature. The Apostle 
ever sees in Christ the revelation of Him Who 
is elevated above time, Who had no beginning 
of days, Who was before creation, and Who 
dwells from eternity to eternity in sanctuaries 
impenetrable to mortal gaze. To shew that 
it is He Who has assumed a human form in 
the Person of Jesus of Nazareth whose his- 
tory he is about to relate, he must commence 
his Gospel by establishing the connection 
between the prehistoric Christ, such as He 
was in the bosom of the Father, and the 


I. JOHN. 1 


hands have handled, of the Word 


of life; 


historical Christ, such as contemporaries 
had seen, known, heard Him. He his 
Epistle also by no abstractions, but by the 
assertion of the greatest fact in the history of 
humanity, ‘That which was from the begin- 
ning,’ &c.” (Neander.) 

which we have heard, which we have seen 
with our eyes, which we gazed upon, and 
our hands handled] In such a passage 
as this reverence will be slow to find mere 
pleonasms. Those only are ‘competent 
judges,” we may safely say (with Bp. Butler 
of his own style), who are also ‘‘ competent 
judges how far the same things, and not other 
things, could have been said in different 
words.” ‘The so-called pleonasms of Scrip- 
ture generally render important services. They 
add colour and impressiveness to the style, 
and give it dignity or liveliness, even when 
they do not directly strengthen its logical 
skeleton. With the skilful rhetorician an 
epithet is often an abridged argument (Archbp. 
Whately, ‘Rhet.’ p. 213; Arist. ‘Rhet.’ m1. 
3). Much more do phrases in Scripture 
accused of being pleonastic often condense 
an argument, or embody an important refer- 
rence (e.g. ‘‘ Mine eyes have seen Thy salva- 
tion,” Luke ii. 30, shews the exact fulfilment 
of v. 26), or add to ethical effect. (‘*The 
pleonasm of entire sentences is a thing not to 
be thought of.” See the instructive pages, 
Winer, Pt. 111. § LXV. 633, 634.) We may 
extend to St John Prof. Jowett’s words, 
originally written of St Paul, that ‘* tautology 
with him is often emphatic.” For each of the 
phrases here has its own proper significance, 
Strange errors were abroad. ‘Taking its start- 
ing-point from the necessary evil of matter, 
Doketism denied the Flesh of Christ. But, as 
the first words of the verse assured Christians 
that their Lord was no common-place Christ, 
so its close maintained by an emphatic appeal 
to human ears, eyes, hands, that he was 
no shadowy Christ. Such a ‘‘Christolo- 
gical image of mist” would have called into 
existence an evanescent Church. Ours is not 
a Christ such as we read of in Gnostic frag- 
ments, which strangely blend Oriental mysti- 
cism with Greek philosophy. The Christ here 
set forth by St John is not one who left no 
footprints upon the earth; who did not really 
eat and drink; who had a spectre nailed to the 
cross in His stead; whose body yielded to the 
touch; who melted away, like mist, in the 
pageant of an illusive ascension. He is One 
‘Who came, in the /ikeness of sinful flesh, in 
the reality of human flesh. It is also remark- 
able how these ‘ pleonasms” serve to establish 
the subject of the verse If we had only the 
verb 4eard, Socinus might be right in inter- 


owe 


- 


v. 2.] 


2 (For the life was manifested, 
and we have seen it, and bear 





preting the passage of doctrine ; if we had only 
the verb seez, de Wette might be right in 
interpreting it of ‘‘the power of a new life.” 
But neither a mere doctrine, nor a mere 
influence—nothing, indeed, but a real living 
person, could have been heard, seen, con- 
templated, handled. Which our hands have 
handled may possibly have an anti-Doketic 
tinge in a very special way. 

which we have heard| This reminds us 
of the words of Jesus, with more i 
reference to the discourses recorded in the 
fourth Guspel. Its place in the sentence— 
above sig? and 4andling—shews the reverence 
with which St John regarded the words of 
Christ. It makes us feel how the Apostle 
would have shrunk from inventing language 
for Him, and putting it into His mouth. 

which we have seen with our eyes| “It is 
not enough to say, we save seen. He adds, 
with our eyes. We believed with our own, 
not other men’s eyes. So in Latin, Aisce oculis 
widt” (Grotius). Cf. for the emphatic use of 
“seeing with the eyes,” Luke i 30. The 
tense here signifies ‘‘ we have looked and see” 
—The impression of the sight still remains. 

which we gazed upon] Between seen 
and gazed upon (@6cacdyeGa) a distinction is 
to be noticed: either (1) as between the ex- 
ternal sight of miracles, and the more spiritual 
and internal beholding the moral glory of the 
only-Begotten (Baur, Ebrard); or (2) with 
much greater truth, as between the sight which 
has simply 4now/edge for its result and object, 
and that fuller and more entranced gaze which 
rejoices in the object contemplated (cf. St 
John’s Gospel, vi. 36—40, where the deholdeth 
of v. 40 is an intentional advance upon the 
bave seen of v. 36). He contemplates who is 
sufficiently struck to stop and gaze. The 
word used here by St John is the same as that 
applied by the angel to those who gazed upon 
the Ascension (Actsi. 11). This shade of 
meaning Gewpeiv (John vi. 40) seems to have 
in common with 6eac6a. In Ps. xxvii. 4 it 
is the word in the LX X. which renders mtn, 
—‘‘clinging, eager, enchanted gaze.” (De- 
litzsch.) ‘‘To contemplate with pleasure; 
delight in the sight of something.” (Gesen. 
‘Lex.’ s.v. Cf. the use of suspicit in ‘ Eneid’ 
I. 442, VI. 667, and “‘ Vis animum mirer sus- 
piciamque tuum,” Martial, 01. 36.) 

The Transfiguration is not mentioned in 
St John’s Gospel. May it not be specially 
pointed at here, and in St Johni. 14? It is 
also referred to by another of the three who 


~ witnessed it, in a tone which implies that it 


was a well-known part of Christian teaching. 
@ Pet. i. 16—18.) 

our hands handled} The expression would 
naturally refer to some great single occasion, 


I. JOHN. L 


witness, and shew unto you that 
eternal life, which was with the 





perhaps to His bidding (Luke xxiv. 39), and 
to the finger and hana £ Thomas in St John’s 
Gospel (xx. 27). See the striking quotation 
from Bullinger in Ebrard, p. 47. 

concerning] used, as it frequently is at 
the beginning of a sentence, to lead t> the 
point to be discussed, 

the Word (who is also) the Life] This 
certainly does not mean the word, written 
or preached, whose subject is the spiritual 
and eternal life; but the Personal Word, 
the Logos, whose attribute it is that He 
is the Life; who is at once both the Word 
and the Life (cf. Ephes. iv. 18). For 
the double gen. and the interpret. of it, 
cf. St John’s Gospel, ii. 21 (‘‘the Temple 
which is His Body”), xi. 13 (“‘that taking 
of rest which is sleep”). 

On the Logos see Introd. to Gospel and 
Notes, John i. 1. (One of Gibbon’s bitterest 
sneers is conveyed in three adroitly italicized 
words upon the margin. ‘‘ The Logos 
taught in the school of Alexandria Jdefore 
Christ 100—revealed to the Apostle St John, 
A.D. 97.” (‘Decline and Fall,’ chap. xx.) 
Those who believe with St Augustine that all 
truth, wherever found, belongs to Christ by 
right, will not be perplexed by the taunt.) 
Chrysostom would seem to refer to this place 
when he says: “If then the Word is the Life; 
and He who is at once the Word and the 
Life (6 8€ Adyos ovTes xai 7 (wy) became 
flesh; then the Life became flesh.” (‘In 
Joann. Evangel.’ v.) ‘‘ Possibly some one 
might understand the Word of Life as some 
speech or teaching about Christ, not the very 
Body of Christ, which was handled. See 
what follows:—‘And that Life was mani- 
fested.’""—St Aug. ‘In Epist. Joann.’ Prolog. 
Tract. I. 2 

“The Word of Life”—does this only mean 
the preaching of eternal life? ‘The words 
which follow clearly refer, not to the preaching 
of life, but to the manifestation of the Life, 
which has taken place in the bosom of human- 
ity.” (Neander.) 


2. A comparison of this verse with the 
Gospel, i. 14, is very suggestive. The Apostle 
in the Gospel naturally writes from an o4- 
JSective and historical point of view. He begins 
with the Zistorical fact (“The Word was 
made Flesh”), and passes on to a statement 
of the gersonal impression made upon himselt 
and others (‘‘and we beheld with entranced 
gaze His glory”). But in the Epistle, which 
is subjectively related to the Gospel, the process 
is exactly reversed. St John begins with the 
personal impression made upon himself and 
others ; pauses to affirm the 4isterical reality of 
the object, which has produced this impression ; 


393 


304 


Father, and was manifested unto 
us ;) 
3 That which we have seen and 
heard declare we unto you, that ye 


1. JOHN. |. 


[v. & 


also may have fellowship with us: 
and truly our fellowship is with 
the Father, and with his Son Jesus 
Christ. 





and then returns to the subjective impression. 
(See Godet, ‘Sur I’Evangile de S. Jean,’ 1. 
197.) It is one of those deep coincidences 
between the Epistle and Gospel, which witness 
not only to a common authorship, but also to 
an interpenetration of one document by the 
other. 

was manifested | ‘The aorist denoting that it 
was once for all historically manifested in the 
Incarnation and life of Jesus. Cf. for thought 
and expression 1 Tim. ili. 16. 

and declare] The verb is the same with 
that which is so rendered at the commence- 
ment of v. 3. The word indicates properly 
the bearing of a message from another. The 
translation in the A. V. is an instance of 
“various renderings of the same words, by 
which artificial distinctions are introduced in 
the translation, which have no place in the 
original.” (Bp Lightfoot, ‘On Revision,’ &c., 
p- 33.) Note that this word includes St 
John’s Gospel with the present Epistle as 
part of the declaration or message which he 
bears to the Church from God. 

the life, the eternal (life) ] theadj. with 
art. placed after noun gives the strongest em- 
phasis of which language is capable. Eternal, 
here an attribute of Crist, is also an attribute of 
God, in Rom. xvi. 26 (so in LXX.; Isai. xxvi. 
4, xl. 28). Note that just this attribute of 
God and Christ is applied to future reward 
and punishment. 2 ‘Thess. i. 9. (See Add. 
Note at end of the Ep. to Thess.) ‘‘As the 
Epistle opens, so it closes with the mention 
of eternal life,” v. 20 (Bengel). 

which| The Greek (771s) is inadequately 
rendered by the simple relative. ‘‘ It expresses 
an attribute belonging to the zature of the 
object, its rea/ and peculiar, not like ds, its 
accidental property.” (Jelf, ‘Gr. Gr.’ II. 
425.) It amplifies, assigns the class to which 
an object essentially belongs, and has a causa- 
tive tinge (cf. Matt. xxv. 1; Luke viii. 3, 
ix. 30, X. 42; John viii. 53; Acts xxiii. 21; 
Rom. iii.2; 2 Thess. i. 3, &c.). 

as being that which was with the 
Father] (See note at close of the Chapter.) 


83. that ye also] ‘‘That you, no less than 
we, may derive fruit from it” (Grotius). 

may have| ‘‘may proceed in having, and 
being confirmed in. He signifies increasing 
and continuous, not inchoate, action; for he 
addresses those who had already entered the 
communion of the Church.” (a Lap.) 

fellowship with| * Fellowship denotes com- 
merce and society in the same faith, religion, 
and Church, where all partake of the same 


sacraments” (ibid.). The prep. (qwith) is used 
especially of intellectual, moral, and spirituad 
relation. 

with us] One blessed result of the reception 
of the Incarnate God is fellowship, com- 
munion with the Church, as the <Apostolie 
Church. It is to be noticed, however, that the 
word Céurch is never used by St John, either 
in his Gospel, or in the First and Second 
Epistle (in 3 John vv. 6, 9, 10. See Note 
on 3 John v. 6). The pronoun qwe is, in one 
sense, its equivalent. It is not so much the 
“plural of majesty;” or ‘‘the plural or 
modesty, when we share our honour with 
others” (Grot.) ; as the plural of cormmunion— 
the spirit which leads men to speak kindly 
and lovingly of those who are intimately as- 
sociated with them as ‘‘ we”—the expression 
of the Apostle’s intense conviction of his 
fellowship with all Christ’s people, and theirs 
with him. As we have in this verse the we 
of a common Apostolic Church (defined 
the prep.), so not unfrequently in St John 
we find the we of a common A lic wit- 
ness, or of collective attestation of the Gos- 
pel: supra v, 1; Gospel, i. 14, xxi. 24. 

and truly our fellowship is) ‘and truly the 
fellowship which I have called ours (qwith 
us) is something more than that. It is 
with the Father,” &c. When xal...8€ occur, 
as in this place, within a short space, they 
are intended to explain and amplify. The 
second part of the sentence is linked to the 
first by these particles, which thus indicate 
a co-ordination in the ideas but with a certain 
progress. (Godet, ‘Sur l’E. de S. Jean,’ 11. 
124; cf. John vi. 51, xv. 27. ‘‘xat...de, in 
one and the same clause, as often in the best 
authors, signifies et vero —atque etiam.” 
Winer, ‘Gramm. of N. T.,’ Part 111. Sect. liii, 
p- 464. 

with the Father, and with His Son| ‘He 
unfolds the grandeur and nobility of the so- 
ciety of the Church; it is a fellowship with 
the Father, and with His Son; cf. 1 Cor. 
i. 9” (a Lap.). “The fellowship of which 
St John speaks is not only that peace and 
concord, by which men are knit to their 
fellow-men, but that by which there is a vital, 
indissoluble union of men with God in soul 
and spirit by faith.’ (Zwingle, quoted by 
Ebrard in Joc.) ‘The idea of the double fel- 
lowship is profoundly given in John xv. 1 sqq. 

Jesus Christ] Our Lord is called Jesus, i. 7, - 
iv. 3, 15, V-1, 5; Jesus Christ i. 3, iii. 23, iv. 
2, v.20. When there is a reference, direct or 
indirect, to heretics who denied the Incarnae 
tion, the name Jesus is specially used as ap= 


¥. 4) 5-} 


4 And these things write we unto 
you, that your joy may be full. 





propriate to the Human Nature. Jesus Christ 
implies peculiarly a recognition of His Mes- 
sianic character (v. 6). 


4. And these things write we unto you] 
Does the Apostle refer to the verses which 
precede, or (as Diisterd) not merely to vv. 
I—3, but to the whole Epistle? (See Addi- 
tional Note at close of the Chapter.) 

On the whole, there is a presumption 
that, in v. 4, St John would have us under- 
stand by these things, not the entire Epistle or 
the subsequent portion of it, but either (1) 
solely the contents of vv. 1, 2, 3, or (2) with 
much greater probability the Gospel also. 

your joy| ‘Two important MSS. read ‘our 
joy.” ‘The internal evidence, however, seems 
to be in favour of the A.V. (x) It is infi- 
nitely more natural in a letter to wish joy— 
for practically what is said here is tantamount 
to a wish—to others than to ourselves. (2) 
2 John x. 12 is not decisive, for (a) the read- 
ing is uncertain, (4) the anticipated pleasure 
of meeting ‘‘ face to face” imparts a different 
colour to the word our, and makes it vivid 
and appropriate. (3) The phrase ‘that your 
joy may be fulfilled” (John xvi. 24) is in 
favour of the Text. Rec. (see Reiche, ‘Com- 
ment. Crit.’ i /oc.). 

your joy may be fulfilled] For the expression 
cf. Gospel, iii. 29, XV. II, XVi. 24, XVI. 13 
‘“The whole Epistle is a devotional and moral 
application of the main ideas, which are 
evolved historically in the sayings and doings 
of Christ recorded in the Gospel.” (Bishop 
Lightfoot.) 

fulfilled (perf. part.)] raised to the highest 
point. ‘‘It is but the beginning of joy when 
we begin to believe. When faith daily in- 
creases, joy increases in proportion ” (Luther). 

Note the coincidence in thought between 
1 John i. 3, 4 and St John’s Gospel, ch. xvii. 

© Jobnit. 3, 4- 

That ye also may have fellowship with us. 
VU. 3- 
And truly our fellowship is with the Father, 
and with His Son Jesus Christ. Ibid. 

These things write we unte you, that your 
joy may be fulfilled. Ibid. v. 4. 


John xvii. 
That they all may be one. xvii. 21 


That they also may be one in us. Ibid. 


These things I speak in the world, that they 
might have My joy fulfilled in themselves. 
Ibid. v. 13. 

{The word should be translated in the 
Epistle exactly as in the Gospel. It is most 
important, as a great scholar remarks, that 
“*the language of the Gospel be linked in the 


New Test.—Vot. IV. 


I. JOHN. 1 


5 This then is the message which 
we have heard of him, and declare 


A. V., as it is in the original, with the lane 
guage of the Epistle,” thus bringing out 
“another of the many coincidences, tending 
to establish an identity of authorship in the 
Gospel and Epistle, and thus to make valid 
for the former all the evidences which may be 
adduced for the /atter.” Bishop Lightfoot, 
‘On Revision of N. T.’ pp. 55, 56.] 


SECTION II. 


i. s—ii. 2. ‘‘ And the message which we 
have heard from Him, and of which we are 
consequently the authoritative announcers to 
you, is as follows:—‘God is Light, and there 
is in Him no speck of darkness whatever.’ If 
we say (I know not whether it be so—it may 
be) that we have moral and spiritual com- 
munion with Him, while yet we practically 
move in the sphere of darkness, we lie, and 
are no doers of the truth. But if we walk in 
the Light, as He is in the Light, we have 
com.nunion with Him, with His Church, 
with all its faithful people, and they with 
us, and the blood of Jesus His Son con- 
tinually purifies us from all sin. I say this, 
mention this purification continually effected, 
because if we say—as some of us perhaps 
do—that we have no sin as our own, no 
reality of guilt clinging to us and abiding, 
we deceive ourselves, and the truth, theoreti- 
cal and practical, is not in us. If we confess 
our sins, He is faithful to His promises, and 
full of righteousness in order to remit our sins 
and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If 
we say that we have not sinned and are not 
sinners, we are making Him a liar, and the 
substance of His teaching is not in us. My 
children! these things 1 am writing to you, 
in order that ye may not sin. Yet if any 
one may have committed some sin (it may 
be!) we—you and I—have an Advocate with 
the Father, a righteous One, Jesus Christ. 
And He is a Propitiation for our sins, nay, 
not for ours only, but for those of the whole 
world.” 


5. This then is the message| ® stands 
alone in reading here, ‘‘ This, then, is the Jove 
of the message.” But several MSS. read pro- 
mise (€mayyeAia) instead of message (dyye- 
Xia). But the context evidently requires, not 
any Gospel promise, but a message as the 
object of ‘“‘ we announce.” ~ In the words that 
follow there is no promise, but there is an 
annunciation. ‘The first of these words in the 
N. T. does not ever seem to signify message, 
but always promise, except in Acts xxii. 21, 
where it means command. (Bretschn. s. v.) 

which we have heard from Him] In 
classical Greek the gen. without the prepos 
would have been sufficient. ( Winer.) 


U 


395 





306 


unto you, that God is light, and in 
him is no darkness at all. 





Him] Christ is HE of whom St John’s 
heart is so full that it seems as if all must 
understand of whom he speaks. It is like 
David, who begins a psalm, ‘I will praise 
Thee,” without naming Him Whom he ad- 
dresses. (Psalm cxxxviii. 1.) This trait seems 
to be beautifully illustrated by the delin- 
eation of Mary Magdalene in the Gospel, xx. 
rs. ‘*Mary did not express by name Him 
Whom she sought, but only said ‘ Him’ three 
times. (John xx. 15.) How Him? she does 
not disclose the name, because she instinctively 
supposes that the thought which is never for 
a moment absent from her own heart must be 
clear to all.” (S. Bernard, ‘Serm. in Cant.’ 
vil.) ‘‘ Believers easily supply the name, for 
their souls are full to overhowing with the 
memory of their Lord” (Bengel). 

and announce] (avayyéA\opev). This is 
not the same compound of dyyéAdw which in 
v. 3 is translated declare. ‘The prep. in com- 
position has the sense of increase and strength- 
ening as well as repetition. It is always used 
of solemn teaching with a certain character of 
authority about it: of the Messiah (John iv. 
25), of the Holy Spirit (xvi. 13, 14, 15, three 
times over, like a refrain), of some one who 
has a message that must be announced, es- 
pecially Apostles (John v. rs; Acts xiv. 27, 
XV. 4, Xx. 20; Rom, xv. 21, of priests and 
Levites; 1 Pet. i. 12). In LXX. it is almost 
a sacerdotal word (cf. Deut. xxiv. 8; Isai. 
lii. r5). Bourdaloue instructively contrasts 
_ the more subjective and appealing tone of 
St Paul (2 Cor. xii. 11 sqq.) with the ma- 
jestic tone which St John knew how to 
assume in his adnuntiamus. 

Note the Apostle’s intense conviction that 
the Message which he has to deliver is 
received from the lips of Christ; that it is 
not the conclusion of an argument, or the 
expression of the consciousness of the con- 
gregation, but a revelation; and that its 
delivery implies a commission. We announce 
implies grandeur and importance in the Message 
—earnestness and commission in the mes- 
senger. 

that God is light] ‘It is difficult to open 
up sufficiently any of the highest and most 
transcendent subjects without using symbols,” 
says Plato (‘ Polit. 396). What is conveyed 
by the symbol of /ight? ‘Since light,” says 
Grimm, ‘‘is the subtlest, the purest, the most 
glorious of things, God is called light, i.e. 
a Nature free from alien intermixture, most 
pure, and most holy.” (Grimm, ‘ Clav. N. T.’ 
s.v., where the writer refers to Wisdom vii. 
26, and Grimm’s note.) Light, in the text, is 
not merely intelligence (Calv.), nor sanctity 
and purity exclusively (Luthardt), though the 
context makes the last idea prominent. ‘‘ This 


I. JOHN. 1. 


[v. 6. 


6 If we say that we have fel- 
lowship with him, and walk in 





profound term designates perfect moral good- 
ness, combined with blissful consciousness of 
His own sanctity, in the sphere of the highest 
life, where the luminous clearness of the 
Divine Wisdom also rules as opposed to the 
world (aidv).” (Godet, ‘Comm. sur I’Ev. de 
St Luc,’ 11. 199.) Cf. for the conjunction of 
light with life, Gospel i. 4, also Phil. ii. 15. 
The root of this is in Ps, xxxvi. 9. 

and darkness in Him there is penal 
‘‘No darkness, i.e. of sin or ignorance, o’ 
error or of death.” (‘ Schol. Matt.’ quoted by 
Liicke.) ‘All and every kind of darkness is 
excluded from the nature of God” (Ebrard), 
There is no speck in that perfect orb. Heng- 
stenb, asserts that while /ight in St John’s Gospel 
is nearly equivalent to sa/vation, in the Epistle 
it almost stands for moral goodness, while dark- 
ness 1S moral evil. The immoderate passion 
for discovering polemical allusions in every 
syllable of the Epistle, and (like Hammond) 
‘* seeing Gnostics where there are none,” has 
led to an unreasonable reaction. Internal and 
external evidence alike attest the existence of 
a polemical purpose in the Epistle, subordi- 
nate to other and higher ends. There is a 
reference in the passage to Gnosticism, and 
the systems of Oriental dualism, with their 
eternal and necessary spheres of light and 
darkness. The verse seems to bear remarkably 
on Spinozism and Hegelianism, which teach 
that evil is only relative to the individual being 
—‘‘good in making.” St Augustine well 
traces the connection :—‘ John has said above 
v. 3—But if God is light, and darkness in Him 
is none, and we should have fellowship with 
Him; then the darkness is to be chased away 
by us that it may be light within us—for dark- 
ness cannot have fellowship with light. There- 
fore see what follows (wv. 6), and compare ‘ what 
fellowship hath light with darkness?’ (2 Cor. 
vi. 14). You say that you have fellowship with 
God, and walk in darkness. But ‘God is 
light, and darkness in Him is none.’ How 
then is fellowship between light and darkness? 
A man may say, ‘ What shall Ido? How 
shall I, a sinner, be light?’ A certain despair- 
ing sadness arises. There is no safety, but in 
the fellowship of God (v. 5). But sins are 
darkness. What then is to be done? Fel- 
lowship with God is to be held fast. Other 
hope of eternal life there is none.” (St Aug., 
‘In Epist. Joann. ad Part. Tract.’1.5. Opp. 
Tom. Il. Pt. 2, 1981, edit. Migne.) 


6. If we say] éav (if) with conj. expressed 
mere supposition, not conviction. It may 
happen. The writer feels no certainty that 
it will, yet has some expectation that his sup- 
position may be realised (Kthner, ‘Gr. Gr.’ 
Jelf’s ed. 467, 470). It will be seen from 


a 


w 7] 


darkness, we lie, and do not the 
truth : 
7 But if we walk in the light, as he 


this what subtle gentleness lies in the form of 
St John’s expression. 

and yet (xai). This use is specially, but 
not exclusively, Johannic. (See note on 1 John 
ii. I. 
walk] make our continuous life-walk. 

we lie] The grand Message, received from 
Christ, and announced in the Gospel, makes 
it evident that if any possibly claim com- 
munion with Him, and yet persistently have 
their life-walk in the sphere of moral dark- 
ness, their whole life becomes a lie in specula- 
tion and action. 

and are not doing the truth] The 
realm of truth, in St John’s conception, is not 
limited to speech, written or articulate. It 
extends to the thoughts, and indeed to the 
whole life. Right action is truth made objec- 
tively visible. See Additional Note, 3 John 3. 


7. he] Christ. See note on v. 5. For 
‘walking in light ” cf. Ps. Ixxxix. 15. 

as he is in the light} ‘The as here is, of 
course, Of similitude not equglity. Cf. Matt. v. 
43, Vi. 12; 1 John iil. 3. 

fellowship one with another] Some of the 
ancient Greek wrifers explain this as * the 
mutual intercommunion of ourselves and of 
Him who is the Light” (Theophyl., Cécu- 
men.). Much better Bengel—‘‘It does not 
seem that the expression can be fitly used of 
God and man.” 

and the blood of Jesus His Son] This 
reading is to be preferred. The word Christ is 
omitted by NBC. Reiche argues for its reten- 
tion. ‘St John in this Epistle xever certainly 
(for iv. 15 is doubtful) calls the Saviour simply 
Jesus, with one exception, which has a singular 
significance, viz. in iv. 3. In that passage he 
opposes heresies which denied the Incarnation, 
and thus had a special reason for employing 
the name which peculiarly denoted the Human 
Nature. But St John generally and constantly 
joins ‘ Jesus Christ’ (i. 3, ili. 23, iv. 2, v. 
20). There is no reason why he should have 
omitted it here. But officious copyists might 
be influenced by dogmatic causes, because to 
_ them it might have seemed that the blood was 
suitable only to the Human Nature” (‘ Com- 
ment. Crit.’ I. 312). This subtle critic, 
however, appears to write with less than his 
usual accuracy. Jesus alone occurs not only in 
iv. 3, but in ii. 22, iv. 15 (probably), v. 1—s. 

““The blood of Jesus,” sc. poured forth. 
‘The whole sacrifice, nay the whole obedience 
of Jesus, consisting in His perfect holiness, 
and consummated by His voluntary self- 
sacrifice. (Gomar, Neander, Bengel.) Some- 
thing more is meant than ‘natural faith 
in the moral purpose of the death of Jesus” 
(Paulus), or even than ‘faith in Christ's 


I. JOHN. 1. 


is in the light, we have fellowship one 
with another, and the blood of Jesus 
Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. 





obedience unto death, or in His Passion.” 
(Episcop., Grot.) For in this expression, en- 
deared to every Christian heart, we have the 
central thought of the Gospel, under the most 
vivid and affecting of images. Scripture speaks 
the language of life and living emotion. It does 
not always define. It takes a striking charac- 
teristic, and puts it before the heart and eye 
aS a summary representative of the whole, 
In ordinary language, an abridged description, 
when the part selected is vivid, picturesque, 
pregnant, gives force and colour to ‘the 
poetry of common speech.” ‘Thus we say, so 
many ‘‘souls” for persons, ‘‘sail” for ships, 
“hands” for effective individuals. Such a 
word in Christian theology is the Blood. 
It is dogma with pathos. But it is not only 
picturesque and pathetic. It implies, as no 
other word could do, (a) the reality of the 
Human Body of Jesus, (4) the reality of His 
sufferings, (c) the reality of His sacrifice. It 
is remembered in heaven as the source of 
redemption. Apoc. v. 9, Vil. 14, xii. 11.—It 
points also to the fulfilment of all that was 
symbolized by blood in the earlier dispensation. 
(Hebrews ix. 11, 23. 

Thus ‘‘the blood of Jesus” is Johannic as 
well as Pauline. ‘‘ Those who are truly of the 
family of God cannot and will not ignore the 
language of their Father's house.” (Melancthon.) 

is ever purifying] (Bp Wordsworth), 
keeps on purifying. The contrast between 
our natural fear of the rigidity of the moral 
government of the universe, with our con- 
sciousness that ‘‘its rules are such as not to 
admit of pardon by the sole efficacy of re- 
pentance,” and ‘‘the particular manner in 
which Christ interfered in the redemption of 
the world, His office as Mediator” (Bp 
Butler, ‘Analogy,’ Part 11. Chap. v.), may 
be drawn out by reading the verse before us 
with a memorabk passage in modern poetry. 
The usurper Canute, who has had a share in 
his father’s death, expiring after a virtuous 
and glorious reign, walks towards the light of 
heaven. But first he cuts with his sword a 
shroud of snow from the top of Mount Savo. 
As he advances towards heaven a cloud forms, 
and drop by drop his shroud is soaked wit* a 
rain of blood, So it is for ever. 

‘‘C’est pourquoi ce roi sombre est resté 

dans la nuit, 
Et, sans pouvoir rentrer dans sa blanchem 
premiere, 
Sentant, 4 chaque pas qu’il fait vers la 
lumi€re, 
Une goutte de sang sur sa téte pleuvoir 
Réde éternellement sous l’énorme ciel noir.” 
(V. Hugo, ‘ La Lég. des Siécles,* 
‘ Le Parrticide,’ I. 77—83.) 


Uz 


307 


308 


8 If we say that we have no sin, 
we deceive ourselves, and the truth is 
not in us. 

If we confess our sins, he is 
faithful and just to forgive us our 


I. JOHN. 1. 


|v. 8—10. 


sins, and to cleanse us from all un- 
righteousness. 

10 If we say that we have not 
sinned, we make him a liar, and his 
word is not in us. 





Read beside this ‘‘ The blood of Jesus is ever 
purifying.” The blood of Jesus has not only 
a momentary efficacy. Its virtue extends to 
the whole Christian life continuously. The 
purification thus effected, and expressed by 
the word ‘“‘is purifying,” is twofold. It 
implies (1) justification, by which we are 
brought back into communion with God; 
(2) sanctification, by which the power of sin is 
gradually abolished. ‘The red rose of pardon 
and the white rose of purity (if we may 
venture to use such language as mystics have 
loved) grow upon one stem and spring from 
one root. The remarkable reading in Apoc. 
xxii. 14 adopted by Tischend. (yaxapior of 
mAvvovtes Tas aTOAas avTov) Would singularly 
illustrate the notion of continuous purification 
in this verse. He who wrote this verse in the 
Epistle before us would naturally write Apoc. 
vil. 14 and xxii. 14 in the more imaginative 
elevation of poetry or prophecy. 


8. Here we have one of those subtle lines 
of connection ; those “roots at the bottom of 
the stream, hidden from casual observers ” 
(Alford) so common in St John. ‘“ What! 
those who, according to v. 7, make theit 
abiding life-walk in the light ; who habitually 
‘form the glorious procession of the sons of 
- light? (W. Archer Butler)—must it be said 
of them that they have a perpetual guilt, 
which needs the perpetual cleansing of a 
perpetual pity?” The answer to this implied 
objection is contained in this v. 8 (‘‘yes! for) 
if we say,” &c. 

that we have not sin] There is often 
an emphatic force in the verb save in the 
New Testament for good and for bad. It 
signifies an abiding reality of guilt or grace 
which we fave and hold (‘This verb 
speaks of the state in which we habitually 
are; of the condition, external and internal, 
in which we abide; when a substant. in the 
accus, follows, the notion conveyed is that of 
keeping permanently in the condition. Cf, 
specially Matt. xvii. 20, where ‘ Aaving faith’ 
is not simply Jdelieving, but being constantly 
full of faith—so Bretsch. ‘Lex. Man.’ s.v. 
See in St John’s Gospel, viii. 12, ix. 41, xv. 
22—24, XIX. 11; 1 John v. fo (cf. Heb. xii. 28. 
This pregnant use of save is also character- 
istic of the Apoc. See vi. 9, xii. 17, xix. 10). 

If we say that we have no sin, we deceive 
ourselves} ‘‘It is to be noted who speaks 
here—a faithful Apostle of Christ, and a vete- 
ran moreover.” (Bengel.) 

we deceive ourselves| or mislead ourselves. 


(Used by LXX. in Exod. xiv. 3 as transla. 
tion of ‘*they are entangled in the land.”) 
Not only like “men whose life has gone 
astray” (Spenser, ‘ Faerie Queene,’ Book 1. 
Cant. iv. 36), but like men who lead their 
own lives astray. 

the truth is not in us| It may be round us, 
near us, acknowledged, contended for, but it has 
not penetrated the soul. It remains an external 
rule perhaps, but a dead letter. It is not im us. 


8, 9,10. Have we not the abiding reality 
of sin? If we say so we are but misleading 
ourselves, self-deceived and self-involved in 
our pride, and the truth is not in us. Have 
we only sin in the abstract, not definite, per- 
sonal, actual sins to confess? Nay, we have 
such, though still with a blessed hope of par- 
don. Are we not sinful in our present con- 
dition, as the respit of past sin? (note the 
perf. v. 10). Nay, if we say sv, we are 
worse than liars. We make Him a liar, 
The whole substance of His word is absent 
from our inner being. Our life is a practical 
negation of that doctrine which is absolute 
truth; for ‘‘the imagination of our own sin= 
lessness is an inward lie.” (W. Archer Butler ) 


9. If we confess our sins| The petition in 
the Lord’s Prayer supposes the Christian per~ 
petually. penetrated with the sense of sin. It 
is implied in it that he prays daily for for- 
giveness. (Luke xi. 3.) 

It has been urged by some that the 
prayer was given by our Lord to disciples 
who had not yet risen above the position of 
Judaism. But this verse beyond all question 
applies to Christian believers. 

he is faithful and righteous] ‘These 
two attributes are conjoined in Psalm exliii. 1. 
Faithful, as abiding by His Promise. Just or 
righteous—there is some temptation here to 
conjecture that the word is used of goodness 
generally, with an under-meaning of gentleness 
and enignity (cf. Matt. i. 1g—and the character 
of the true Christian gentleman in Ps, cxii. 9). 
But the slight allusive touch in the word une 
righteousness at the close of the verse (which 
is lost by the just of the A. V. at the beginning 
of it) seems to fix the more usual meaning. 

that He may forgive us our sins] ze. 
in order to, or with a view to, “forgiving 
us.” (See Winer, ‘Gr. Gr.’ p. 483.) The 
word can scarcely, however, be limited to 
bare forgiveness. Among its various senses, 
indeed, running as they co in Lexicons 
round the compounds of missio (emissio, di- 
missio, omissio, permissio) we must include 


1. JOHN. L. 


remsssio. This is specially applied to debt 
(Deut. xv. 1, 2; LXX.) and to sin, looked 
upon as a debt incurred (Matt. vi. 12, 
xviii. 27). But in the Old Testament it is 
used by LXX. as the translation of verbs 
signifying expiation (Isai. xxii. 14), ablation 
(Ps. xxv. 18), pardon and indulgence (Num. xiv. 
19). ‘* We cannot argue from the word alone 
that God in forgiving sin doth only and barely 
release the debt.” (Bp Pearson on Creed, 
Art. X.) 

our sins...all unrighteousness| ‘There are in 
Exodus xxxiv. 7 three words for sin under 
different aspects, “iniquity, transgression, sin” 
(A. V.)—sin as vanity, nothingness; sin as 
separation from God; sin as mistake and error 
—dvopia, ddixia, duaptia( LX X.). If we may 
be guided by the Hebrew words of which 
they appear as the translation, we should say 
that siz is transgression as a terrible mistake, 
unrighteousness as a separation from God. See 
also the important note on Ps. li. 3. 


10. we make him] A peculiar Johannic 

hrase, ‘‘to declare one to be such by word 
and deed” (a John v. 10; cf. Gospel, v. 18, 
Vill. 53, X. 33, XIX. 7—1I2). 

his word is not in us| “The Divine word is 
regarded as a thing which rhay pass over into 


subjectivity” (Dusterd), ct. ‘Ye have not 
His word abiding in you,” Gospel v. 38. The 
expression is parallel with, and an advance 
upon, ‘‘the truth is not in us,” supra v. 8. 

As this Epistle alone in the N.T. is addressed 
to a generation which had grown up in the 
midst of Christian tradition, and surrounded 
by Christian influences, it would quite natu- 
rally (as it does here) give prominence to 
the Christians’ perpetual need of pardon. In 
dwelling upon pardon once obtained, and sanc- 
tification once begun, Christians sometimes 
forget that pardon is to be always sought, 
purification to be always going on. We are 
perpetually to pass through new pardons and 
new purifications, coming from new surrenders 
of self to Christ. This passage (esp. v. 9) 
certainly does not speak of ‘‘ one pardon of all 
sins, past, present, and future,” but of con- 
tinuing sinfulness and ever-renewed pardon. 
The appointment of the general confes- 
sion and absolution in the Prayer-Book for 
every day in the year is perhaps the best 
practical commentary upon the spirit of these 
verses. Cf. also St Paul’s exhortation, ‘‘ be ye 
reconciled to God,” with his magnificent re- 
cognition of a great change which had taken 
place once for all, and remained in its con- 
sequences. 2 Cor. v. 20; cf. v. 17. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Cuap, I. 2, 4, 5. 


%. ‘By the prep. mpos in this place is 
meant the utmost possible proximity without 
confusion, and likeness without sameness” (Cole- 
ridge, ‘Table Talk,’ p. 13), ‘‘qwith signifies 
both propinguity and difference“? (Grotius). 
The prep. of motion with the verb of repose 
involves eternity of relation with activity and 
life (Coleridge, idid.), cf. Gospel, i. 1, with 
Luther’s pregnant Commentary. ‘ The with 
sounds as if the Word were different from 
God ; therefore he takes it up again, and closes 
the ring—“‘ and the Word was God.” (Cf. 
Proverbs viii. 30—where, however, Sys is 
translated by a different prep. in LX X.) 


4. An exhaustive consideration of the 
passages in St John in which ovros occurs 
leads to the following conclusions. 

(2) ‘That otros with iva, éav, 6te always 
points to that which fo//ows (Gospel, iii. 19, 
Vv. 18, Vi. 29, XV. 12, XVli. 3; £ John ii. 3, iii. 
II, 23, V- 3): 

(4) That otros alone generally refers to 
that which precedes. Thus in 1 John v. 33, 
14, the ravra, these things, in v. 13 must refer 
to that which goes before—the adrn...67e in v. 
14 to that which is just coming (see Gospel, ii. 
22, XIV. 25, XV. II, 21, XVI. I, 3, 4, 25, 33; 
XVii. I, XX. 31, XXi. 24). 

Still there remain several exceptions to con- 
clusion (4): in Gospel, i. r9, v. 3; in First 
Epistle, ii. 25, 26, v.25, “this is the pro- 
mise,” i.¢. that which follows; v. 26, “these 


things have I written unto you,” 2. that 
which goes before. [It has been suggested that 
the solution is to be found in the use of the 
singular and the plural—the singular always 
referring to that which precedes. (Licke ) 
But this is very precarious. ] 


5. We are not merely to look upon this 
use Of ards as a Christian equivalent of the 
way in which the Pythagoreans used to speak 
of their master. (Compare for this—** And 
him—O wondrous him! O miracle of men!” 
‘Henry IV.’ Act 1. Scene 3.) There is a 
higher consciousness pervading the use of it 
by St John and St Paul. Among the Hebrews 
Nin (hii), He, He Himself, like 4a among the 
Persians, avrds, ékeivos among the Greeks 
(Simon. ‘Onom.’ 549), denotes God in the 
religious usus Joguendi, and therefore N\IN 
(Abhiyha, avréécos) with XIN VIN 
(Abhiyah, Abhiyél), [Fuerst, ‘Heb. and 
Chaldee Lexicon,’ p. ro. Cf. Mark xii. 32, 
where the true reading is—‘‘ for there is Oxe” 
(God being incorrectly supplied in T. R.), 
‘and there is none other but HE.” ‘The 
practice of denoting God by the pronoun of 
the third person was common among the 
Hebrews. The name Elihu (‘He is my 
God’) is one example.” (Renan, * Job,’ p. 
153.) God and Christ run so completely into 
one subject that the subtlest criticism often 
seeks in vain to sever them (1 John ii. 5, 12, 
25, 28, 29, ili. 1, 23 2 John w. 6. 


309 


310 


Tholuck ‘On Hebrews,’ Vol. 11. 63). For 
this solemn and reverential use of avrés, see 
besides the passages just cited, Luke i. 17, 
v. 16, 17, ix. 51; the avros, tawelve times 
repeated of Christ in Col. i. 16—20; finally the 
probably true reading of Hebr. x. 12 (avros 8¢, 
“but He”). Contrast, as significant of subtle 
differences of character, St Paul’s effusion and 
expansiveness in again and again reiterating our 
Lord’s names (e.g. 1 Cor. i. 4—9; 2 Cor. iv. 
Io, I1, 14) with St John’s general love of 
tender periphrases. (Very striking is the 
passage ending with the words referring to 
Christ—rovd cod... €mayyedAopevov, os eoTw 
autos. S. Ignat. ‘ Epist. ad Trall.’ x1.) 

God is Light] Inalllanguagesat all stages of 
culture, light has been used as the most appro- 
priaterepresentation of God’s holiness, bliss, and 
goodness. Light has been, not unsuccessfully, 
appealed to as the first real educer of the 
religious instinct of the idiot. (Mentioned in 
a Report of the Earlswood Asylum a few 
years ago.) To the Arabs it is so potently 
suggestive, that by one well versed in their 
modes of thought, they have been supposed to 
lose the object of their worship in His own 
glorious emblem, and thus to practise in a 
peculiar form the idolatry which their creed 


CHAPTER II. 

1 He comforteth them against the sins of infir- 
mity. 3 Rightly to know God ts to keep his 
commandments, 9 to love our brethren, 15 
and not to love the world. 18 We must 
beware of seducers: 20 from whose deceits 


Cuap. II. 1, 2. The object of this teach- 
_ ing is holiness, ‘‘ My children, these things 
I am writing to you, in order that ye may not 
continue sinning. Yet, if any one may have 
committed some act of sin (it may be!) you 
and I have an Advocate.” 

1. My children!] There are two dif- 
ferent words in this Epistle alike rendered 
‘little children” in A. V., rexvia and radia, 
the first in ii. 12, 28, iii. 18, iv. 4; the second 
in ii, 13, 18. Both seem to have been caught 
from the lips of Him who speaks in the Gospel 
(the first, xiii. 33; cf. Mark x.24; the second, 
xxi. 5). There seems to be some distinction 
between the two; St Paul’s use of rexvia (in 
Gal. iv. 19 alone in his Epp.—possibly, how- 
ever, réxva) appears to shew that it signifies 
the spiritual relation of children in the faith 
to a spiritual father. It will be seen (inf. v. 
12) that the first of these two words is 
used generally of all sons in the faith, and 
includes adults; while the second designates 
properly the age or characteristics of child- 
hood (Luke 1. 80, ii. 40; 1 Cor. xiv. 
20), as a class, with special reference to 
the earliest period of human life (inf. vv. 12, 
13). Thus the first is a more definite and 
technical term, and has a specific reference to 


I. JOHN. IL ; 


Iv. 


abhcrs. (Palgrave's ‘ Travels.) Of the effect 
of light upon : ae man of the 
highest eminence the owing interesting 
record has been preserved. ‘The pre- 
dominance of light as a figure and a 
symbol in Clifford’s writings will be re- 
marked: he associates it with the right and 
all things good so constantly and naturally 
that it is one of the marks of his style. He 
had physically a great love of light, and chose 
to write when he could in a clear and spacious 
room, with the windows quite free from cur- 
tains.” (W. Kingdon Clifford, by Frederick 
Pollock, ‘ Fortnightly Review,’ May 1, 1879, 
pp. 686, 676.) The same passion for light 
may be traced constantly in St Augustine. 
(See especially ‘ Confess.’ x. 34.) Poetry 
connects light instinctively with our highest 
ideas. Cowley apostrophizes it, 

‘«Swiftness and Power by birth are thine!” 
The exquisite beauty of Dante’s allusions to 
light is admirably drawn out in Dean Church’s 
Essa 


y- 

But ‘there is no poetry” (says Herder) 
““which on the subject of ight can be com- 
pared with Hebrew. The very word (7i8, or) 
has a lofty sound, and is the special symbol 
of joy.” (‘ Geist v. Heb. Poes.’ p. 55.) 


the godly are safe, preserved by perseverance 
in faith, and holiness of life. 


Y little children, these things 
write I unto you, that ye sin 


not. And if any man sin, we have an 


spiritual fatherhood, and may be translated 
my sons or my children; while the second is the 
gentle and benevolent address of ‘‘age in 
admonishing youth, of authority in charging 
subordinates, of wisdom in instructing igno- 
rance and inexperience.” (Reiche ‘Comment. 
Crit.’) It will be best to translate this last by 
the more endearing word, Little children! 

That ye may not sin. And yet 
if any may have sinned. [adpapry, past 
isolated single action, not present continuous Or 
Suture action.] And yet. This rhetorical use 
of xai—the «ai of paradox—in connecting 
two propositions, of which the last seems 
contradictory to the first, is noted by Stall- 
baum (‘ Plat. Apol.’ 29 b). It is rather fre- 
quent in N. T. (Matt. vi. 26; 2 Thess. ili. 155 
Apoc. iii. r are good instances). Two re- 
marks may be made: (1) On the Gospel 
mode of making men virtuous. Not by an 
appeal to interest or happiness, or even to the 
eternal fitness of things and to the will of 
God. These answers to the question ‘‘ why 
should we be virtuous?” are all true in some 
measure, some very nobly true. But practi- 
cally they meet with little success. But the 
appeal ‘‘Be virtuous, because i. 7—9 is true” 
bas succeeded, and will succeed as nothing 


v. 2.) 


advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ 
the righteous : 


else can. (2) To the general end and prin- 
ciple ‘‘that ye may not sin,” there is here an 
apparent exception, ‘if any man may have 
sinned,” &c. One illustrative passage may be 
cited. ‘‘ Although the design of the Gospel 
be that we should erect a throne for Christ to 
reign in our spirits, and this doctrine be there- 
fore preached ‘that we sin not;’ yet, if one 
be overtaken in a fault, despair not. Christ is 
our Advocate, and He is the Propitiation ; 
He did propitiate the Father by His death, 
and the benefit of that we receive at our first 
access to Him. But then He is our Advo- 
cate too, and prays perpetually for our per- 
severance or restitution respectively.” (Bp 
Taylor ‘Of Repentance.’) It is peculiarly 
necessary here to preserve the exquisitely 
adjusted balance in the divine original of in- 
vigorating effort for the Christian’s strength 
and comfortable promise for the Christian’s 
weakness. No encouragement is given to 
those who continue in present, or to those 
who meditate future sin. 

we have] The Apostle tenderly and humbly 
includes himself among them who have and 
need an Advocate. 

we have an advocate| mapak\nTov, éxopev. 
On the pregnant sense of ave see note supra 
on i. 8. 

Paraclete, ‘‘one who is called in by his 
good word or countenance to aid him whose 
cause is to be examined, or whose petition is 
to be considered.” The word occurs five 
times in the New Testament ; four times (in St 
John’s Gospel) of the Holy Ghost; once (in 
this verse) of Christ. It will be best here 
simply to refer to the exhaustive note on St 
John xiv. 16. 

an advocate) ‘Christ is our Advocate: 
(4) interpretatively, by pleading before the 
Father His merits or blood; (2) formally 
and properly by pleading for us—not by pros- 
tration as a suppliant, but by expressing His 
desire for the salvation of His people, in such 
wise as may beseem Him” (Est.). ‘‘ Christ 
pleads the cause of His Church with the 
Father; the Holy Spirit with men” (Grotius). 

with the Father| Christians have never 
adopted the formula “Christe! ora pro nobis.” 
For His intercession is not verbal and tempo- 
rary. It is interpretative and continuous. He 
pleads with His Father—not at particular 
seasons, like the Jewish High Priests—but 
perpetually by His very Being and Presence. 
(Voss. ‘ Harmon. Evang.’ p. 423.) 

Two remarks remain to be made: (1) The 
intense conviction of Christ’s /iving Personality 
in St John’s heart. He is for St John not 
merely a memory, but the living Advocate. 
He continues the same work which the Apostle 
saw Him begin upon earth, only elevated 


I. JOHN. IL 


2 And he is the propitiation for 
our sins: and not for ours only, but 





above the condition of time and space. The 
‘“way” for us through the veil is a ‘living 
way” (Heb. x. 20). Earth’s great men live 
on in their work, or in the principles which 
they have embodied and represented. The 
work of Luther or Napoleon is linked to their 
history; the work of Jesus is linked to His 
Person. (2) Some modern critics have asserted 
a dogmatic difference between this passage 
and St John’s Gospel (xiv. 16), which speaks 
of another Comforter. ‘This is so far from 
being the case that this very passage in the 
Epistle is, so to speak, one of the asterisks 
which point its readers back to the Gospel: 
one of the suggestions implying a question 
which only the Gospel can answer. When 
esus speaks of ‘another Comforter,” He 
implicitly gives this very title to Himself. 
Jesus Christ who is righteous] ‘‘Our 
version, Jesus Christ the righteous, is rather 
beyond the original. As itis, St John has said 
only, ‘ Jesus Christ, a righteous Person’” 
(Bp Middleton). Note, however, that this 
apparently casual epithet fits into one great 
leading idea of the Epistle, because it points 
gently to the picture in the Gospel. Jesus 
Christ is not only a sage teaching a system 
of beautiful ideas to a school. He is not 
only the Word who is the Life. He is 
Righteous (observe the position of the word 
closing the verse). What stress is practically 
laid upon this may be seen further on, where 
the Christian’s life is declared to be an imita- 
tion of His righteousness, 1 John iii, 7—1O0. 


2. And he is| The present of ‘to be” is 
used by St John especially, with a presentia- 
ting shade of thought and meaning when He 
speaks of our Lord. It is thus used of His 
life on earth (z John iii. 3, 5, 7), of His life 
in heaven (iii. 2, iv. 17). So here of His 
propitiation. It is not merely an isolated act 
of history. It is abiding and present. Cf. 
the old Collect for 15th Sunday after Trinity, 
“Keep Thy Church by Thy perpetual pro- 
pitiation” ( propitiatione perpetua). 

propitiation, ‘Ps. cxxx. 4; LXX. ftac- 
pos, Only there and in Dan. ix. 9; Neh, ix. 
17 (The verd in 2 Chro. vi. 21, 25, 27, 30, 
39); Vulg. propitiatio, 1 John ii. 2” (see 
Kay, ‘The Psalms,’ p. 418). ‘Iacpés, ao- 
ts, after Hebrew usage, are from jAdo- 
keoOaz, ‘‘to cause sins to cease.”” Thus ‘* He 
is a propitiation, either (1) by means of the 
effect produced by His obedience, as Rom, 
ll. 25 (iAaoriHptov), i.e. one who renders God 
propitious (Gom., Vorst.), or (2) as an ex- 
piatory Victim, offered upon the Cross. .y 
which God was rendered propitious (August., 
Piscat., Est.). The advocacy of Christ is 
here based upon His offering; and we have 


311 


312 


also for the sins of the whole world. 
3 And hereby we do know that 


three characteristics of it: (a) It is present 
and abiding (‘‘He is”); (4) it is propitiatory ; 
(c) it is universal. 

The doctrine of the Atonement is not de- 
pendent for its life upon any one phrase or 
figure—therefore, not upon this of propitia- 
tion. Yet it is useless to attempt to evade its 
force. ‘' Was it,” it has been asked, ‘ that 
God needed to be propitiated? Such a thought 
refutes itself by the indignation which it 
awakens. From the Epistle to the Hebrews it 
has passed into modern theology. We can 
live and die in the language of St Paul and 
St John.” (Prof. Jowett.) Yet English- 
speaking Christians, at least, have not learnt 
to apply the idea of propitiation to Christ’s 
work from the Epistle to the Hebrews. (In 
the original, indeed, of Heb. ii. 17, it does 
occur, but in our A. V. neither there nor else- 
where in that Epistle.) To them it comes 
exclusively from Rom. iii. 15, and from St 
John’s Epistle, who does not shrink from re- 
peating the word, infra iv. 10. So completely 
at one in this matter are St Paul, St John, 
and the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews. 

for our sins| The technical sacrificial prepos. 
used with verbs signifying expiate, offering for. 

for those of the whole world] whole 
(6Xor) signifies fulness of quantity; all (nav) 
completeness of number. 

world| In St John ‘the qwor/d” denotes 
either (1) creation, the universe (xvi. 24), or 
(2) “the sphere of mingled good and evil, 
receiving many Satanic influences, and also 
-capable of certain germs of good,” or (3) men 
universally (iii. 16, vi. 51), as in this place, 
or (4) that element in the material and human 
world, in the sphere of mingled good and evil, 
which is external to God, His Spirit, and His 
Church. [The signif. of the word is well 
traced by Dean Vaughan, ‘St Paul’s Epistie 
to the Romans,’ p. 15.] ‘Thesense of the love 
of God sometimes falls upon narrow hearts. 
’ There is a self-righteousness from the sense of 
special favour, no less than from that of special 
merit. None ever drew the line between the 
Church and the world more distinctly than St 
gots (see infra, v. 19). Yet now that “the 
arriers of a nation had been broken down, the 
boundless perspective of the Christian horizon 
broadens on his view.” (De Broglie, ‘ Hist. 
de I’Empire et l’Eglise,’ 1. 99.) This universal 
statement does not really contradict, but 
rather explains, our Lord’s statement in St 
John’s Gospel (x. 15), even if we decide that 
“for the sheep” there includes believers alone. 
In the Divine idea and purpose Christ laid 
down His life for a//. In historical reality 
and fact it will profit those only who receive 
it. ‘‘He knows that it will only take effect 
for the last, and therefore He says, ‘I lay 


I. JOHN. II. 


[v. 3- 


we know him, if we keep his com- 
mandments. 





down My life in favour, on behalf of the 
sheep’” (Godet, ‘S. Jean,’ II. 291). The con- 
nection, i. 8—ii. 2, is admirably traced by St 
Augustine: ‘‘i. 8—If you confess yourself a 
sinner, the truth is in you; for that truth is 
light. Your life is not yet a perfect splendour, 
for sins are in it; but you have begun to be 
enlightened, because you confess your sins. 
For see what follows (i. 9): not only past 
sins, but those which we happen to contract 
from the present life; for men in this life can- 
not but have sins, though they be not of the 
graver kind. And lest he should seem to give 
impunity to sis in i. 9, and men should say 
‘ Let us sin securely, for Christ cleanses us’... 
note what follows (ii. 2): ‘Yes; but sin 
perhaps creeps in from human life. What 
then? Shall we despair? Nay, listen (~. 1, 
ad fin.) : He then is the Advocate. Take heed 
not to sin. If sin shall have crept in from 
human frailty, at once see and condemn it. 
And when you have condemned it, come 
without fear to the Judge. There you have 
the Advocate. Fear not to lose the cause. 
If a man ina worldly cause commits himself to 
an eloquent pleader, and is safe, shall you trust 
yourself to the Advocate and perish? No! 
‘We have an Advocate. Mark St John’s 
humility. He says not ‘ye have’; nor ‘ye 
have me’; nor even ‘ye have Christ.’ But 
he puts forward Christ, not himself; and he 
says ‘qe have,’ not ‘ye have,’ placing him- 


self in the rank of sinners.” (‘In Epist. 
Joann.’ Tract. I.) 
SEcTION III. (a). ii. 3—6. 


3—6. ‘And we know that we have 
made ourselves acquainted with, and at pre- 
sent continue to know Him by this simple 
fact, if we carefully and thoughtfully keep 
Christ’s commandments. Some man perhaps 
vaunts, ‘I have made myself acquainted with, 
and continue to know Christ.’ Suppose 
that such an one keep not Christ’s com- 
mandments. Christ’s word which is the 
truth dwells not in his inner being. But 
if a man not only keeps the commandments 
one by one, but observes that word as a 
whole, truly such a man not only knows 
God, but his love to God reaches to- 
wards the standard of ideal perfection. By 
this we test our communion with Him. He 
that vaunts a vital abiding with Christ, ought 
himself to walk continuously, to make his 
walk of life such as Christ made His one 
great Life-walk here upon earth.” (Gospel, viii. 
29, vi. 57, ‘As He hath sent Me, so I live for 
Him—to manifest His Life and Majesty.”) 


3. Aereby] In this that follows, namely, 
if... See note oni. 4. 


v. 4—6.] 


4 He that saith, I know him, and 
keepeth not his commandments, is 
a liar, and the truth is not in him. 

5 But whoso keepeth his word, 





we do know that we have the know- 
ledge of Him (Alford)]. A gentle parody of 
the ambitious gnosis of the Gnostics (Hengst.). 
It is denied by some critics (Liicke) that to 
know signifies the experimental knowledge of 
love. But the Hebrew word, of which it is the 
transl., is lit. to perceive or understand, hence 
in a secondary sense to have intimate acquaint- 
ance, and corresponding love. (On 7’, 
ywookeav, LXX. see Fuerst, ‘Heb. and 
Chald. Lexicon,’ p. 543.) Hence in LXX. 
the word is used to denote man’s loving know- 
ledge of God (Ps. ix. 10; 1 S. ii. 12; Job 
Xvili. 21; Hosea viii. 2) as well as God's 
loving knowledge of man. In the text the 
word is not merely the ‘‘ knowledge of Him as 
Advocate, as Propitiation” (Hammond), but 
loving knowledge. ‘‘ Knowledge is placed in 
these Epistles twenty-seven times as the fun- 
damental ethical and spiritual principle, faith 
only seven times” (Rev. C. A. Row). 

if we observe His commandments.] 
The verb (rnpapev) signifies to keep the eye 
fixed upon an object; hence to keep the eye 
of the soul fixed upon the commandments, in 
our desire to perform them thoughtfully and 
conscientiously. (Cf. ‘'deditaque eo mentes 
cum oculis erant.” T. Liv. * Hist.’ 1. 9, quoted 
by Bretsch. *L. M.’ s. v.) 

his| of Him, sc. Christ. See note on i. 5. 
This practical teaching is unlike mere mysti- 
cism, in which there is generally a tendency, 
more or less, to a sort of pantheistic absorp- 
tion of morality in the spiritual element. In 
all parts of the Christian Church, perhaps, 
immorality has from time to time co-existed 
with some degree of capacity for emotional 
religionism or of zeal for assumed orthodoxy. 
The Apostle meets this plainly and decidedly. 
Here is the test by which to distinguish mor- 
bid religionism, or ostentatious orthodoxy, 
from true religion. 


4. He that saith, 1 have knowledge of 
Him] ‘A prosopopceia of one vaunting his 
knowledge of Christ.” 

observeth not His commandments] 
The negative here has an emotional and 
subjective tinge, quite in accordance with St 
John’s character. He does not assert it as a 
fact that there is such a person actually ; but 
given the existence of such—‘‘he is a liar,” 
&c. “‘Some Gnostics, who professed to be 
perfect, said that they were no more polluted 
by sins than gold by mire, or sunbeam by the 
dunghill.”. (Hammond.) 

the truth ts not in him] The Cod. Sinait. 
strikingly adds, ‘‘ the truth of God.” 


I. JOHN. IL. 


in him verily is the love of God per- 
fected: hereby know we that we are 
in him. 

6 He that saith he abideth in him 


5. In vv. 5, 6 we have an instance of one 
of St John’s most beautiful peculiarities. We 
find frequently a parallelism in his writings ; 
but not the mere monotonous parallelism, the 
cycloidal composition, the eternal tautology, 
with which that favourite mould of Hebrew 
thought has so often been charged. (Sce a 
beautiful defence in Herder, ‘Geist von Hebr 
Poes.’ Part I. 1.) Thus here—‘‘to observe 
His commandments” (v. 4) is much; ‘to 
observe His word” (wv. 5) as one great whole 
is more, i.e. not merely keeping the com- 
mandments in act, but the word of Christ, 
one and indivisible. Again, the “love” in 
this verse is, in expression, an advance upon 
the ‘“‘knowledge” in the last. Well and 
briefly Grotius—‘‘ He who not only observes 
the commandments but the word not only knows 
God but perfectly /Joves Him. Love presup- 
poses knowledge.” For marked examples of this 
‘¢ accessional parallelism” in which each suc- 
cessive member of an antithesis is made to go 
beyond that which precedes, and the last rip- 
ple of thought always breaks highest up on 
the beach, cf. i. 6, 7, ll. 4, 5, 6—9, Io, 11, 
13, 14—20, 27, 28, v. 18, 19. (See Introd. 
to the Epistle.) 

verily inthis man his love of God is 
perfected] ‘* The love of God,” i.e. his love 
toward God. This is the general sense of the 
phrase in St John (see Gospel, v. 42; cf. xv. 
Toss Joln on. argu 107;2'v. 93)22) When 
God’s love towards man is spoken of, either 
the context is different (z John iv. 9), or some 
periphrastic expression is thrown in which 
determines the meaning (cf. ‘‘the love that 
God hath,” 1 John iv. 16). The verse has 
been explained away (mainly for the dogmatic 
purpose of opposing perfectionism) in two 
ways; either (1) by maintaining that ‘‘the love 
of God” here is God’s Jove to us; or (2) by 
joining the adv. ‘‘truly” immediately with 
the verb ‘‘ perfected”»—‘‘In such a man love 
is truly perfected, in deed and truth, not in 
mere name.” The question must be decided 
by St John’s use of the word “to perfect.” 
See Gospel, iv. 34, Vv. 36, Xvil. 4, 23, 
xix. 28; 1 John iv. 12, 17, 18. In speak- 
ing of “‘ perfection” the Apostle here, as ofter 
elsewhere, expresses an ideal standard. In 
proportion as we advance towards this ideal 
of a perfected, finished love towards God, 
‘¢we know that we are in Him.” 

in him] in—study this little word which is 
so great. The force of in (ev), applied to 
separate, yet intimately connected personal 
existences, is strikingly illustrated by St Luke, 
xi 19, “if I in (ev) Beelzebub.” “It has an 


313 


314 


ought himself also so to walk, even 
as he walked. 

7 Brethren, I write no new com- 
mandment unto you, but an old com- 
n'andment which ye had from the 


energetic sense. It signifies not only dy 
authority of Beelzebub, but by Beelzebub 
dwelling personally in Him,” by a mutual 
inver-existence, so to speak, of one with the 
other. (Godet, ‘Comm. sur l’Ev. de S. Luc,’ 
II. 74.) 


6. he that saith] as in v. 4, a notion of 
vaunting implied—-‘ giving out.” Cf. Luke 
xxiii. 2 ad fin.; Acts v. 36, viii. 9. 

be abideth in him] One of those truly 
Johannic words, which he had caught from 
the lips of Christ. It signifies not only 
‘‘abiding patiently,” or ‘‘ moral perseverance,” 
(Licke), but vitally and mystically. It is the 
compression of John xv. 1—5 into a single 
word, and implies spiritual immanence, inter- 
penetration of life and spirit. ‘* No words (it 
has been truly said) expressive of the soul’s 
union with God, can be pantheistic, unless 
they imply that the soul ceases to be, and 
becomes essentially one with God.” 

ought] is bound, lit. “‘is in debt” (ddei- 
Xe), is morally bound. 

is bound, even as He walked, so also 
himself to be walking. 

even as he| The pronoun here (ékeivos) is 
constantly used by St John in an exclusive 
sense, with a sort of tacit antithesis. ‘‘He, 
and He alone.” It will be seen what meaning 

- this gives to many passages in the Gospels 
(i. 18, 33, ii. 2t—He who had the true 
secret; xiv. 26, i.e He shall teach you, 
in antithesis to Me who leave you; ix. 9, 
i.e. others said so-and-so, but he who knew 
best said, ‘‘I am he.” Here it signifies—‘‘as 
He walked, and He alone.” ‘The pronoun is 
reverential and reserved. Observe in w. 6, 
the contrast of tense in speaking of Christ’s 
walk, and the Christian’s—‘‘is morally bound, 
as He made His one great life-walk, so also 
himself to walk continuously.” The walk 
denotes the action of life, external and internal, 
wherever we are or turn on the path by which 
we must go. The word was used by our 
Lord metaphorically (John viii. 12, xii. 35), 
and from thence passed into the vocabu- 
lary of Christians (Acts xxi. 21; Eph. ii. 10; 
Col. iii. 7; Rom. vi. 4). May not St John 
with his subtle delicacy—in keeping with 
his constant practice throughout the Epistle 
—refer to the very word which he had used 
(with touching allusion to the homelessness 
of Jesus) historically in the Gospel—(1) of 
the Lord’s life in Galilee (‘‘ Jesus walked in 
Galilee,” vi. 7) and in Judza (xi. 54), and 
(2) of His disciples’ communion with Him 


I. JOHN. IL 


[v. 7, 8 


beginning. The old commandment 
is the word which ye have heard 
from the beginning. 

8 Again, a new commandment I 
write unto you, which thing is true 


(vi. 65)? (Bretschn. well says of the word 
“to walk”—“ After the Hebraistic usage it 
denotes, Aabitually being or dwelling in a par- 
ticular place or way of life. St John vii. 1, 
xi. 54, in which passages there is also a refer- 
ence to the fact that Jesus taught as He went 
itinerating—ambulando docebat.”) (See ‘Lex. 
M. N. T.’ s.v.) The walk of Christ is the 
Christian’s highest and only standard, and St 
John refers to that description of it, which 
he had traced for them. The verse is another 
finger-post, pointing to St John’s Gospel 
—another suggestion of a question which that 
Gospel only can answer.—‘‘Even as He 
walked.” How did He walk? The answer is 
written at large in the Gospel. The Christian 
life, as conceivec by St John, is at once a 
continued humiliation (x John i. 9), and a 
continued aspiration (ii. 4). It utters itself 
in a long miserere (i. 8—10)—for “true re- 
pentance must run through the state of holy 
living ” (Bp Taylor)—and in a long excelsior 
(ii. 6). The first is embodied in the daily 
General Confession, the second in the order 
of the Christian seasons. 


SECTION III. (4). vv. 7—11. 


7. Beloved] Cf. ili. 21, iv. 1, 7, 1%, 
‘‘ Brethren” only occurs in this Epistle in iii. 
13. 

I am writing zo fresh commandment] 
There are two words alike translated mew in 
the A. V. (xacvos, the word in this verse, and 
véos). Of these, the first (movus, nouveat) 
expresses that which is zew in relation to 
quality, set over against and occupying the 
place of the outworn or effete (Heb. viii 
8—13); the second (recens, neuf) expresses 
that which is new in relation to tise. The first 
denotes novelty, intellectual, ethical, spiritual, 
and may sometimes be rendered fresh; the 
second, novelty temporal and chronological. 
(See note Col. iii. ro.) St John is speaking 
of no single commandment, but of the one 
entire Gospel commandment. The command. 
ment was in a sense old to those who had it 
so long; in a sense fresh and new, because it 
superseded and took the place of an older one. 


8. which thing is true in him and in you} 
These difficult words are variously under- 
stood. (x) Some refer the relative ‘ which” 
to the idea contained in the word new. “1 
am writing a new commandment unto yous 
which thing (i.e. new) it truly is” (adnOés 
adverbially), or ‘‘ which quality of newness it 
truly possesses in Christ and in you.” But 





v. 9—11.] 


in him and in you: because the 
darkness is past, and the true light 
now shineth. 

g He that saith he is in the light, 
and hateth his brother, is in darkness 
even until now. 


this is harsh, and opposed to St John’s use 
of words. (2) Harsher still is another view, 
“ Again, | am writing to you as (sub. ws) a 
new commandment, ¢éis thing (rovro) which 
is true,” «.7r-A. (Knapp). (3) Rather vv. 7, 8 
may be thus explained naturally—‘‘ Beloved 
(in bidding you walk as Christ walked, wv. 6), I 
am writing to you not a fresh commandment, 
but an old commandment which ye have always 
had and held fast from the beginning of the 
Gospel. The commandment, that old com- 
mandment, is no isolated one, but the entire 
word which ye heard once for all, Again, 
a fresh commandment I am writing unto you, 
which taken as a whole in its universality (6) 
is true, and of which you have attestation, 
partly in the example of Christ in the Gospel, 
partly in your own experience.” 

because} Some explain the connection— 
‘‘which thing is true, is realized in this, that 
the darkness,” &c. 

is passing by] (Alford); “‘is drifting 
by” (wapdyera:). Two uncials (N A), possi- 
bly by a slip of the scribe, read “shadow” 
(cxia). ‘*The shadow passeth.” (Hammond.) 

the light, the very light] Not the 
true as opposed to the jfa/se, but as op- 
posed to the imperfect—not veracity but 
realization—not harmony between word and 
thought, but embodiment of essential idea. 
The ‘very light,” then, is that which cor- 
responds absolutely with the highest idea 
of light—which is all that light can be. It 
should be especially noted in St John that 
when a zatural and a spiritual object are de- 
signated by one word, the last is always called 
very, while the material is considered but as 
the shadow and image. (i. 9, Vi. 32, xv. I.) 

enlighteneth, or is enlightening] St 
John does not use the middle, as generally in 
classical Greek, but the active—not shining 
so as to be recognized, but enlightening so as 
to dispel darkness ; as in the Collect, ‘‘ Lighten 
our darkness.” Note the present, in act yet 
in continual progress. Cf. Gospel, i. 5. 


8. in the darkness] as his proper ele- 
ment, in exile from the light of God. His 
state is the contradiction of that mentioned in 
St John’s Gospel, iii. 2x. When we consider 
the impression made upon the Apostle by the 
life of our Lord, and the tone in which he 
speaks of Judas staggering out into the dark- 
ness of night (‘‘and it was night,” xiii. 30), it 
would seem as if then he fully realized the 
symbolical significance of darkness. 


I. JOHN. IL 


1o He that loveth his bratne. sbi- 
deth in the light, and there is none 
* occasion of stumbling in him. 


11 But he that hateth his brother = 


is in darkness, and walketh in dark- 
ness, and knoweth not whither he 


hitherto] (€ws dpr:) used by St John 
only here, and Gospel, v. 17. 


10. there is none occasion of stumbling in him] 
Lit. scandal in him there is not. Scane 
dal (from a word meaning to halt) is used by 
LXX. forthewoodinatrap(Ps. cxl. 5; cf. Rom. 
xiv. 13; Rev. ii. 14); then a stumbling-block 
upon which one strikes his foot (Rom. ix. 33; 
t Peter ii. 7, 8); thence, sin which entices our 
fellow-men to destruction. (Bretschn. See 
Additional Note at the end of the Chapter.) 
The root of St John’s idea is in the Psalmist’s 
words: 


‘Great peace have they who love thy law, 

And no stumbling have they.” 
(Ps. cxix. 165.) 
(1) They walk firmly and safé/y in the clear 
path of duty. (2) They are not scandalized, 
driven into scepticism, by the iniquity of the 
world or the defects of men professedly religious. 
Their soul is rooted and grounded in love, and 
while they desire to reform all faults, yet hoping 
all things, enduring all things, they retain peace, 
inward and outward. (Estius.) The God af 
peace is with them, and does not allow their 
strength to stumble beneath the burden. (Neh. 
iv. to.) (3) They are free from the ‘‘stum- 
bling of heart” (z S. xxv. 31), the paralysing 
weakness which follows on the consciousness 
of having wronged. or of bearing ill-will to a 
brother.” (Kay, ‘The Psalms,’ pp. 399, 400.) 
Neander well grasps the force of the passage. 
“* Whilst walking in the dark, we are in danger 
of stumbling at every step. When the road is- 
lighted, we walk with confidence. So with 
the spiritual walk. Without light, we are 
always exposed to the danger of stumbling. 
But the guiding light of the Christian walk is 
Love. Love communicates an exquisite tact 
which knows how to profit by every circum= 
stance of life, and to distinguish the night 
from wrong in every action and event. Love 
then gives security and withdraws us from 
the empire of passion and hatred, which dark- 
ens the judgment.” 


11. Note the solemn and picturesque elo= 
quence of the accessional parallelism in this 
verse. The inner condition of him who hates 
his brother—‘‘is in darkness” (‘‘the night 
has crept into his heart.” See quotation from: 
Tennyson just below)—the outward life— 
“‘walketh in darkness.” (Cf. éy oxéres d:a- 
mopevovra, Ps. Ixxxil. 5, 6 adpav év crores 
wopeverat, Eccles. i. 14, with éy cxorig wep 


316 


goeth, because that darkness hath 
blinded his eyes. 


12 I write unto you, little children, 


marei in this verse.) He has lost his point 
of orientation—she knoweth not whither he 
goeth, to what unsurmised guilt and punish- 
ment. Something follows, worse than dark- 
ness above—the darkness has not only blinded 
him, but blinded his very eyes once for all. He 
has lost the very faculty of sight! (Could the 
Apostle have thought of creatures who, in 
dark caverns, not only lose the faculty of 
sight, but have the visive organs atrophied?) A 
great living poet has presented the same image, 
applying it however not to sin but to sorrow: 
“But the night has crept into my heart, 
and begun to darken my eyes.” 
Tennyson, ‘ Ballads and other 
Poems. Rizpah.’ 


See remarks upon the occasional picturesque- 
ness of St John’s style in the Introduction. 
For his feeling of the symbolism of night and 
darkness, cf. Gospel xiii. 30. The fall of 
Judas lies in the background of the terrible 
picture. See note, supra, v. 9. Cf. also 
Matt. vi. 23. 


SECTION III. (c). vv. 12—17. 


“All that I write to you is intelligible to 
you and will be realized only under certain 
conditions which are fulfilled in your case. 
I write this epistle to you, dear children in 
the faith, because your sins having been 
blotted out are forgiven for His Name’s sake. 

_ I write it to you, fathers—because ye have 
known Him, the Eternal Word, who was 
from the beginning. I write it to you, youths 
—because ye have won a triumph and are 
victorious over the evil one. As with the 
whole epistle, so with what is written. I have 
written it to you, little children! because ye 
fave known the Father; to you, fathers— 
because ye have known Him who was known 
to you from the beginning; to you, youths 
—because ye are strong, and the word 
of God abideth in you as the source of 
strength, and ye are victors over the evil one. 
Now here is my solemn warning: ‘Love 
not the world.’ If any man love the world, 
&c. For all that is in the world—I speak 
not physically, but morally—I mean, the lust 
whose seat is in the lower nature, the lust 
which is fed through the eyes, and the vaunt- 
ing arrogance of life—has not its origin from 
the Father, but from the world. And the 
world is shifting and passing away, and the 
lust which it excited; but the doer of the will 
of God abideth for ever.” 


12—14. These verses will be made clearer 
by two remarks: (1) According to the read- 
ing commended by the majority of best MSS. 


I. JOHN. IL 


Lv- 12, «gy 


because your sins are forgiven you for 
his name’s sake. 
13 I write unto you, fathers, be- 





and by the symmetry of the periods we have six 
clauses, divided by the different tenses of ypape 
—I am writing (ypapw), I have written (é 
ypawa). Thus: 
1. | am «writing unto you, 
(A) Children (rexvia). 
1. Fathers. 
2. Young men. 
ii. I have written unto you. 
(B) Little children (ra:dia). 
1. Fathers. 
2. Young men. 


The thrice-repeated “‘I am writing” refers 
to the whole Epistle; the thrice-repeated ‘I 
have written” points to the portion of it which 
was already written. 

(2) The temptation of dividing the spiritual 
life into three ages, corresponding to childhood, 
youth, old age, has led many preachers and ex- 
positors into inaccuracy. (After St Augustine. 
‘*Children, fathers, youth are here. In 
children, we regard their Jirth—in fathers, 
their age—in young men, their strength.”) 
The first clause of each series is marked by a 
general address, which includes the old and the 
young—‘‘children” (v. 12), ‘little children” 
(v. 13). In each case, those who are 
universally called ‘‘ children” in the first set 
of clauses, ‘little children” in the second, are 
divided into favo classes, ‘* Fathers” and 
‘Young men.” The verses might gain in 
impressiveness and clearness of representation 
by standing thus: 


1z. | am writing unto you, childrent 
because your sins are forgiven for His name’s 
sake. (13) Iam writing unto you, fathers, 
because ye have known him that is from the 
beginning. I am writing unto you, young 
men, because ye have overcome the wicked one. 


I have written unto you, little children! 
because ye have known the Father. (14) I 
have written unto you, fathers, because ye have 
known Him that is from the beginning, I have 
written unto you, young men, because ye are 
strong, and the Word of God abideth in you, 
and ye have overcome the wicked one. 

It certainly seems, at first sight, somewhat 
difficult to understand this importunate pro- 
lixity of affection. But the unusual form 
gives an emphasis of its own. All that he 
was about to write, or had written, would be 
practically meaningless unless they had re- 
ceived forgiveness and grace, and the faculty to 
embrace and understand it. All his spiritual 
children on entering into covenant with God 
had had their sins forgiven, and been brought 
into ‘‘a state of salvation,” a permanent 
condition of acceptance. The elder, as life 


Vv. 14, 15.| 


cause ye have known him that is 
from the beginning. I write unto 
you, young men, because ye have 
overcome the wicked one. I write 
unto you, little children, because ye 
have known the Father. 

14 1 have written unto you, fa- 


went on, learned to know no theological 
novelty—no new ideological Christ—no tem- 
porary juxtaposition of an Hon with a man 
of exceptional holiness—but the Everlasting 
which was from the beginning. The young, 
confirmed in the faith, had within them 
a fountain of perennial youth and energy 
through the personal Word abiding in them. 
Here is another suggestion of a question only to 
be answered by the Gospel—‘‘ The Word of 
God abideth in you.” How so? St John 
Xiv. 23. 


12. are forgiven| The verb is in the 
perfect (Winer, p. 294), expressing a per- 
manent state as the result of a past con- 
dition. In reference to the Christian life, 
and its general history, St Paul habitually 
uses the aorist, St John the perfect. (In one 
magnificent passage, St Paul combines his 
habitual baptismal aorist of the one great 
change with the Johannic perfect of the in- 
tended abiding result. ‘‘ The old things passed 
away, all things have become and conse- 
quently are new.” 2 Cor. v.17.) St Paul 
employs the aorist in its strictest aoristic sense 
of the great spiritual change as summed up 
in one act—‘ potentially to all men in our 
Lord’s Passion and Resurrection; actually to 
each individual man when he accepts Christ, 
is baptized into Christ” (Bishop Lightfoot, 
‘Revision,’ pp. 84, 85). St John by the perf. 
binds the present with the past, and speaks of 
the abiding result of the past in the present. 

for His name’s sake| His—see oni. 5. On 
“the name” see on 3 John 7. ‘‘ Note that 
confidence in remission of sins is a help, not 
an impediment, to piety and the fear of God.” 
(Calv.) 


13. have knowledge of Him that is 
from the Beginning] ‘The ‘have know- 
ledge” is not an allusion to a personal know- 
ledge of Christ on earth among the aged 
believers. “He that is from the beginning” 
is not here the Ancient of days, the eternal 
Father. (This interpretation arose from a 
sentimental concinnity between the ‘ fathers ” 
and the Fatherhood of God.) It must mean, 
therefore, one of two things: either, (1) ‘‘ye 
have knowledge of the old Christ, whom ye 
have known from the beginning of your 
Christian experience” (the somewhat super- 
ficial interpretation of Macknight and others); 
er (2) most probably—‘‘the eternal Pre-ex- 
istent Christ, who was from the beginning” 


I. JOHN. IL. 


thers, because ye have known him 
that is from the beginning. I have 
written unto you, young men, be- 
cause ye are strong, and the word of 
God abideth in you, and ye have 
overcome the wicked one. 

15 Love not the world, neither 


—“Christ, new in His Flesh, ancient in His 
Divinity—Begotten by the Eternal Father, 
from eternity, in eternity. Exod. iii. 143 
Psal. Ix. 3; St John i. 5.” (St August. ‘In 
Epist. Joann.’ Tract. 11. Cap. ii. 5. Opp. 
Tom. 111. Pro. 1992.) Cf. 1 John i. 1, and 
note on ‘‘from the beginning.” ‘‘ Ye have 
known the Person who was from the begin- 
ning, who has existed from eternity. The 
text is another of those which affirm the 
eternal pre-existence of Christ, and harmoe 
nizes exactly with the language of St John in 
the exordium of his Gospel.” (Bp Middleton, 
‘Greek Article,’ p. 440.) 


14. Note again the addition, the acces- 
sional parallelism in—‘ ye are strong, and the 
Word of God abideth in you” (v. 14)—com- 
pared with the simple ‘‘ have overcome the 
wicked one” (v. 13). For the Word of God 
here being the living Personal Lord, cf. infra 
iv. 4; John xiv. 18, 23, xv. 5. Consider the 
advance upon Ps. cxix. 9. The thought of 
the indwelling of Christ in the heart is also the 
ground of the exhortation in 1 Pet. iii. 34. 
Some modern writers represent the Holv 
Trinity as simply three manifestations of God 
—the Father God in nature, the Son God in 
history, the Holy Ghost God in conscience. 
But Scripture does not represent the Father 
exclusively as God in nature. (Ps. civ. 3; 
Col. i. 16.) Nor again (as we see in this 
verse), the heart or conscience as the sole and 
exclusive domain of the Holy Spirit. 


15,16,17. A warning against the love of 
the world. (For the world, see above on v. 2. 
The world here is used in the second of the 
senses there indicated.) ‘That sinfulness 
which is dominant in the whole race of man; 
that collective common life of sin, depending 
on spiritual contagion and example, which 
then ruled supreme in the earthly order, and 
corrupted it to the heart’s core—that Jesus. 
summed up under the name of the quor/d.” 
(Dillinger, ‘ First Age of the Church,’ 1. 28.) 
St John in his strongest prohibitions never 
runs into fanatical excess. ‘All that is in 
the world” without the appositional qualifi- 
cation (“the lust of the flesh”) might justify 
the extremest spirit of monasticism, It is not 
of material things, but of worldly lusts that St 
John affirms that they are not from the Father. 
There is deep truth in Augustine’s remark— 
‘« By the world is signified not only the fabric 
which God hath made of heaven and earth and: 


317 


the things that are in the world. If 
any man love the world, the love of 
the Father is not in him. 

16 For all that zs in the world, 





sea ; but the dwellers in the world are called 
the world, as both the walls and their in- 
habitants are called the house. Sometimes we 
praise the house, and censure its inhabitants. 
All lovers of the world, because they inhabit 
the world by their love of it, are called the 
world.” 

There are favo reasons given by St John for 
this admonition. 

i. ‘‘If any love the world, the love 
towards the Father (see on wv. 5, supra) 
is not in him.” 

This is the application of the law of human 
nature that two master-passions cannot co-exist 
in one man (cf. Chalmers’ Sermon, with the 
profound and suggestive title ‘On the ex- 
pulsive power of a new affection’), ‘Shut 
out the evil love of the world, that thou 
mayest be filled with the love of God. Thou 
art a vessel, but so far thou art filled—Pour 
out that which thou hast, that thou mayest 
receive that which thou hast not.” (St. 
August. ut supra, 1994.) 

il. The fleeting character of the world, its 
irremediable transitoriness. The world is 
passing away, drifting by in ceaseless 
change (v. 17). 

No Christian teacher has more deeply under- 
stood these words than St Augustine. ‘‘ Let 
us not love those things which are in the 
-world.” St John adds this to ‘‘ Love not the 
world,” lest any should reason in this way: 
“¢ Heaven, earth, ocean, moon and stars, the 
ornaments of the sky, are in the world. God 
made them, why should I not love that which 
God hath made?” Well, God forbids not 
that thou shouldest love them, but that thou 
shouldest love them so as to find thy bliss in 
them. It is as if a spouse should give his 
betrothed a fair and precious ring. And if she 
should love the gift more than the giver, would 
not her heart be convicted of unfaithfulness, 
even though that which she loved were her 
lover’s gift? If she said—‘‘his fair gifts are 
enough for me, I care not to see his face”— 
where were her love? The spouse bestows 
the gift to this end, that 4e may be loved in 
#.” (‘In Epist. Joann.’ Tom. 11. P.2. 1995.) 


16. the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the 
eyes, and the pride of life] Not merely 
woluptuousness, covetousness, ambition, aS in 
Did systems of moral theology. We cannot 
always fit the language of St John more espe- 
cially into the pigeon-holes of modern termi- 
nology. We lose more in truth and depth 
than we gain in deceptive clearness, by trans- 
lating language which is spiritual and mystical 


I. JOHN. IL 


[v. 16. 


the lust of the flesh, and the lust 
of the eyes, and the pride of life, 
is not of the Father, but is of the 
world. a 





into the apparently more precise and definite 
language of modern moral philosophy. 

the lust of the flesh| The act of. desiring, 
and that which is desired, run up into one, 
(For lust of flesh, cf. Gal. v, 16—24; Ephes. 
il. 3; 2 Pet. ii. 18.) It is a general term for 
all the propensities which objects presented to 
our senses have a tendency to awaken. In St 
Paul, St John, and St Peter, it generally sig- 
nifies the azimality of man, as the natural 
“fountain,” or “‘hearth,” or ‘‘seat,” of appetites 
in the bad sense—(fomes)—human nature 
so far as it is animal and instinctive, un- 
renewed by the gift of the indwelling Spirit, 
unregulated by the Divire law, and lusting 
against that law. To this is constantly 
opposed the nature of man, transformed and 
instrengthened by the Holy Spirit, and thus 
elevated into the wider sphere of true reason 
(Rom. vi. 19, vil. 18, 25, Vill. 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 
13; Gal. v. 8, 16, 17; Ephes. it 3; Col. i. 
18; 2 Pet. ii. 18). See dissertation in Introd. 
to Romans. 

Jfiesh| Note the careful distinction between 
flesh and body in Scriptural language. See 
notes on Rom. vii. and viii. and on Col. ii. 18. 

of the eyes] desire so far as it is conveyed 
by the movement of the eyes. The sins of 
envy and voluptuousness are connected with 
the eye in the New Testament (Mark vii. 22; 
2 Pet. ii. 14). It may well be that St John 
was thinking, in part at least, of the san- 
guinary and voluptuous fascination of the 
circus and theatre, of which the history of the 
Church contains a striking examplein Alypius 
(St August. ‘ Confess.’). 

arrogancy of living] The word here 
translated /ife is not that which almost uni- 
versally in Scripture denotes Aigher life, but a 
different word (8ios), which means the organic 
life; the period of time during which we pre- 
serve it; and that which belongs to its prolon- 
gation of pleasurable enjoyment. (See infra, 
ili. 17.) Sometimes all this is summed up in 
riches. Pride (ddatoveia, lit. the character of 
an ad\a¢év)—a word which in classical Greek 
has almost a notion of gasconade and umpos- 
ture (Arist, ‘Ethic. Nic.’ Iv. 7, 11) ; ¢avice used 
in New Testament (James iv. 16, and here). 
The phrase is variously translated and under- 
stood. (‘‘ Secular ambition,” St Aug. ; ‘‘ar= 
rogant and self-assuming pomp,” Beng. ; 
‘swelling pride and phantasy of life,” Chry- 
sost.; ‘‘ desire of boastful display in the con- 
duct of life,” Ebrard; “vanity, love of 
display, deliberate self-seeking,” Neand.) It 
has been remarked that ‘the pride of life” is, 
as it were, projected outward, and set in a 


v. 17, 18.] 


17 And the world passeth away, 
and the lust thereof: but he that 
doeth the will of God abideth for ever. 


material framework in the gorgeous descrip- 
tion of the ‘‘merchandise” of Babylon in 
Apoc. xviii. 11—1z4—On these three anti- 
spiritual principles. ‘The lust of the flesh 
has the lust of the eyes as a subtle form of 
itself, and attains its culmination in the 
pride of life” (Diisterd). ‘St John indi- 
cates three special forms, under which the 
worldly spirit which he attacks is revealed; 
(2) carnal desires, (2) desires awakened in the 
soul by the objects of sight, (3) vanity, love of 
éclat, deliberate self-seeking. Thus, satisfaction 
of sensual desires, love of pleasures, and pride, 
are the three principal forms of the worldly 
spirit, here signalized by St John” (Neander). 
Of all that has been written on this verse, three 
passages may be selected for reference: one, 
among the most vivid and interesting of 
ancient theology, almost a treatise on the 
whole subject, and specially on the lust of the 
eyes, in St August. (‘ Confess.’ X. 35); an- 
other, valuable for its application to our 
Lord’s threefold Temptation, in Dr Mill ‘On 
the Temptation,’ pp. 60—85, 86; the third, 
Bossuet, ‘ Traité de la Concupiscence—Expos. 
de 1 Joann. ii. 15, 17.’ 

is not from the Father, but from 
the world it is. [See Additional Note.] 


17. And the world is passing by, 
and the lust of it. For passing 4y, 
see on wv. 8 supra. ‘The thought of the 
passing by of the world’s shifting scene lay 
very deep in the heart of primitive Chris- 
tianity (cf. 1 Cor. vii. 31). All higher spirits, 
indeed, recur to this in their truest moments. 
Even Goethe, that “‘ pagan in Christendom,” 
cried, ‘‘ Die Gestalt dieser Welt vergeht ; und 
ich méchte mich nun mit dem beschiftigen, 
was bleibende Verhiltnisse sind.” ‘The 
Jashion of the world passeth away; and I 
would fain occupy myself only with the 
abiding” (‘A French Critic on Goethe.’ 
‘Quarterly Review.’ Jan. 1878, p. 163). 
“<The current of things temporal sweeps 
along; but like a tree over that stream has 
arisen our Lord Jesus Christ. He willed to 
plant Himself, as it were, over the river. Are 
you whirled along by the current? Lay hold 
upon the wood. Does the love of the world 
roll you along in its course? Lay hold upon 
Christ. For you He became temporal, that 
you might become eternal; for He was so 
made temporal as to remain eternal.” (St 
August. ui supra.) 

but he that doeth the will of Goa abideth for 
ever| ‘There is slight authority for the very 
striking addition in some Fathers of the Latin 
Church. “even as God also abideth for ever.” 
Theworld passeth away, and the pleasure which 


I. JOHN. IL. 


18 Little children, it is the last 
time : and as ye have heard that anti- 
christ shall come, even now are there 





has the world for its object is as evanescent 
as that object. But ‘he who continues doing 
the will of God ” is “ not accessible to earthly 
vicissitudes; for him death does not exist. 
He is partaker of a life of unchanging happi- 
ness, which will only attain its complete 
development when earth, with its life and 
riches, shall have passed away” (Neander). 
*« Join thy heart to the eternity of God, and 
thou shalt be eternal with Him” (St Aug.). 


SECTION IV. i. 18—28. 


‘‘Dear children! I have spoken of the 
world’s umnabiding character. Well, its 
last fixed period now is, and as ye have 
heard of Antichrist’s solemn predestinated 
entrance upon the stage of history, so, as it 
is, many Antichrists have come into existence, 
and are now. From whence we practically 
know that it is the last period. They went 
out from us, but they were not of us. Had 
they been of us, which they were not, they 
would certainly have remained continuously 
with us. They went out that they might 
shew once for all that they are not all of us. 
Ye on the other hand have nothing from Anti- 
christ; ye really have and hold a chrism 
from Christ the Holy One of God, and con- 
sequently know all that ye need know on 
this. Why then, it may be said, do you write? 
I have not written to you because ye have not 
learned and do not know the truth, but because 
ye know it, and that no lie is of the Truth. 
Who is the liar, unless we conceive it to be 
he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? The 
Antichrist is this, the denier of the Father 
and the Son. And remember every denier of 
the Son hath not the Father, while he who 
confesses the Son hath the Father also. Ye 
then—that which ye once heard from the 
beginning, let it abide in you—if that which 
ye heard, and nothing else, abide in you, ye 
too shall abide in the Son and in the Father. 
And to encourage you to remain—this is the 
promise which He promised, eternal life. 
‘These things that precede I have written to 
you, concerning those who would deceive 
you. And ye—the chrism which ye have once 
received abides in you, and ye have no lack to 
need that any such as [ should be teaching 
you, but as His chrism is your teacher and is 
true, and is not a lie, and as it once taught 
you, so shall ye abide init. And now, dear 
ones, abide in Him, that when He te mani- 
fested we may have boldness, and not be 
ashamed before Him when He comes.” 


18. Little children, it is the last hour (épa)] 
Period (ypovos, time in reference to dura- 
tion, or chrenological succession ; xaipés, time in 


319 


320 


many antichrists; whereby we know 
that it is the last time. 

19 They went out from us, but 
they were not of us; for if they 


reference to events, or historical adaptation; 
@pa, time (generally brief) in reference to 
jixed date, chronologically assigned limit of 
human or Divine purpose). It will be ob- 
served here, again, that we have ‘‘a root below 
the stream.” The connection lies in the sub- 
stance of the thought. St John has been 
speaking of the drifting by of the world. 
Hence he proceeds to speak of ‘‘the last 
hour.” ‘‘ That last hour is long; yet it is the 
last.” The ‘‘root below the stream” is keenly 
seen by St Augustine: ‘‘Some might pro- 
dably say—how is it the last time, the last 
nour? Certainly Antichrist must first come, 
and then the day of Judgment. John saw 
their thoughts: lest they should become secure, 
and suppose that it was not the last hour, 
because Antichrist was to come, he adds, 
v. 18—Could that hour have many Anti- 
christs, if it were not the last?” (St August. 
ut supra, 1998.) 

heard] A lesson taught by Christ Himself 
(Matt. xxiv. 24; John v. 43, ‘‘another” who 
*¢shall come in his own name”) and by His 
Apostles (Acts xx. 29, 30; 2 Thess. ii. 3 (see 
note there); 2 Cor. xi. 4; 1 Tim. iv 1). 

antichrist] This word is absolutely peculiar 
to St John. The general use of avri (contra) 
and the meaning of the similarly formed word 
avrideos (St Just. M. ‘Quest. et Resp.’ q. 103, 
_ p- 463) lead to the conclusion that the term 
means ‘‘adversary of Messiah.” The Jews 
derived their conception from Daniel vii. 25, 
Vill. 25, xi. 36 ; Ezek. xxxvili—ix. The zame 
was probably formed by St John. It was 
believed by the Jews that Antichrist would 
appear immediately before the advent of 
Christ. (See references in Grimm and 
Bretschn, s. v.) Cf. inf. v. 22, iv. 3; 2 
John 7. Our Lord mentioned ‘ pseudo- 
Christs” as a sign (Matt. xxiv. 24). St 
Paul gave a solemn warning to the very 
Churches which St John now specially ad- 
dressed (Acts xx. 29). St John saw these 
principles and the men who embodied them in 
full action, and it was an indication for him 
of ‘the last period.” So far Christians had 
only learnt in general to expect the personal 
appearance of one great enemy of Christ, the 
Antichrist (ye have heard that Antichrist 
cometh). In his Epistle St John gives solemn 
warning that those heretics who denied the 
God-Man were not merely precursors of Anti- 
christ, but impersonations of the Antichris- 
tian principle—each of them in a true sense an 
Antichrist. The term is used by no other 
sacred writer, by St John himself only five 
times (1 John ii. 18, twice; ii. 22, iv. 3; 2 


I. JOHN. IL 


[v. 19 


had been of us, they would no doubt 
have continued with us: but they 
went out, that they might be made 
manifest that they were not all of us. 





John 7), and that specifically to characterize 
heresy denying the Incarnation, Person, and 
dignity of Christ as God-Man. Antichrist is 
‘the liar;”” his spirit and teaching is a lie pure 
and simple. The ove Antichrist, whose coming 
was stamped into the living tradition of the 
early Church, and of whom believers had 
necessarily ‘‘ heard,” is clearly distinguished 
from many who were already in existence, 
and were closely connected with him in spirit 
(1 John ii. 18, 22, 26, iv. 3, 6; 2 John ~. 7). 
Probably St John expected the chief Anti- 
christ, the ‘‘ theological antagonist of Christ,” 
before the Personal Advent. In 2 Thess. ii. 
we find the same idea of a singular individual 
of pre-eminent wickedness, while St Paul does 
not call the ‘‘ Man of Sin” Antichrist. [See 
note on 2 Thess. ii. 3.] In the Apoc. we have 
a delineation of an Antichristian power (xiii.— 
xvii.); in St Paul and in St John’s Epp. of the 
‘‘eximious Antichristian person.” (H. More, 
‘ Theol. Works,’ 552.) 

cometh] There is solemnity and elevation 
in the word. It denotes a solemn predes- 
tined entrance of any great messenger of God, 
or representative of an idea, upon the stage 
of history. It is the almost technical term for 
Christ's appearing (Gospel, iv. 25, xii. 27. 
Cf. Matt. x. 34, 35, xi. 3; Luke vil. 20, xvii. 
20, of the Kingdom of God). Hence, it is 
applied to the Man of Sin or Antichrist, and 
well brings out the parody of Christ. Cf, 
John v. 43, xX. 8; 2 Cor. xi. 43 2 Thess. ii. 3. 
See more jally notes on the elaborate 
parody of Christ by the Man of Sin. 

80 now] corresponding to as in as ye have 
heard. 

many antichrists are in existence} 
they have come into existence, and are. See 
Additional Note. [1 John iv. 3.] Cf. for the 
thought, and that with special reference to 
Ephesus and the other Churches of Asia 
Minor, Acts xx. 29, 30 (Matt. xxiv. 24). 
Note that St John speaks of Antichrists newly 
risen up ; for the importance of this as bearing 
upon the polemical object of the Epistle, see 
Introd. on the polemical aspects of St John’s 
first Epistle. 


19. They went out from us] Ct. ‘certain 
which avent out from us,” Acts xv. 24. 

But they were not of us, for if 
they had been of us, they would have 
continued with us. On éé, denoting em- 
phatically origin from the very centre and 
essence of anything, see note on 1 Thess. 
ii. 6. The xo doubt of the A.V. is better 
omitted. The meaning is, ‘had they been 


Ve 20—23.] 


20 But ye have an unction from the 
Holy One, and ye know all things. 

21 I have not written unto you 
because ye know not the truth, but 
because ye know it, and that no lie 
is of the truth. 

22 Who is a liar but he that de- 


from us, which they were not, they would 
have continued with us, which they did not.” 
“They would certainly have continued com- 
munion with us” (Hammond). ‘See from 
this that many who are not from us receive 
Sacraments with us...they receive Baptism 
with us; they receive in common of the very 
altar, and are not from us” (ut supra, 1699). 
See Additional Note. 
that all are not of us (Alford). 


20. ye bave...from] Signifies having some- 
thing received from another, as its author and 
giver (Bretschn.). 

unction or chrism] Ogiona), allusively 
to Christ and Antichrist. ‘‘ Ye are not of An- 
tichrist! ye have chrism from the Christ, the 
Holy Spirit proceeding from the Holy One.” 
‘¢This spiritual unction is the Holy Spirit 
Himself” (St August.). ‘*‘ The Holy Spirit 
is called and is unction and seal” (St Athan. 
‘ Epist. 111. ad Serap.’ ‘ Opp. Dogmat. Select.’ 
Edd. Thilo, 768). For “the oil of holy 
ointment” (ypicwa Gyov) see Exod. xxx. 25 
LXX.; cf. Ps. cxxxui. 2 sqq. Oi/ denotes 
the Holy Spirit in Scripture. Remark the 
prohibition of oil and frankincense with sin- 
offering (Levit. v. 11)—the frankincense as 
symbolising acceptable prayer (Levit. vi. 13; 
John ix. 31), o/ as denoting the Spirit of joy 
and freedom (Ps. li. 12)—to mdicate that sin 
and the Holy Ghost are mutually exclusive. 
(See Hengst. on ‘Sacrifices,’ p. 385.) We 
are Christians as anointed by the Holy Spirit 
(2 Cor. i. 21; cf. 1 Chro. xvi. 22). It should 
be noticed that while St John does not here 
mention the Holy Ghost directly, he begins 
the subject in a form peculiarly his own. For 
it is common with him, before introducing 
some great topics, to prepare the way by allu- 
‘sive hints, delicately playing round a subject 
which is to be more fully handled presently. 
£.g. ‘the birth from God,” iztroduced 1 John 
ii. 29, is expanded iii. 9; ‘‘ confidence” intro- 
duced iii. 21 1s expanded ¥.14. The symboli- 
cal unction in this place is a prelude to the 
fuller music of the Veni, Creator Spiritus, infra 
iii. 24, iv. 13, v. 6. ‘‘ Antichrist shall not lay 
his disanointing hand upon you. You have 
and hold chrism from Christ, the gift of the 
Holy Ghost.” [Hence chrism was used at a 
very early period in connection with baptism 
and confirmation. Bingham, ‘ Antiquities,’ I. 
462, 514, 565.] ; 

the Holy One] i.e. Christ, according to New 

New Test.—Vot. IV. 


I. JOHN. IL 


nieth that Jesus is the Christ? He 
is antichrist, that denieth the Father 
and the Son. 

23 Whosoever denieth the Son, 
the same hath not the Father: [dut] 
he that acknowledgeth the Son hath 
the Father also. 





Testament usage. Cf. Mark i. 24; Luke i. 
35, iv. 34; Acts iii. 14; Rev. iii. 7. - 

ye know all things| Reference of suggestion 
to John xiv. 26. It must be remembered 
that science and revelation are two different 
spheres. The Apostle’s assertion points to 
the Saviour’s promise, and, like it, is limited 
to the last. For St John, in his inspired 
writings, there is nothing in the way of 
‘‘ work, device, knowledge, or wisdom” out- 
side the margin of God’s kingdom. 


21. The connection here is supplied by an 
objection, which occurs to St John’s mind as 
likely to be felt by those to whom he wrote. 
‘‘ If we thus realize our Lord’s promise, re= 
corded in the Gospel, and know all things, 
why do you write? Not because you have 
not learned, or do not know the truth, but 
just because you know it!” 

that every lie is not of the Truth. 
It has been suggested that the 6dr, thrice 
repeated in this short verse, is that of 
quotation. (The quotational dr: (6ri recita- 
tivum) is frequent in St Mark. See iii. 21, 
xvi. 11.) ‘‘I have not written t4is—‘ye 
know not the truth’—but 4is—‘ye know 
it’"—and #éis finally—‘every lie is not from 
the truth.’” It may be noted that St John’s 
sternly severe view of truth makes it certain 
that he would have shrunk with horror from 
the manufacture of discourses dramatically 
put in the mouth of our Lord, or from any 
false or highly-coloured representation of His 
work. Cf. Apoc. xxii. 15. 

of the Truth. Cf. iii. t9 with Gos- 
pel, xviii. 37. 

22. Who is the liar, but &c. 

The Antichrist is this, he that 
denieth the Father and the Son. 

the liar. ‘‘Something more is meant than 
‘a liar.” The context leaves no doubt that 
‘the liar’ is the same with the Antichrist fol- 
lowing” (Bp Middletan, p. 440). 

that Jesus is the Christ} ‘* Jesus has one 
signification, Christ another: though Jesus 
Christ our Saviour is one, Jesus is His 
proper name. As Moses, Elias, Abraham, is 
called each by his own name, so our Lord 
Jesus has that as His own proper name; but 
Christ is the name of His offices.” (St August. 
ut supra, 2002.) 


23. The words bracketed in A. V. should 
be retained here for two reasons. (1) The 


x 


323 


322 


24 Let that therefore abide in you, 
which ye have heard from the begin- 
ning. If that which ye have heard 
from the beginning shall remain in 
you, ye also shall continue in the 
Son, and in the Father. 

25 And this is the promise that he 
hath promised us, even eternal life. 

26 These things have I written 





preponderance of witnesses, uncials and other 
MSS. (A, B, C, 8, Cod. Amiat.). (2) The 
accordance with St John’s style, who delights 
in repeating his weightiest thoughts in one 
peculiar form, i.e. first positively, then nega- 
tively (i. 5, 8, ii. 4, iii. 6, iv. 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 
Ve) 12): 

he that confesseth the Son, &c.] 
Modern Rationalism and the so-called ‘spiri- 
tual philosophy’ of Deism are proofs not 
less truly than Judaism of the truth of this 
oracle. These systems, expounded with 
touching eloquence and consummate ability, 
desire to give up the historical Christ, and 
to cling to the idea of the Father. In com- 
mon with Judaism, they reject the worship 
of Christ, professedly out of reverence for 
the Father. But, by a necessary process of 
thought, the rationalist and spiritual Schools 
are constantly being absorbed in atheism or 
pantheism. God, opposed to Christ, is not 
the Father, the living God; He becomes 
a metaphysical abstraction, alternately ex- 
panded into the monstrous God who is all, 
or diluted into the shadowy God who is no- 
thing. When Voltaire, rapt into momentary 
enthusiasm bya sunset upon the Alps, exclaimed 
“¢ God the Father! I adore Thee,” and then, 
as if ashamed, added a disclaimer of worship 
of the Son, he furnished, however unwillingly, 
one other exemplification to this text. It 
is the expression of true Christian Theism 
against Judaism, Deism, and Mahommedan- 
ism. Cf. especially the thought in x Pet. i. 21. 


24. That which ye heard from the 
beginning let it abide in you; if that 
which ye heard from the beginning 
abide in you, ye also shall abide in 
the Son and in the Father. 

In the A. V. we have three different words 
(abide, remain, continue) for the same Greek 
word. On ‘‘abide” see note supra, wv. 6. 
abide in the Son. The truly Johannic idea 
—in the Son (xiv. 19, 20, xv. 4, 7; I John 
li. 5, 6, 24, 28, ili. 24, v. 20), is also truly 
Pauline. See on the mystica] meaning of év, 
note on 1 Thess. i. r, and Rom. viii. 1 (III. 
146 and 707). Cf. also r Pet. v. 14. 

25, And (to encourage) this is the 
promise that He promised us, even 
the eternal life. 

be] See oni. 5 


I JOHN. IL 


[v. 24-—27. 


unto you concerning them that se- 
duce you. 

27 But the anointing which ye 
have received of him abideth in you, 
and ye need not that any man teach 
you: but as the same anointing 
teacheth you of all things, and is 
truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath 
taught you, ye shall abide in ' him. 





the promise] See on i. 4 (the word evaye 
yéXvoy occurs nowhere in St John). 

the eternal life. For the accus. here 
as ‘‘an apposition comprehended in a relative 
clause,” see Winer, p. 552. 


26. These things] i.e. those which go be- 
fore. See note on i. 4. 

them that seduce you| are for mislead- 
ing you. Cf.i. 8. 


27. And ye—the unction which ye 
received from Him abideth in you, 
and ye have no need that any man be 
teaching you; but as His unction is 
teaching you concerning all things, 
and is true, and is not a lie, and as 
it taught you, so shall ye abide in 
Him. 

His unction or chrism, i.e. the Holy 
Spirit (Athanas.). For the strength and joy 
of this cf. Ps. xcii. 10. ‘‘ The same anointing 
(A.V.) (76 atro xpioua) (A, B, approved 
by Bengel, Liicke, Huther, Lachmann, Bp 
Wordsworth). So quoted by St Athanas. 
(‘ Epist. 1. ad Serap.’ 23). His unction (ro 
avrod xpicpa) (C, 8, Cod. Amiat. (unctio 
ejus), approved by Tisch. and Reiche. The 
latter critic gives the following reasons in its 
favour. 

i. The word His is of importance in the 
argument. It brings out the efficacy of the 
unction as Divine. 

ii. The marked advance of thought in St 
John’s usual manner. The expression shews 
the relation of the Holy Spirit to Christ as 
His Spirit more essentially and dogmatically 
than ‘‘ye have an unction from the Holy 
One” (v. 20), or ‘‘the anointing which ye 
have received of Him” in the earlier part of 
the present verse. The copyists might not 
have thought ‘‘ His unction” a very intel- 
ligible or even reverent expression. 

all things] See note on v. 20. 

and is true] ‘‘That is, the Spirit of God 
Himself who teaches men cannot lie.” (St 


August.) 
as it hath taught] taught once for all. 
ye shall abide} ‘The imp. abide ye has very 


considerable support (A, B, C, 8, Cod. Amiat., 
manete in Eo—approved by Diust., Huth., 
Lach., Bengel, Lticke, Tisch.). Reiche pre- 
fers the fut., (1) from v. 25, where the language 
is not of command but of hope and blessed 


1 Or, &. 


v. 28.) 


28 And now, little children, abide 
in him; that, when he shall appear, 





augury; (2) there is a subtle beauty in the 
change from v. 27 to v. 28—*‘ ye shall abide 
in Him” (wv. 27)—“ well, then, children! do 
abide in Him” (v. 28). So, in the inverse 
order in v. 24, “let that which ye have heard 
abide in you...ye also shall abide” &c. 

as His unction is teaching you con- 
cerning all things...and as it taught 
you. ‘As the Spirit excites the whole spi- 
ritual life, so He exercises an influence upon 
the power of spiritual knowledge” (Olsh.). 
These words have an important controversial 
and practical bearing. (1) Development 
through a continuous revelation by an in- 
fallible organization, or by an individual human 
being, is, to say the least, ignored. The lan- 
guage is such as surely could not have been 
used by any one who held that view even 
implicitly. (2) We may cite two passages 
from two spiritual teachers in different ages. 
(a) ‘‘ The sound of our words strikes on the 
ear; the Teacher is within. I, for my part, have 
spoken to all of you:—but they to whom the 
unction within speaketh not—whom the Spirit 
within teacheth not, goaway untaught. There 
are certain appointed outward offices and 
administrations for our behoof. The Teacher 
in the heart hath His chair in Heaven” (St 
Aug.). (4) ‘Persons deprived of all human 
aid often advance the work of sanctification 
more by continually renouncing themselves in 
order to follow the impulse of the Holy 
Ghost than by all the precepts and methods 
of masters of the spiritual life. The Holy 
Spirit, who dwells in a justified soul, is a 
great director, when we are willing to listen and 
know how to hear Him. His anointing teach- 
eth you of all ihings” (Lombez, ‘ Paix Int.’). 


28. little children] children. See note, 
supra, ii. 1. 

confidence...ashamed| Opposed, as in Phil. 
i. 20. (See Prov. xiii. 5, LXX.) Dappnoia 
is literally ‘‘ liberty of speech to speak out all 
we think.” It was the almost technical word 
used by Athenians of their privilege as citi- 
zens. Eurip. ‘ Hipp.’ 442; Plat. ‘Rep.’ 557. 
[“Right of free speech is the badge, the 
privilege, of the servant of Christ. See espe 
cially 2 Cor. iii. 12.” Bishop Lightfoot, 
‘Philippians,’ p. 89.] “Confidence in the 
original denotes the entire freedom with 
which we unburden, in presence of an inti- 
mate friend, all which can weigh upon our 
heart” (Neander). 

not be ashamed at his coming| In (ev) with 
a subst. after defines a term of time. Here, 
when He shall have come—‘ when the 
last trump shall sound” (1 Cor. xv. 52)— 
“Sin them is filled up the wrath of God,” 
s.e. when they (the plagues) shall have finished 
(Rev. xv. 1). 


I. JOHN. IL. 


we may have confidence, and not be 
ashamed before him at his coming. 


coming | The technical term for the coming 
of Christ, 2 Thess. ii, 8 (and of the Man of 
Sin as His unholy caricature and counter- 
part). This verse and the following are 
of very high dogmatic importance, because 
they prove the unity of Apostolic teaching 
upon eschatology, and shew that the notion 
of a visible, exterior, historical advent is ot 
“foreign from and unknown to St John,” 
or inconsistent with his idealizing mould of 
thought. (See Meyer on St John’s Gospel, 
XXI. 22, 23.) 

not be ashamed before him] (aicyuvOdpev 
az avtov.) A Hebraism. ‘The verb ‘“‘to be 
ashamed” (W123, to grow pale, to change 
colour for shame) is translated by LXX. as 
in the text (Jer. il, 36, xlviii. 13). 


SECTION V. il. 29—iii. 9. 

“If ye know (theoretically or scientifically) 
that He is righteous, ye know ( practically) 
that every one who doeth righteousness has 
been born of Him, and continues to be His 
child. We may well dwell upon this Sonship 
as regards the present and the future. 

‘* As regards the present. Behold! of what 
marvellous love the Father is a giver to us, 
that we should be, and be owned to be, the 
children of God. For the very reason that we 
are such, the world has no real knowledge of 
us, because it has not taken knowledge of Him. 

‘“ As regards the future. As it is, we are 
children of God, and what we shall be is not 
yet manifested once for all. We know that 
when that (i.e. ‘ what we shall be’) may have 
been manifested we shall be like Him, for we 
shall see Him as He is. And this is a very 
practical truth. Every one who holds and 
cleaves to this hope reposed in God is per- 
petually purifying himself even as He, Christ, 
is pure. 

‘“‘This is no unnecessary teaching. ‘There is 
no charm by which sudjective sin ceases to be 
sin objective, by which the intrinsic character 
of actions is transformed in virtue of those who 
perform them. Every doer of sin is a doer of 
transgression. There may be a formal differ- 
ence, there is an essential identity between 
them. Ye know that He has been once mani- 
fested for the very purpose of removing the 
guilt and power of sin, and speck or stain of 
sin in Him there is not. Every one vitally 
abiding in Him is therefore no habitual sinner. 
Every such habitual sinner has no true his- 
torical knowledge and insight into His cha- 
racter, much less has he inner knowledge and 
love of Him. 

‘* Dear sons, there are deceivers abroad. 

‘‘Let no man deceive you. He that doeth 
righteousness is righteous even as He is 
righteous. The sin-doer is of the devil, for 


x2 


323 


324 


8 Or, dxow 
e. 


29 If ye know that he is right- 
eous, 'ye know that every one 


the devil from the beginning of the world 
keeps on sinning; he does the devil’s works. 
And how can he be on Christ’s side, who 
does the very works which He has become 
incarnate for the purpose of destroying? No, 
he who having been born of God continues 
such, is no doer and worker of sin; because 
God’s holy seed (i.e. His children) continues 
in abiding vital union with Him (w. 6). and 
it cannot continue in sin, because having been 
born of God it continues in that blessed 
condition.” 


29. If ye know that he is righteous, 
ye are aware that every one doing 
righteousness is born from him. 

Tf ye know | theoretically. 

ye are aware, practically. 

doing righteousness. ‘The part. pres, 
denotes the course, or tendency, in which a 
man continuously and determinately perse- 
veres. Of the two verbs translated do in 
A. V. that which is here used (ao:dv) is most 
appropriate to doing good, i.e. effective reali- 
zation, abiding product. 

righteousness | Righteous, righteousness, with 
St John denotes moral rectitude in some as- 
pect of it, He calls Christ “righteous” with 
special significance in this Epistle (1 John ii. 
I, iii. 7). ‘In St John’s Gospel our Lord 
attributes righteousness to Himself (xvi. 10). 
The Holy Ghost will convince the world, not 
here of a righteousness to be found in Christ, 
but of a purer and more perfect type of szora/ 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on 


10. Two words in Hebrew are rendered 


by oxavdadoy ; (1) bwon from root bw> to 
totter in the ankles, z.e. that against which any 
one stumbles, a stumbling-block—hence (a 
cause of falling, (4) incitement to fall, 3 
offence or scruple of conscience (x S. xxv. 31, 
Gesen. s.v.), (2) YP from Yp', a hook or 
snare, 

In LXX. ov« gotw avtois cxavdadov (Ps. 
cxix. 165), here cai oxavdadov év avr@ ovK 
éorw (x St John ii. 10). 


16. ex ‘figuratively signifies every source 
and cause, out of which something ffows.” 
Winer, ‘Gramm. of G. T. D.,’ Pt. i11., 
Sect. xlvii., p. 385.—‘‘ eivat, yeverOar €k, 
oriundum esse ex ; hinc, de qudvis alia origine. 
elvaa x Tivos, ab aliquo proficisci auctore” 
(Grimm, ‘Clay. N. T.,’ p. 129). 


18. On ‘the last period” the following 
extracts will be of interest, as representing the 
inions of two great scriptural students, and 
the very different schools to which they be- 


I. JOHN. II. 


[v. 29. 


that doeth righteousness is born of 
him. 





righteousness than it had known or conceived, 
and that in one done to death by it, but taken 
up from its sight to God’s Right Hand.” 
(See Olshausen, ‘Gospels,’ Iv. 92.) With 
St John the word is essentially ethical, with 
St Paul essentially doctrinal. Yet, even in 
St Paul, when it stands alone, it is ethical, 
not dogmatic. Note the strikingly Jobannie 
phrase in Rev. xxii. r1. 

is born of him] is born from him, is 
born (perfect, a present state as the result 
of a past action. See below on iii. 9). From 
him (€£ avrov). [This addition aed: 
with slight variation, infra iii. 9, iv. 7, Vv. 1, 
4, 18) might be cited with some force in favour 
of translating the word rendered again in St 
John’s Gospel (iii. 3) as from above. (dvabev, 
cf, also iii. 31, xix. 11. Ibid. v. 23, it is /ocal, 
‘“‘from the top.”) For (x) in the 
this word never denotes again. (2) The new 
birth is only directly mentioned in this form 
outside St John’s Gospel in the present Epistle. 
It is one of the /oops which specially fasten the 
two books to the same cover. Consequently the 
birth from God in the Epistle, so emphatically 
repeated, would seem to be the exponent of 
dvwbev. (See, however, the note on St John 
ili. 3.) It may be noted that here, as so 
often, the Hebraic idea of the new birth 
of God, in connection with the registration 
and entrance of the citizens of the New City, 
is found in its first sense in the Psalter. 
(Ps. lxxxvii. 4, 5, 6.)] See Additional Note, 

Justus justum gignit, (Beng.) 


Cuap. Il. 10, 16, 18, 19, 29. 


long. ‘‘x John ii. 18, Grotius and Mede 
understand these Antichrists of the pseudo- 
Christs (Wevdoxpioror, Matt. xxiv. 24) that 
our Saviour foretells of, which should start up 
before ‘‘the last time” of the Jewish Com- 
monwealth, the destruction of Jerusalem, 
which was the écyarn dpa of Judaism. But 
éoy. o. signifies xarpos écxatos (for NY is 
indifferently rendered dpa or xatpos), and the 
fourth kingdom in Daniel being the last. the 
time of that kingdom may be alsoi ntimated 
by it. Whence that in St John (1 John ii. 18) 
may signify this, viz. that the last time in 
Daniel’s kalendar of his four kingdoms, i.e. 
the last kingdom, was then a running on, 
which is the Roman, during which kingdom 
the Little Horn, here called Antichrist, shall 
come upon the stage. This is 6 ’Avr., that 
famous Antichrist which ye have heard from 
Daniel, but this is a greater distance off. 
Wherefore (to speak what more nearly ccn- 
cerns you) ‘even now are there many Anti- 
christs which not Daniel, but our Saviour 


vat: | 


foretold of, whereby again we know it is the 
last hour; but I mean not cf Daniel’s four 
kingdoms, but of the Jewish Commonwealth, 
as our Lord predicted.” Or briefly, ‘It is 
the last hour, i.e. last kingdom of the four, 
viz. the Roman; and as you have heard that 
Antichrist will then come, so also now, in the 
last time of the Jewish polity are many Anti- 
christs ; whence we may assuredly gather it is 
the last hour thereof—these many Antichrists, 
according to prediction, attending ¢#is last 
hour, as that one famous Antichrist that.” 
Henry More, ‘Theological Works,’ p. 521. 
Again—‘ And the sense of both 1 John ii. 18 
—iy. 2, 3, may be this, namely, that whereas 
those to whom St John wrote had received a 
rumour or fame of that eximious Antichrist 
that was to come into the world in the last 
time, occasioned (I doubt not) from Daniel’s 
prophecies of the Little Horn and of that King 
of Pride that would exalt himself above all ; 
the event of these prophecies being further 
off, though at last certainly to come, he fixes 
their minds upon such Antichrists as were 
nearer at hand; and who, though but the 
types and figures of that great Antichrist to 
come some ages after, were yet of more con- 
cernment to them to take notice of: but in 
the interim describes Antichrist so, that 
though it does more palpably point at these 
types of the future Antichrist, yet the de- 
scription, more narrowly searched into, takes 
fast hold also on that great Antichrist himself ; 
forasmuch as it is implied, that it is one who 
by way of imposture puts himself into the 
place of Jesus, who is the true Christ, that 
King, Priest, and Prophet appointed by God, 
to whom all must submit. Which not only 
Barchocab and such false Messiahs in the 
Jewish Commonwealth have done, but he 
that has so made himself the Head of the 
Church as to null the laws and doctrines of 
Christ is deprehended to do the like also.” 
(ibid. p. 522.) 

‘‘The Apostle shews Christians that they 
should not be inattentive to the signs of the 
times. In fact, events do not succeed without 
order or reason. They make part of a vast 
plan, directed by God, and in which each 


CHAPTER III. 


1 He declareth the singular love of God to- 
wards us, in making us his sons: 3 who 
therefore ought obediently to keep his com- 
mandments, 11 as also brotherly to love one 
another. 


Cuap. III. 1, what manner of love] 
how great and marvellous. Cf. Matt. viii. 27; 
Mark xiii. 13 2 Peter iii. rz. 

that| ‘‘with the intention that we should 
be” (Winer, p. 481). 

be called ‘‘ be, and be owned to be.” (See 
Luke i. 32—35.) After be called, some read 


I. JOHN, IIL 


event has its place. Speaking of the epoch in 
which he lived, St John calls it ‘the last 
time,’ i.e. ‘the Christian period.’ It is so 
called because that period is the end and ac- 
complishment of all previous periods; all 
which precedes it has only been the gradual 
preparation for it. The coming of Jesus 
Christ is the centre and corner-stone of the 
whole history of the kingdom of God. Start- 
ing from that moment, we assist at the develop- 
ment and application of this great fact; such 
is the substance of history since Christ. All 
which has followed forms one sole period, de- 
signated in its entirety—whatever its duration 
is to be—as ‘the /ast time;’ it extends to 
the final crisis of God’s kingdom, which will 
commence with Christ’s Personal coming.” 
(Neander.) 


18. yeyovaci, perfect middle of yiyvouat, 
‘‘come into being:” yéyova and éyevouny 
supply the perfect and aor. of eiyi, I am; 
yéyova frequently has a present sense, ‘‘ I have 
been born, and therefore am in existence,” 
pei Donaldson, ‘Gr. G.’ pp. 266, 286 
(cf. Matth., Jelf, ‘Gr. Gr.’ 1. 236). 


19. «i yap €& nuav joav, peperncercay 
av, «i with indicative of historical tenses, 
when the truth of the antecedent is denied— 
‘thad they been, what they were not.” The con- 
sequent is then generally expressed by a cor- 
responding tense of indicative with dy, whereby 
the truth of the consequence also is denied. The 
pluperfect is used in such cases, to express 
the continued action of the consequent. See 
Jelf, Matth., ‘ Gr. G.’ p. 474. 


29. The most important objection to this 
view is that alleged by Tholuck. Nicodemus 
appears to understand advwéev as Sevrepov (St 

ohn iii. 4, ‘‘can he enter the second time, 
&c.”). Tholuck also appeals to the regenera 
tive idea in Titus ili. 5 (wadvyyevecia), 1 Peter 
i. 3 (dvayevvycas), ibid. 23 (avayeyevynpévor). 
See Lange, ‘ Life of Christ,’ 11. 31; cf. also 
Bp Wordsworth, ‘New Testament,’ 11. 162, 
Bretschn., ‘Lex. Man. N. T.’ s.v. yevvaw, and 
the important Additional Note on St John’s 
Gospel, p. 63. 


EHOLD, what manner of love 
the Father hath bestowed upon 
us, that we should be called the sans 
of God: therefore the world know- 
eth us not, because it knew him not. 





and we are, A, B, C, 8 (et sumus, Cod. Amiat.), 
This reading is approved by Diisterd, Lachm., 
Huther, Tischend. (in his 8th edit.). 

sons of God] St John ever uses the 
word vids of any human child of God (xii. 
36 is the nearest approach to an exception). 
He eniploys a different word (réxvov) 


325 


326 


2 Beloved, now are we the sons 
of God, and it doth not yet appear 
what we shall be: but we know that, 
when he shall appear, we shall be 
like him; for we shall see him as 
he is. 


and wv. 2, iii. 10, v. 2; cf. Gospel i. 12, xi. 
52. St Paul uses the latter rarely (Rom. 
viii. 16, 17, 21, ix. 8; Philipp. ii. 15) the 
former more frequently (Rom. villi. 14, 19, 
ix. 26; a Cor. vi. 18; Gal. ii. 26, iv. .6, 
9, So Heb. ii. 10, xii. 5,6, 7,85 ch Ps. 
Ixxiii. 15). The first, probably, rather con- 
templates the adoptive act, by which one who 
does not belong to the family is adopted and 
brought into the relation of a son; the second 
the nature imparted to those who are born 
and produced by actual birth. 

2. now] as it ts. 

it doth not yet appear | it never yet was 
manifested. (Alford.) 

if it (sc. what we shall be) shall be 


manifested. Additional Note at end of 
these Epistles, p. 382. 
like him] 2 Cor. iii. 13. “As the whole 


body, face, and above all eyes, of those who look 
at the sun become bathed in light (énsolantur).” 
(Beng.) 
“So clouds themselves like suns appear, 
‘When the sun pierces them with light.” 
Cowley. 
‘¢The last words with which Arnold closed 
his last lecture on the N.T. were in comment- 
ing on x Johniii. 2. ‘ Yes,’ he added with 
marked fervency, ‘the mere contemplation of 
Christ shall transform us into His likeness,’ ” 
(Stanley’s ‘ Life of Dr Arnold,’ Il. 331, 332.) 
“ When some heathen converts to Christianity 
were translating a Catechism into their own 
language, they happened to come upon 1 John 
iii. 2; they stopped—‘‘No! it is too much,” 
they said, ‘‘let us write that we shall be per- 
mitted to kiss His feet.” ‘‘ The whole life of 
a good Christian is one act of holy desire 
for this.” (St August. ut supra, 2008.) 
3. every man that hath] Holds and cleaves to. 
this hope in Him] Him should beso printed 
as to shew that God is the object on whom this 
hope reposes (€yav thy éAmida tavtny em 
avro). Cf. émi coi, Kupre, yAmtoa, Ps. Xxx. I 
(LXX.), and the subtly varied form of ex- 
pressing hope’s mode of resting upon God or 
Christ (1 Cor. xv.19; 1 Tim.v.5; 1 Peter iii. 
5). The hope of poetry is hopefulness. ‘* Hope 
delighted smiled, and waved her golden hair.” 
(Collins’ Ode on the Passions.) The hope of 
the New Testament is patient, comfortable 
expectation of the promises of God, built upon 
the sure foundation of God's word. But hope, 
like our strongest affections (angcr, fear, love), 
is personal in its highest form; and so God 


I. JOHN. III. 


[v. 2—4. 


3 And every man that hath this 
hope in him purifieth himself, even 
as he is pure. 

4. Whosoever committeth sin trans- 
gresseth also the law: for sin is the 
transgression of the law. 


—_—— 


Himself is the highest object of hope. ‘‘ Hope 
in Him, or rather on Him (x John iif. 3). 
And this is a special act of Christian hope 
to be thus unfastened from ourselves and 
fastened upon God.” See the wise remarks 
of Hammond, ‘ Practical Catechism,’ Lib, 1., 
Sect. iii. and the note in this volume on 1 Pet. 


ie gt 

purifieth| is continually purifying himself. 
‘“The very hope of it now, if it be fastened 
on God, hath the power of making us pure” 
(Hammond). See South’s Sermon on this 
text, and Paley’s on Purity of heart and affec- 
tion (Sermon XLII.). Augustine well notes 
—*‘+ See how he does not do away with free- 
will; for he says, ‘purifies bimself—Who 
purifies us but God?’ Yet God does not 
purify you when you are unwilling. There- 
fore, in joining your will to God, you purify 
yourself.” 

even as he| Here no longer avros, but 
éxeivos (see on the antithetic use of this pro- 
noun above on ii. 6), ‘‘as Christ, and Christ 
alone,” &c. 

is| Presentiating tinge of thought. The 
sinlessness of Jesus is still considered as present 
to faith. 


4. Every one that is doing sin is 
also doing lawlessness, for sin is 
lawlessness. Every sin-doer also doeth 
lawlessness. (See Additional Note.) St Paul’s 
idea is the same in 2 Thess. ii. 3—8. The 
‘Man of sin” is also ‘‘ the /awless one.” St 
John’s object is to state that there is no per- 
sonal favour which charms away the intrinsic 
sinfulness of sins, and gives a dispensation to 
privileged individuals, by which sin subjective ~ 
(auapria) ceases to be sin objective (dvopia), 
by which the intrinsic character of actions 
is changed out of consideration for those 
who perform them. Every doer of sin is 
a doer of lawlessness, every sin-maker a 
law-breaker. ‘‘It is one of those exactly 
convertible or reciprocal propositions which 
are very rare” (Rose on Bp Middleton, ‘ Doc- 
trine of Greek Article,’ p. 55 note). The con- 
nection has been thus traced. ‘If we would 
not lose that hope, we shall aim at a universal 
and pervasive holiness. We shall refrain not 
only from palpable violation of the law, but 
from all sin, for it is false to suppose that the 
former can ever be separated from the latter. 
There may be a formal difference, there is aa 
essential identity between them” (Storr and 
Michael. ‘ Einleitung,’ 1520). 





v. 5—8.] 


5 And ye know that he was mani- 
fested to take away our sins; and in 
him is no sin. 

6 Whosoever abideth in him sin- 
neth not: whosoever sinneth hath 
not seen him, neither known him. 

7 Little children, let no man de- 
ceive you: he that doeth righteous- 


5. to take away our sins| Our is omitted 
by some MSS, and editors (Lachm., Tischend.). 
It is not in A, B, apparuit ut peccata tolleret 
(Cod. Amiat.). It is, however, retained by 
C, 8, and others. Internal arguments tend 
to turn the balance in its favour. (1) 
Throughout the Epistle it is we who are 
spoken of as forgiven (i. 7, Io, il. I, lv. To). 
(2) In wv. 4 supra, sin has been spoken of 
generally. Here it is made special by in- 
cluding the Apostle and his readers, (See 
Reiche, ‘ Comment. Crit,’ iz Joc.) 

to take away| that He should take 
away by one act. Dogmatic disputes have 
arisen as to the exact meaning of the verb 
rendered ‘‘take away.” [ John i. 29 (cf. 
Isai. liii. 4, 6, 11) the context would certainly 
seem to lay more stress on the Lamb of God 
bearing sin by way of expiation, than lifting it 
from the sinner by way of sanctification. But 
‘the act designated by atpew being that which 
consists in lifting a burden, in order that it may 
not crush him upon whom it weighs, it is em- 
ployed as the emblem of deliverance from sin 
in general, which includes both expiation and 
sanctification” (Godet, ‘Snr lEv, de S. Jean,’ 
I. 292). The context here would seem to 
Tequire us to think still more of lifting away 
the power than the gui/t of sin. 

And sin in Him is not. 


6. whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, 
neither knoweth him] No habitual sinner 
(the present part. denoting continuance in) has 
attained a true historical knowledge of, and 
insight into, His character, much less has he 
gained inner knowledge and love of Him. 
To see in the New Testament often denotes 
clear religious knowledge (John i. 18, vi. 46; 
Heb. ii. 8). See the interesting note of Apol- 
linaris on our Lord’s words—‘‘I speak that 
which I have seen with my Father: and ye 
do that which ye have seen with your father,” 
John viii. 38—in Cramer, ‘ Catena,’ II. 280. 
“In saying that He had seen, and with His 
Father, He indicated not seeing with the eyes, 
but the knowledge and insight which was in 
accordance with His nature; since in assert- 
ing that they also had seen with their Sather, 
He by no means signifies that they had been 
ocular spectators, but that by the wickedness 
which dwelt in their souls, they were familiar 
with the counsels and character of the evil 
one,” 


I. JOHN. IIL. 


ness is righteous, even as he is right- 
eous. 

8 He that committeth sin is of 
the devil; for the devil sinneth from 
the beginning. For this purpose the 
Son of God was manifested, that 


he might destroy the works of the 
devil. 





7. This verse is addressed by anticipation, 
not only to Gnostics, but to all in the Christian 
Church who ‘‘fashion out such a God as will, 
in Christ at least, in those that be once His 
own, by one knows not what fond affection 
appropriated to Himself, connive at their very 
sins, so that they shall not make the least breach 
between Himself and them.” (Cudworth, 
‘Sermon before the House of Commons.’) 

is righteous, even as he is righteous] ‘‘ Even 
as does not always or necessarily imply parity 
or equality. For instance, what a difference 
there is between the face of a man, and its 
reflection in the mirror! And yet we say 
even as there are ears or eyes in the one case, 
so in the other....He purifies us even as He is 
pure; but He is pure eternally, we pure by 
faith—we are righteous and He is righteous; 
but He immortally and for ever, we by believ- 
ing in Him whom we see not.” (St Augus- 
tine, ut supra, 2010.) 


8. the devil] (6 diaBodros). See for this 
word note on_John vi. 7o. The interpreta- 
tion of ‘‘ accuser,” ‘‘ calumniator,” appears to 
be fixed, both by the derivation and by Apoc. 
xii. 10; cf. 9. [The curious Hebraized word 
“N2°OP, the transliteration of Rear yep is used 
by the Rabbis. Buxtorf, ‘Lex. Rabbin. 
Talm.’ 2009*. Schoettgen, ‘Hor. Hebr.’ 1121 
sqq.] 

the devil sinneth from the beginning] Cf. 
John viii. 44. Genesis is recognized as worthy 
of credit. For arguments against the Mani- 
chean notion of an eternal personal principle 
of evil, see St Aug. ‘De Civ. D? x1. 13. 

that he might destroy the works of the devil] 
destroy (Avon), to weaken, deprive of power, 
abolish in principle; a word in this sense pecu- 
liar to St John (unless Matt. v. 19 be an ex- 
ception). See Gospel, li. 19, v. 18 (‘‘ was 
destroying the Sabbath”), vii. 23. 

the works of the devil| Among the miracles 
recorded in the Gospels, a whole class, those 
of dispossession, peculiar to the synoptical 
evangelists, and especially to St Mark, are 
nowhere recorded by St John. But the evan- 
gelistic silence is no objection (John xx. 30, 
31). We certainly read in him of no pare 
ticular victories over Satan in the recovery of 
demoniacs. But it should be observed that 
they are here included and referred to. It 
is false to say that possession was quite alien 
to St John’s life or even knowledge. Moral 


327 


328 


g Whosoever is born of God doth 
not commit sin; for his seed remain- 
eth in him: and he cannot sin, be- 
cause he is born of God. 


10 In this the children of God 


and spiritual possession is very strongly indi- 
cated by him (vi. 70, viii. 44, xili.27). As 
to the Anowledge of the writer of the Gospel 
of the idea of possession, see John Vili. 48, x. 20. 


9. Whosoever is born of God is rot doing 
Bin...because he is born of God] (yeyevynpevos 
..-yeyévvnta, pft.). The tense shews that 
St John is speaking not of those who have 
been once regenerate, but of those who re- 
tain and develop the new life and continue 
in it; who having been born from God 
remain in a condition correspondent to the 
supernatural life which they have received in 
the birth of water and of the spirit; who 
persevere in ‘“‘an untirable and continuate 
goodness.” (Shakespeare, ‘Timon of Athens,’) 
Is this consistent (cf. also infra v. 1—4) 
with our Lord’s words to Nicodemus (Jokn 
iii. 3—5, 6, 7)? Perfectly. The natural 
difference between the Epistle and Gospel is 
that the Epistle gives the subjective version, 
so to speak, of the objective elements presented 
in the Gospel—a fact which accounts for 
apparently slight but most significant varia- 
tions of expression. (Cf. i. 1 with 1 Johni. 
I, 23 xix. 34 with r Johny. 6.) Our Lord, 
speaking to Nicodemus, contemplates the 
germ and first principle of the new life, which 
he had yet to receive. St John, writing to 

‘those who had long entered the kingdom, 
contemplates not the germ but the fruit, not 
the tendency but the realization, not the im- 

ulse towards and capacity of renovation, 

ut the renovation itself. To Nicodemus our 
Lord declares how a man must enter into 
the kingdom, and be provided with spiritual 
facultiés fitting him for it. St John in his 
Epistle speaks of the ideal new life issuing from 
the new birth. The fourth Gospel refers 
principally to the new birth, to the shower of 
grace; the Epistle of St John refers princi- 
pally to the new life—to the growing of the 
grass long after the rain has fallen. (See Bp 
Browne ‘on the XX XIX. Articles,’ p. 636.) 

for His seed continues in Him. The His 
...Him refer to God, not to ‘‘ whosoever is born 
of God.” ‘‘Seed” (amépya) is used as in Isai, 
liii. 10, Ixvi. 22, for the holy stock of God’s 
children. His holy seed continues in 

abiding vital union with Him. (The LXX. 
translate Y71 by omépya in these passages in 
the sense of posterity, stock, race.) ‘This is the 
essential cause that ‘‘ whosoever is born of 
God doth not commit sin.” [The view which 
understands the ‘‘ seed” of the Holy Spirit as 
the germ and principle of a new life, intended 


I. JOHN. IIL. 


[v. 9, 10 
are manifest, and the children of 


the devil: whosoever doeth not 
righteousness is not of God, nei- 
ther he that loveth not his 
brother. 





to spring up into holiness, has gained much 
acceptance (Bishop Taylor, ‘Life of our 
Blessed Lord. Of Baptism.’ Lect. 1x. 23), 
but is not so consonant with the general usage 
of the word in Scripture. 

and he cannot sin} The pronoun under- 
stood may be a resumption of the first part 
of the verse, 4e ; or (somewhat less probably 
a further development of the spiritual stren 
of the seed of God, #t. And he is not able 
tu continue in sin (ov dvvara: auapravew). 
He is not able. The word is one of those 
which it is quite incorrect to treat as pleo- 
nastic or nearly so, and which should be fully 
fendered. (See Winer, Part rit. § Ixv. 635, 
637.) Note the vitally important distinction 
between the present here, and the aor. of the 
same verb, supra ii.1. [‘* The infinit. aorist 
is generally used...either of a thing occurring 
only once, which does not admit, or at least 
does not require, the notion of continuance 
and perpetuity, or of something which is 
brief and as it were only momentary in dura- 
tion.” (Stallbaum, ‘Plat. Euthyd.’ p. 140.) 
‘“‘The inf. pres. is generally employed to ex- 
press an action now in course of perform- 
ance, or continued in itself or its results, or 
Srequently repeated.” Winer, Pt. Il. § xiv. 
348. An excellent illustration will be found 
in Matt. xiv. 22.] ‘‘As whep we say, ‘an 
honest man cannot do this or that,’ our mean- 
ing is not to assign any natural impossibility, 
that he is not ad/e, but that he cannot think 
fit [or bring himself] to do it, the principle 
of honesty within him [as here the principle 
of the new life] will resist it; or, if he do not, 
he is no longer to be called an honest man” 
(Hammond). ‘‘A man, if you speak natue 
rally, can masticate gums, and he can sip up, 
by little draughts, mixture of aloes or of the 
deadly night-shade; but he cannot do this 
naturally and willingly, cheerfully and with 
delight. Every sin is against a good man’s 
nature.” (Bishop Taylor, Sermon I, ‘* Of the 
Spirit of Grace,” ‘ Works,’ I. 763.) 


SECTION VI. iii. r1o—24. 


10. One of the fruits of the Gospel, pointed 
to in the Epistle, is love of man. The 
as exhibited by St John, is not only the 
spiritual law which directs souls, and the moral 
law which regulates consciences; it is also 
the social law, which should govern the earth, 
and the love of man for man is i 1 
linked with his love for God (Baunard, 
‘L’Apétre S. Jean,’ p. 342). 


1 Qe, coms 


were 
ment, 


v. 11—17.] 


11 For this is the 'message that 
ye heard from the beginning, that we 
should love one another. 

12 Not as Cain, who was of that 
wicked one, and slew his brother. 
And wherefore slew he him? Be- 
cause his own works were evil, and 
his brother’s righteous. 

13 Marvel not, my brethren, if 
- the world hate you. 

14. We know that we have passed 


I. JOHN. III. 


from death unto life, because we love 
the brethren. He that loveth not his 
brother abideth in death. 

15 Whosoever hateth his brother is 
a murderer: and ye know that no mur- 
derer hath eternal life abiding in him. 

16 Hereby perceive we the love a 
God, because he laid down his life for 
us: and we ought to lay down our 
lives for the brethren. 

17 But whoso hath this world’s 





ll. this is the message| message in New 
Testament signifies tings announced that they 
may be done. ‘He loves to call it the message 
rather than the law” (Beng.). Here, as in 
i. 5, 8 and others read a word, which is al- 
ways promise, exc. Acts xviii. 21. But promise 
would be almost unmeaning here. Here again 
the Epistle points to, and is supported by, 
the Gospel of St John. Our Lord’s urgent 
**command” to His disciples (John xv. 12, 
17), the emphasis which in the High Priestly 
Prayer is laid upon the unity of believers 
(xvii. 21, 22, 23), receive their most instruc- 
tive practical development, and their most 
beautiful historical development, in the Epi- 
stles of St John. 


12. Not as Cain was of the evil 
one! The comparison is not expressed with 
full technical precision; yet the reader can 
conceive the meaning vividly :—This is the 
message ...that we should love one another 
(v. 11). Not gs Cain was of the wicked one, 
sc. shall it be with us. Abel is mentioned by 
our Lord as the proto-martyr, and viewed in 
contrast with Cain, as the representative of 
the whole generation of saints over against the 
whole seed of the evil one, Note a second 
recognition of the Book of Genesis within a 
few lines (cf. supra, v. 8). See Additional 
Note. 


18. Marvel not...if] “ei is uséd after 
verbs of emotion, when the objective ori, that, 
might have been expected” (Winer, p. 564). 
Cf. Mark xv. 44. 

brethren] brothers! Here alone are Chris- 
tians thus addressed in the Epistle. That ad- 
dress is suitable to the context. 


14. that we have passed over] Cf. John v. 
24. ‘That passage contains no reference to a 
future event, but to something that has really 
commenced. Cf. 1 John iii. 14; Liicke, 
Comment.” (Winer, pt. III. § XL. p. 289.) 
The condition of man without the Son of 
God is a condition in which he is in wrath 
(Gospel, iii. 36). The correlative of the 

a severed from the life of God and 
perva y an ever-deepening misery, is death. 
(Gospel, v. 25.) The love of the brethren is 


not the cause but the efect of this blessed 
translation, 


16. Herel; know we] have studied and 
consequently know. 

the love] that love which is above all 
love (Luth., Beng.). (Cf. Philemon, wv. 9, 
note.) We have come to know what that 
love is. 

we ought] are morally bound. 

to lay down our lives for the brethren] 
Note the exact echo in these words and in 
those in the last clause, of the Good Shep- 
herd’s declaration, John x. rs. ‘‘’The measure 
of love is to have no measure. The model 
of love is the love of Jesus giving His life 
for the life of the world.” (Baunard, 
‘L’Apotre S. Jean,’ p. 344.) In the touching 
tradition of the young robber, won back by 
St John, the Apostle is represented as saying, 
‘If needs be, I would willingly die for thee, 
as He died for us.” (Euseb. ‘H. E.’ 111. 42.) 

for the brethren] on their behalf (vzép). 
This moral obligation extends as far as the 
propitiation, which is the great proof of the 
love. It is, no doubt, true that Jdrother 
here, and in wv. I0, 13, 14, I5, denotes 
every fellow-man and fellow-sinner ; that the 
limit of the word is not the /é//ow-regenerate, 
but the fellow-redeemed. Still it is well to 
weigh Augustine’s explanation of St John’s 
silence upon love of our exemies in this Epistle. 
‘It is necessary that love like fire should first 
seize upon that which is near, then extend 
itself to that which is more remote. Extend 
your love to those who are nearest; yet you 
can scarcely call that extension, where the 
objects are so close. Extend it to those un- 
known to you, who have done you no evil. 
Pass over them also; arrive at the point of 
loving your enemies.” (St August. ut supra, 
2438.) The complete Christian teaching is 
given by St Peter. Philosophers have said, 
‘Honour all men;” sectarians and schools 
have said, ‘‘ Love the brotherhood.” Chris- 
tianity alone has said ‘‘ Honour all men--love 
the brotherhood.” (x Peter ii. 17.) 


17. An argument from the greater to the 
less. ‘The sacrifice of a portion of worldly 


325 


I. JOHN. III. 


good, and seeth his brother have 
need, and shutteth up his bowels 9 
compassion from him, how dwelleth 
the love of God in him? 

18 My little children, let us not 
love in word, neither in tongue; but 
in deed and in truth. 


goods is small compared with the sacrifice of 
life itself, which is our bounden duty. 

hath this world’s good] the living of the 
world. Life (Bios, here), not the sigher life 
(a7), but the organic life, and so that sus- 
tenance which belongs to its prolongation 
or enjoyment. The word is well translated 
“living” in A.V. Mark xii. 44; Luke xxi. 4. 
See supra on ii. 16. (‘‘Bios (1) period of life, 
(2) hence means by which it is sustained, 
means of life.” Archbp Trench.) 

gazeth on] The word implies looking on 
quietly, gazing at it as a sight (@ewp7). 

bowels} heart, sympathy. 

how abideth love towards God in 
him? On ‘‘the love of God” as Jove towards 
God, see supra, ii. 5. 

18, 19. children, let us not love... 
nor with the tongue, but in truth... 
in this] ze. that which just precedes, supra, 
i. 4. This will remind most readers of the 
beautiful story told by St Jerome. “‘ When 
St John was lingering at Ephesus, even to 
extreme old age, and was with difficulty car- 
ried to church by the disciples, and could not 
sustain his voice for many words, he used to 
say nothing at each service but Little children! 
love one another. At length the disciples and 
brethren somewhat wearied, said, ‘ Master, 
why are you always saying this?’ He 
answered in a sentence worthy of John, 
‘ Because it is the precept of the Lord, and 
sufficient, if it only be done.’” St Hieron. 
‘Comment. in Epist. ad Galat.’ Lib. 111. Cap. 
v. (Tom. VII. 529). 

that we are of (from) the truth] Our 
Lord’s phrase before Pilate, John xviii. 37, 
‘every one that is from the truth.” 

shall assure] or persuade, still, paciyy, pla- 
care (Diisterd). (The fut. of expectation; 
that which issues so directly from the nature 
of the case that we must anticipate it.—defore 
him. Not in the distance of the Great Judg- 
ment. (Cf. éreure Aavid tots avdpas, x.T-A., 
1 S. xxiv. 8, LXX.) The word is used Matt. 
XXVill, 14. 

our hearts} St Paul and St Peter alone in 
Scripture use conscience (auveidnois). (See 
Additional Note.) It is never used by St John. 
“Convicted by conscience” (viii, is of 
doubtful authorship. (It is the honour of 
Grecian thought to have first found a special 
word to designate conscience.) Hebrew uses 
the same term which designates seart. ‘+ Hee 
brew has no term which peculiarly and 


[v 18 --27. 


19 And hereby we know that we 


are of the truth, and shall t assure our 1c 


hearts before him. 

20 For if our heart condemn us, 
God is greater than our heart, and 
knoweth all things. 

21 Beloved, if our heart condemn 





exclusively signifies that which we understand 
by conscience; and two words, heart or spirit, 
are used instead, Prov. iv. 23, xviii. 14; 
Eccles. vii. 22; 1 John iii. 21” (Bp Sander- 
son, ‘De Oblig. Consc. Prelect.’ 1. 3; Rig- 
genbach, ‘ Lieb. Jes.’ p. 121). See Additional 
Note. 

him] God. See note, supra, i. 5, and ct. 
v. 21 (‘if our heart condemn us not, we 
have confidence toward God”). 


20. For if our heart condemn us, God is 
greater than our heart, and knoweth all ‘ings 
Many interpretations have been proposed 
these difficult words; but they may be con- 
sidered as falling under favo general divisions, 
as they are supposed to aim at quieting or 
awakening conscience: (i.) Those who think 
that St John’s object is to soothe the con- 
science, naturally reject all in the interpretation 
which would create a feeling of alarm. It is, 
they think, a gracious pardoning omniscience 
which we are to keep in view ‘ And hereby 
we shall persuade our hearts before Him, in 
whatever matter our conscience may accuse us 
(Gre ea, Cf. 6 eav rouqre, Coloss. ili. 23...6 €av 
aitopev, infra, v, 22, quand méme), because 
God is greater than our heart, and knoweth 
all things,” i.e. The Christian, who is con- 
scious of true love in word ahd deed, though 
vexed by a morbid and scrupulous, or eyen 
a restless and lacerated conscience, may yet lull 
it, and persuade it to be calm, by the sweet 
spell of one consolatory thought. He who 
is Love is greater than our fallible conscience 
with its tormenting misgivings. His tender 
omniscience knows us through and through 
better than we know ourselves, and in that 
knowledge we may rest. (See Additional 
Note.) The whole sentiment, then, would 
be in accordance with St Peter’s words in 
John xxi. 15, 16, 17 (‘‘ Thou knowest all 
things. Thou knowest that I love Thee”), 
and a fulfilment of the promise of forgive- 
ness in Matt. vi. 14. (ii.) St John’s object, 
however, is to appeal to, and awaken cone 
science; and his words fall into this view with 
a natural and unforced emphasis which goes 
far to prove the truth of the interpretation. 
“*By true love in word and deed (w. 18) 
we know that we are children born from the 
Truth, and attain to the blessedness of silence 
ing the accusing echoes of the voice of con- 
science (v. 19). It is so—for if we cannot 
honestly and as in God's sight ‘‘persuade” 
our conscience; if we are forced to admit 


v. 22—24.| 


us not, then have we confidence to- 
ward God. 

22 And whatsoever we ask, we 
receive of him, because we keep his 
commandments, and du those things 
that are pleasing in his sight. 

23 And this is his commandment, 
That we should believe on the name 


to ourselves that there is a disaccordance 
between our profession and our conscience ; 
if, in spite of all opiates administered, and 
illusions attempted, conscience still wakes, 
and pierces through the plausibilities, and 
cries ‘‘ guilty ;” how can we succeed in de- 
ceiving God, who is omniscient, and there- 
fore greater than conscience itself (v. 21)? 
Nothing can escape that piercing eye; the 
accusation of our heart is the avant-courier of 
the judgment of God. ‘‘ Thus,” adds Nean- 
der, ‘‘the means of knowing ourselves tho- 
roughly is to recollect ourselves, and hear in 
silence the voice of the incorruptible judge 
whom each of us carries in the depth of him- 
self. If, in the examination, our conscience 
bears us witness that we sincerely desire to 
put our practice in unison with our profes- 
sion, then we are in peace. ‘ Beloved, if our 
heart condemn us not, then have we confi- 
dence toward God’ (v. 21). Our works do 
not justify us; but they are witnesses that we 
are really in communion with Him who jus- 
tifies; they seal our Christian life with the 
signet of sincerity. ‘Thus they become for 
us a subject of confidence.” 


22. The same boundlessness of promise as 
in the Gospel (xv. 7), and the same condition. 
‘‘ A prayer thus formed is the child of heaven, 
and its return to its home is natural. It is 
God’s promise transformed into supplication” 
(Godet). ‘‘ Love itself prayeth. Against this, 
He who gave it knoweth not how to close 
His ears.’’ (St August. iz Joc.) 

because| for—not the reason why, not the 
Meritoriou cause of our being heard. 


I. JOHN. III. 


of his Son Jesus Christ, and love 
one another, as he gave us com- 
mandment. 

24 And he that keepeth his com- 
mandments dwelleth in him, and he 
inhim. And hereby we know that 
he abideth in us, by the Spirit which 
he hath given us. 





éeep] observe. See note supra, il. 3. 

commandments...... things that are (well) 
pleasing in bis sight} "Two aspects of God’s 
law. Assuredly not that the things well- 
pleasing are over and above the command- 
ments, and so counsels of perfection. 


23. The ‘‘commandments” of wv. 22 
summed up in one (cf. ii. 35, where ‘‘word ” 
in v. 5 is an advance upon ‘‘ commandments” 
in v. 3). The two that follow (that “we 
should delieve and Jove”) are not favo but one. 
Faith and piety, dogma and duty, run into one, 

believe on the name] Cf. v. 13 (where the 
constr. is different); here it is believe the 
Name. 


24. 
verse. 

This is the first direct mention of the Holy 
Spirit in St John’s Epistle, cf. ii. 20, note. 
The direct mention is purposely deferred, just 
as St Paul does in Rom. v. 5 compared with 
vill. r sqq. The whole structure of St John’s 
Epistle is thus Trinitarian (see W. Archer But- 
ler’s Sermons, pp. 92—94). He has mentioned 
the Father and the Son (i. 3), now the Spirit. 
So in the Gospel, we find the section of the 
Spirit, chapters xiv. to xvii. 

And hereby we know that he abideth in us, 
from the Spirit which he gave us| from—ex, 
when it has a partitive signification, indicates 
the abundance out of which something is 
given. (See in Matt. xii. 34; John viii. 44.) 
The same word is unfortunately translated 
(A.V.) dwelleth at the beginning of this verse 
and abideth at the close. 





Said to have been Spinoza’s favourite 





ADDITIONAL NOTES on 


8. 6 moray THY apapriay. ‘This term, as 
it stands in direct antithesis to 6 yeyev. éx T. 
@co3, is correlative to it in meaning—a state or 
condition, not a simple act. The word roy, 
according to the Hebraic usage, in the present 
participle, denotes not act only, but Aadit, or 
rather more than abit. “Apaptiav mowav— 
Lat. operarius iniquitatis, one that maketh a 
trade of sin, or professeth iniquity, whose 
Service is altogether incompatible with the 
profession or life of a Christian.” Jackson, 
‘Works,’ 111. 363. “rods towdvras THY dvo- 
piay (Matt. xiii. 41), omnes qui iniquitatem 
exercent, et, ut ita dicam, iniquitatis artem 


CuHap. Ill. 8, 9, 12, 19, 20. 


factitant ; magis enim sabitus quam actus He- 
braica phrasi significatur.” Maldon, ix Joc. 


9. This verse and its parallel in this 
Epistle were prominently appealed to by 
Jovinian. ‘ Jovinian asserted that John made 
no distinction but one, viz. between those 
who are born of God, and those who are not. 
He did not reflect that, although Divine life 
as a common property of all who believe is. 
one and the same, yet different stages are 
found in its development and degree; that 
along with the Divine life the sinful tendency 
lingers on, which may more or less overcome, 


3At 


33? 


or be overcome by, that life; that in this 
way it zs right to speak of more and less, of 
distinctions and degrees, in sin or holiness. 
Hence, too, he represents sanctification as 
simply possession of what has once been re- 
ceived, not progressive development of it” 
Neander, ‘Church History,’ 1. 368). St 

ohn, here as so often, gives us the ideal 
standard of Christianity as it stands for ever 
high above all superficial views of its cha- 
racter, which look only at partial, particular, 
imperfect realizations of it, and sever it from 
its eternal and unattainable ideal. But Jo- 
vinian failed from a contrary error. He did 
not distinguish between the ideal standard, 
and human realizations of it, with their infinite 
degrees (see Liicke on the text). 


12. It has sometimes been supposed that this 
may have been suggested to St John by the 
conduct and teaching of Apollonius of Tyana 
at Ephesus. From the strange book of Philo- 
stratus it is difficult to draw precise chrono= 
logical data, but the visit may possibly have 
been A.D. 96, towards the close of St John’s 
life. Philostratus tells a story of a poor old 
mendicant, whom, after the example of Cal- 
chas, Tiresias, and Epimenides, Apollonius 
advised the people to kill. This story is 
narrated by Philostratus with picturesqueness 
and pathos (‘ Vita Apollon.’ Act. 11. Sc. II. 5, 
58, 59). It would certainly form a vivid 
commentary on x John iii. 12. (See Baunard, 
«L’Apétre S. Jean,’ pp. 286, 287.) 


19. ‘This omission has important reasons, 
—(1) To avoid apparent entanglement with 
mere Moral Philosophy. (2) For the same 
reason for which Bishop Butler so often 


CHAPTER IV. 


i He warneth them not to believe all teachers, 
who boast of the Spirit, but to try them by 
the rules of the catholick faith: 7 and by 
many reasons exhorteth to brotherly love. 


I. JOHN. IV. 


[v. 3 


varies his languag., ‘ud uses one equivalent 
after another for conscence; a process which 
he says will seem “strange to those who have 
not observed the reason of it ”—viz, to state 
general truth, apart from special theories 
about it, such as are involved in the fixed use 
of words of the kind. ‘St John designates 
the human soul, the spiritual being, by the 
name of 4eart, without troubling himself as to 
psychological distinctions drawn between the 
different faculties of the soul ” (Neander). 


The use of 25 in Hebrew seems to be 
this: (1) the central point of blood, and vessel 
of corporeal life; then (2) the life itself; then 
(3) the seat of senses, emotions, affections; 
and (4) the mode of thinking and acting, the 
seat of will and purpose—in fact the centre of 
corporeal, of sensuous, of emotional, of moral 
and voluntary life; where the moral character 
becomes manifest in virtue or vice. Gesen. 5.9. 
and Fuerst, ‘ Lex.’ pp. 723, 724. 


20. This interpretation is defended gram- 
matically by Hoogeven (‘ Doct. Part. Gree.’ 
Pp. 589), morally by Nésselt (‘ Interp. Gramm.’ 
1 John iii. 19, 22) and by Huther, see quota- 
tions in Liicke in /oc. Several modern scholars 
who take the soothing view of the subject- 
matter of this verse explain it thus: ‘* We 
shall convince our hearts as in His presence 
that [if our heart condemn us] that God is 
greater than our hearts.” e Greek is 
understood thus :—reigopuev ras xapdlas...0re 
[€av xatayweokn nav 1 Kapdia] Srt peitav, 
x.T-A.—the second dre being simply a resump- 
tion of the first by repeating it. Cf. the re- 
sumption of otros by odros after a parenthetic 
clause in James i. 25. 


eee believe not every 
spirit, but try the spirits whe- 
ther they are of God: because many 
false prophets are gone out igto the 
world. 





SECTION VII. iv. r—6. 

Cuap. IV. 1. believe not every spirit] 
believe not any spirit, ie. do not give 
credence to it, the assent of faith, merely upon 
its own word. 

spirit] In the utterance of any powerful 
teacher St John would have seen, not the 
individual, but (1) the general spirit at work, 
and (2) behind and beyond that the in- 
fluence of a superhuman intelligence, good or 
evil. 

but test. So St Paul, ‘despise not prophe- 
syings, but bring all to the test ” (1 Thess, v. 
21). Cf. among the distribution of gifts of 
the Spirit, those of criticism and discernment, 
1 Cor. xii. 10. The spirit of St John and 
St Paul, however deeply reverential and child- 
dike, is not one of credulous fanaticism, or 


abject unreasoning submission to authority. 
Cf. x Cor. xii ro, xiv. 29; 1 Tim. iv. I. 
See note on r Thess. v. 21. It must have 
been a crisis-time in the spiritual world, 
cf. Apoc. ix. 1—3. We must remember that 
at Ephesus, and in Asia Minor generally, 
St John found not only a heresy of the intellect 
in Cerinthus and the Gnostics, and a heresy 
of the senses in the Nicolaitanes, but also a 
heresy of magic and mysticism. The streets of 
Ephesus were full of theoleptics and convul- 
sionaries; magical practices and invocations 
were pursued by the educated with a pas- 
sionate interest to which modern spiritualism 
presents but a feeble parallel (see the ‘‘exor- 
cists,” ‘curious arts,” and ‘‘books ” spoken of 
in Acts xix. 19). St Paul triumphed for a 
season (ibid. vv. 17, 20). But Persian Magi, 





v. 2—6.] 


2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of 
God: Every spirit that confesseth 
that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh 
is of God : 

3 And every spirit that confesseth 
not that Jesus Christ is come in the 
flesh is not of God: and this is that 
spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have 
heard that it should come; and even 
now already is it in the world. 

4 Ye are of God, little children, 


with their enchantments and philtres, Egyp- 
tian hierophants, Chaldean astrologers, came 
to Ephesus year after year. Cabalistic letters, 
called Ephesian letters, were in reputation for 
their power of healing or divination. (Clem. 
Alex. ‘Stromat.’ I. pp. 386 sqq.) Apollonius 
of Tyana found an enthusiastic reception in 
Ephesus (Baunard, ‘L’Apotre S. Jean,’ pp. 
297—288). It may be added that St John’s 
Epp. contain no hint of the Apostles exercising 
gifts of healing. Even in the Acts, immedi- 
ately after Pentecost, while Peter and John 
walk together, the influence of the former in 
this department completely overshadows that 
of the latter. Peter performs the miracle. 
John assists in silence by faith and prayer. 
(Acts iii. to iv. 22.) 

many false prophets are gone out into the 
world] It was a critical time in the spiritual 
world; cf. 2 John, v. 7. For the words 
“gone out,” see supra, ii. 19. The idea is 
given in a poetry of awful symbols, Apoc. ix. 
Eas 

2. Hereby know ye] It may be indic. or imp. 

that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in 
the flesh] Jesus Christ come in the flesh. 
(Note the perf. partic. éAnAv@ora, the per- 
manent state or condition consequent upon 
His having come; and cf. the pres. (épyouevov 
év gapxi) 2 John v. 7. In this passage the 
Incarnation is looked upon as a past fact with 
permanent consequences in the present—in 
2 John 7, as a present and continuous prin- 
ciple.) 

3. And every spirit that confesseth not that 
Jesus Christ is come in the flesh| ‘Tischend. 
and others read, ‘‘ every spirit that confesseth 
not Jesus,’ omitting the following words, 
‘‘ Christ...come in the flesh” (Reiche, how= 
ever, argues for their retention). A celebrated 
controversy rose upon this text. See Addi- 
tional Note. 

+5 not of God] from God. 

this is that whole power and princi- 
ple of the Antichrist] (ro rov ’Avti- 
xpiorov). Prob. not spirit understood (as 
in A. V.), but a generalizing use of the neuter 
for essence and character, denoting a collective 
whole, (‘‘ When we wish to express as gene- 


I. JOHN. IV. 


and have overcome them: because 
greater is he that is in you, than he 
that is in the world. 

5 They are of the world: there- 
fore speak they of the world, and the 
world heareth them. 

6 We are of God: he that know- 
eth God heareth us; he that is not 
of God heareth not us. Hereby know 
we the spirit of truth, and the spirit 
of error. 


rally as possible all that de/ongs to or proceeds 
from the person or thing signified by the accom- 
panying word, the omission of zpayya or pa 
para is regular.” Donaldson, (Gu Gr Eas 

whereof ye have heard that it is coming] 
not only in this Epistle, but as an integral 
part of Catholic tradition in which they lived 
and breathed. Cf. 2 Thess. ii. 5. 

4. Ye are from God, children! and 
have overcome them, “In the ‘ery heat of 
conflict the children of God kn sw that the 
victory is won” (Diisterd). The victory of 
truth is taken for granted. (Neander.) Cf. 
Gospel, xvi. 33. 

them] sc. the false prophets, v. 1 supra. 

he that is in you] sc. the Personal Word. 
Cf. ‘the Word of God abideth in you,” 
supra ii. 14. Ignatius, after St John’s death, 
writes to the Church of Epéesus in a strain 
derived from this passage, as if sure of being 
understood by them. ‘Let us do all things, 
as if He were dwelling permanently in us, 
that we may be His temples, and that He 
may be in us our God, which He both is and 
will appear before our face.” (Ignat. ‘ Epist. 
ad Ephes.’ xv.) ‘*‘Every one who hears—the 
words ‘ ye have overcome’—lifts his head, and 
would be praised. Nay, exalt not yourself, 
See who has overcome in you. Greater is He 
that 1s in you, than he that is in the world.” 
(St August. in Epist. Joann. Tract. VII. 2, 
Epp. Ill. p. 2, 2050.) 

5. ‘* They are from the world. There- 
fore from the world is the very form verbally. 
of that which they speak” (Aadotow). On 
the implied difference between Aad@, Aadsd, 
and éya, Aoyos, cf. John vill. 43, “* Why do. 
ye not comprehend the form and mode of 
speech so peculiarly Mine own (ryy Aadiaw 
Thv eunv)? because ye are morally incapable 
of hearing with true reception the substance 
of the message which is emphatically Mine 
(roy Aoyov Tov épov).’ 

6. ‘The testimony which St John bears- 
in this verse is broad enough to include all 
who have truly received Christ by faith: it is. 
narrow enough to exclude all who make any 
other than Christ the service of their life 
(Diisterd). 


333 


334 


7 Beloved, let us love one an- 
other: for love is of God; and every 
one that loveth is born of God, and 
knoweth God. 

8 He that loveth not knoweth not 
God ; for God is love. 

g In this was manifested the love 
of God toward us, because that God 





the Spirit of The Truth] Who 1s He? 
Gospel xiv, 17, xv. 26, xvi. 13. The article 
should be preserved in translating all these 
passages. See Additional Note on 3 John 3. 


SECTION VIII. iv. 7—v. 2. 

7. love...every one that loveth] Love (7 
iyarn), the “charity” of St Paul. (For this 
word, see notes, Vol. III. pp. 338 and 376.) 
On the distinction between ayarn and dudia, 
the peculiarly Christian use ee ayazn, and the 
tbsence of épws, the student should read five 
beautiful pages in Archbp Trench’s ‘Sy- 
nonyms of the New Testament,’ pp. 39—43. 
“Tt should never be forgotten that dyazn is 
uword dorn within the bosom of revealed reli- 
zion; it occurs in the LXX., but there is no 
example of its use in any heatnen writer what- 
ever” (p. 42). ‘A wicked man may have Bap- 
tism. He may have prophecy. He may receive 
the sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ 
(a Cor. xi. 29). All these things a wicked 
man may have. But no wicked man can 
have charity.” (St August. ut supra, 2031.) 


8. God is love] Cf. v. 16. There is 
something in this much beyond the mere So- 
cinian view that ‘‘ God is benevolent ;” or even 
the Calvinistic view that God has given in 
Redemption most touching evidence of His 
love to man, though these are included. It 
has been observed that ‘‘ Reformed expositors 
have a tendency to see in these words not a 
Nature of love but proofs of love” (Diisterd); 
while the theologians of the Primitive Church 
and Lutheran and Roman Catholic expositors 
rather find in them that God is Love in- 
wardly, so to speak, as well as outwardly—by 
essence as well as manifestation. ‘God is 
Love” points not only to our Creation and 
Redemption, but to an inner essential Love 
in the everlasting Trinity. And this Love 
becomes the solution of the mystery of exist- 
ence—the answer to the question, ‘‘ Why did 
God create?” There was no outward ne- 
cessity ; no compulsion but that of love, for 
love is in its nature diffusive and creative. 
“Brevis laus, et magna laus; brevis in ser- 
mone, magna in intellectu.” (St August. ut 
supra, 2045.) (See Additional Note.) 

9. In this was manifested the love of God 
in us] Toward us is not an adequate trans- 
lation of év nyiv. It is more than the simple 
dat.: it means not only ‘bestowed upon 


I. JOHN. IV. 


[v. 7—15. 


sent his only begotten Son into the 
world, that we might live through him. 

10 Herein is love, not that we 
loved God, but that he loved us, and 
sent his Son ¢o de the propitiation for 
our sins. 

11 Beloved, if God so loved us, 
we ought also to love one another. 


us,” or ‘‘ acting toward us,” but in us. Cf. 
Acts iv. 12 (dedouevoy ev avOpamrois), SO also 
“the grace of God given in the Churches 
of Macedonia” (2 Cor. viii. 1). ‘* The gift or 
grace was not only bestowed upon, but 
operated in, the Churches. 
working in them by love” (Bp Wordsworth, 
‘N. T. 11. 167). Cf. Bp Bull, ‘ Works,’ v1. 
99, 100; Olshausen, ‘Commentary,’ III. 396. 

that God hath sent] Perfect (améarahxev). 
This perfect, implying the present, permanent, 
continuing effect of the mission of the Son of 
God, should be carefully compared with the 
aorist of the same verb in the next verse 
(dréoretde), which signifies the propitiation 
effected by that mission considered as one 
great act. For a fine illustration of the 
distinction between the aor. and perfect, and 
of the force of the tense here, see ** He 
anointed Me...and hath sent Me,” the former 
(€xpicé ye) viewed as what took place once, 
the latter (dméoradxé pe) as still present in 
its effects. (St Luke iv. 18.) Winer, Part 
Ill. § xi. p. 287. Note the bearing of the 
verse upon the doctrine of the Atonement. 
(1) We did not first become objects of 
God’s love in consequence of the Atonement. 
Rather, the sending of the Son was an 
evidence of a love which already existed. 
(2) God’s love was not evoked by ours, but 
preceded it, even when we were aliens in heart. 

His Son, His only-begotten. The title 
which St John chooses here for our Lord is 
selected with deep thoughtfulness to indicate 
and enhance the extent and preciousness of 
the Father’s gift. This title of Christ occurs 
only here and in St John’s Gospel, i. 14, 18, 
ili. 16, 18. The word does not signify, as 
some of old thought, brought into existence 
by the One God, but the Only Begotten One 
(6 povos yevynOeis). St Basil, Lib. 11. ‘adv. 
Eunom.’ 


10. sent His Son a propitiation] 
Cf. supra, ii. 2. 

ll. if God so loved us| If expresses no 
doubt; it is conditional only in form, and 
in sense is almost equivalent to since. Cf. 
Gospel, vii. 4; Rom. xi. 21. 

so loved us] Cf. Gospel, iii. 16. The se 
is not merely immeasurable love—so much— 
but refers to the manner of His love, as de 
scribed in v. ro—not to the quantity, so to 
speak, but to the gua/ity of the love. 


it was a grace’ 


v. 12—16.] 


12 No man hath seen God at 
any time. If we love one another, 
God dwelleth in us, and his love is 
perfected in us. 

13 Hereby know we that we dwell 
in him, and he in us, because he hath 
given us of his Spirit. 


12. God] Both here and St John i. 38, 
the Divine Name stands without the article. 
This confirms the inference that he is speaking 
not of the Father in particular, but of the 
Godhead (see the important note on John i. 
18), which is the doctrine of the greatest 
teachers of the Church. ‘‘ When the Arians 
said that the Father only was invisible, Athana- 
sius asserted from Scripture and reason the 
equal invisibility of the Trinity, proving that 
God is not seen save by the assumption of man- 
hood—but that as regards the proper nature of 
Deity, God is invisible—i.e. Father, Son, and 
Holy Ghost—save as far as He can be known 
mentally and spiritually.” See this and other 
testimonies to the same effect. (St August. 
‘Epist.’ CXLVIII. Tom. II. 626, Edit. Migne.) 

God no one hath ever yet beholden. 
True! He is invisible. But, if we love one 
another, He comes very close to us. Yes! He 
@bideth in us. ‘The connection is so ex- 
plained by a Lap., Huther, Diisterd. We 
must observe carefully the distinction between 
the simple sight spoken of in the Gospel i. 18, 
and the intent contemplation of the verb here 
used (reéarar). ‘The question how this state- 
ment is to be reconciled with St Matt. v. 8, 
1 John iii. 2—and with the sight of God attri- 
buted in the Old Testament to Abraham, 
Isaac, Jacob, Job, Moses, Micaiah, Isaiah 
(Gen. xviii. 1, xxvi. 2, XXxii. 30; Job xxxviii, 
1; Exod. xxxui. 11; 1 K. xxii. 19; Isaiah vi. 
1)—is discussed at length by St Augustine in 
an Epistle which won the enthusiastic admi- 
ration of Bishop Pearson—(‘‘that golden 
Epistle.” ‘De Invisib. Dei,’ Lect. x11. ‘Minor 
Theol. Works’ 1. 118—127). St Augustine 
points out that the sight spoken of is not that 
of exterior objects or of mental phenomena. 
God’s words to Moses—‘“‘ thou canst not see 
My face: for there shall no man see Me, and 
live” (Exod. xxxiii. 20)—lead to the solution 
of the difficulty. No living man in this life 
can see Him and live. The right view of 1 
John iii. 2 refers to a sight of God very dif- 
ferent from that which was enjoyed by Moses 
and others upon earth. They saw Him when 
He willed, with that sort of sight which He 
willed, not in the inner glory of that Nature 
in which He remained hidden, even when in a 
sense He was seen. ‘‘ We shall see Him as 
He is” (1 John iii. 2) exactly answers to the 
sight which was withheld from Moses (Exod. 
XXxiil. 20, 22, 23). ‘This you can under- 
stand so far as you are united to God, and 


I. JOHN. IV. 


14 And we have seen and do tes- 
tify that the Father sent the Son to 
be the Saviour of the world. 

15 Whosoever shall confess that 
Jesus is the Son of God, God dwell- 
eth in him, and he in God. 

16 And we have known and be- 


prepare yourself within as the incorporeal 
place of His dwelling to hear the silence of 
His speech, and to see His invisible form. 
‘The pure in heart shall see God.’ Not that 
He shall appear to them as a body from any 
interval of place—but that He shall have come 
to them and made His abode with them. For 
they shall be filled with all the fulness of God, 
not that they shall become fully God, but 
that they shall be perfectly full of God.”...... 
‘“¢ Great theologians have well said that the In- 
visible God is seen invisibly, i.e. by that nature 
which is also invisible in us—by a pure heart.” 
S. August. ‘ Epist.’ CXLVII., CXLVIII. Opp. 
Tom. Il. 596—630. St John vi. 45, 46, 
should be carefully studied. Learning from 
the Father as a consequence Of continuing to 
hear His teaching is markedly distinguished 
from seeing Him. The first belongs to all who 
come to Jesus: the second is the exclusive 
attribute of the Son. 

God abideth im us. 

his love is perfected in us| Not sharply 
either ‘‘ His love to us” or ‘‘our love to 
Him ;” but—‘‘the relation of love between 
us and God (on God’s part already perfected) 
is perfected zz us, if we love one another.” 
‘‘ Have you begun to love? God has begun 
to dwell in you. Love Him who has begun 
to dwell in you, that by dwelling in you more 
perfectly He may make you perfect.” (St 
August. in Epist. Johann. Tract. vii. 12.) 


13. Supra, ili. 24. ‘* Whence know we 
then that He hath given us from His Spirit? 
Ask your own heart. If it is full of love, you 
have the Spirit. Whence know we that you 
may thus know that the Spirit dwelleth in you? 
Ask St Paul (Rom. v. 5).” (St August. ut 
Supra, 2043.) 

14. ‘We have seen with adoring wonder— 
and the impression of the sight abides with 
us (reGeayeGa)—and are bearing witness 

paptupodpev)—that the Father hath sent 
perf.) the Son as the Saviour of the world.” 
One of the numerous /oops that bind the 
Epistle to the Gospel. It is the phrase of the 
Samaritans, who have been convinced, not 
only by the woman’s witness, but by their 
own hearing, in St John’s Gospel, iv. 42. 
The language here is certainly such as would 
be inappropriate in any but an eyewitness. 

16. ‘“ We know and save believed and 
continue to believe in” (memcotevkapev) (Cf. 


Gospel, xx. 29), i.e. we have not only “ made 


335 


336 


sieved the iove that God hath to 

us. God is love; and he that dwell- 

eth in love dwelleth in God, and God 

in him. 
an act of faith” at some past time, but cone 
tinue now in possession of that faith as the 
result. That in which we believe is the love 
that God hath in us—not only ¢o us but in 
as, by virtue of the Incarnation. It is impos- 
sible to understand the Epistle here without 
a reference to the Gospel. ‘‘ We have known 
the love which God hath in us.” Why so? 
Because Jesus promised—“‘ ye shall know that 
I am...in you”—*1 will make it known to 
them that the love with which Thou lovedst 
Me may be in them, and I in them” (xvii. 
26). It is yet another instance of the connec- 
tion of suggestion between the Epistle and 
Gospel. (mtoreveww rt, to be persuaded of 
anything, to believe it with an underlying 
notion of constancy in the persuasion—ze- 
mloTevkapev THY ayamnyv, we are fully per- 
suaded of the love of God. See Bretsch. 
‘Lex. Man. N. T.’ s.v.) The passage may 
also be explained by looking upon ‘we be- 
lieve” as parenthetical. ‘‘ We have known 
Lana e still permanently believe it] the 
love,’ &c. It has been profoundly remarked 
by Bossuet upon this verse, that it goes to 
the very root of the heresies upon the In- 
carnation which St John had in view. Such 
heresies generally have refused to receive nei- 
ther the power, nor the wisdom of God, but, 
strange to say, His goodness. The mystery 
under which the pride of the sophist sank 
was, at its root, the mystery of the love of 
God. ‘In all mysteries let us give as the best 
reason, God so loved the world. ‘That is the 
doctrine of the Master, and the beloved dis- 
ciple well understood it. In his time the here- 
siarch Cerinthus would not believe that God 
could make Himself man, and the victim for 
sinners. What is the answer of the Theolo- 
gian of the New Testament to the heresiarch ? 
What symbol, what new confession of faith, 
does he oppose to the nascent heresy? Hear 
and wonder—we have believed the love that 
God hath in us! There is the whole faith of 
Christians; there is the cause and abridgment 
of the whole Creed.” (‘Oraison Funeébre 
d’ Anne de Gonzague.’) 

A philosopher of the day has said ‘“ that 
theologians fail by attaching themselves to the 
Christian symbol instead of to the moral senti- 
ment which carries immeasurable Christianities 
in its bosom.” (R. W. Emerson.) St John 
says that the two are one in Christ—that the 
syrnbol zs a sentiment. The Creed which we 
believe is ‘‘ the Love which God hath in us.” 


17. Herein hath the love been per- 
fected (and is consequently perfect) with 
B38] (9 ayary we jar), love with us (‘ be- 


I. JOHN. IV. 


[v. 17. 


in is t - t Gr. 
17 Herein is tour love made per- Ge. 


fect, that we may have boldness in 
the day of judgment: because as he 
is, so are we in this world. 





tween us, mutual love,” Bretsch.), love gene- 
rally to God and man, is fulfilled and per- 
fected in this, viz. that we may have boldness 
in the day of Judgment—because as He who 
is the Love, is (abiding in deathless love in 
the unfading picture in the Gospel which you 
may contemplate, in the Heaven above where 
you may lift up your eyes and see Him by 
faith, in your hearts where He abides), so are 
we in this poor fallen world. It is difficult 
not to feel that there is some subtle reference 
to the idea of God with us (Matt. i. 23), 
and to our peace with G with man, 
and with ourselves, through the Incarnation. 
(See Bp Wordsworth.) As He is—is pre 
sentiating (see supra, il. 2, ill. 23 John v. 2) 


—so are we too. Cf. even as He is pure (iil. 


3); also as He is righteous (iii. 7). ‘The we 
are answering to the He is brings out more 
subtly the idealising and unattainable cha- 
racter of the standard. See on éxeivos (** He, 
and none else”), ii. 6. 

in the day of judgment] in the day of The 
Judgment. 

the day; The Hebrews arstinguished two 
‘“‘ages,” that before Messiah, and that after 
Him. (See Additional Note at the end of 
2 Thessalonians.) The ‘‘last day” is the last of 
the ‘‘age,” in which Christ shall come again. 
“‘The day of the Judgment” is the day ap- 
pointed for the Judgment. According to St 
John’s use of language xpicis is (a) the se- 
paration and critical discrimination which goes 
on necessarily and spontaneously by the very 
fact of our Lord’s appearance and witness 
between men as they receive or reject Him, 
with special reference to its condemnatory 
aspect (John ili. 1g—27, the sentence of cone 
demnation upon this world, ibid. xii. 31; cf. 
xvi. 8—11); (4) the /ast Judgment, with a 
special inclusion of the condemnation of those 
rejected in ‘‘the resurrection of judgment,” i.e. 
sequacem habens condemnationem (John v.29), 
(c) a usage including doth these senses—* My 
judgment, the judgment which is peculiarl 
Mine”’ (John v. 30), ‘‘a// judgment” (éid. 
Vv. 22), 1.e. totum judicandi negotium—the 
whole long series of judgments culminating in 
the Great Judgment, the long process of dis- 
crimination with its last and awful sequel. 
St John’s eschatology is at one with that 
of St Peter and St Paul, and looks on the 
day of Judgment—the ‘‘ Last Judgment,” as 
it used, with true instinct, always to be called 
—with a vivid realization, as if it were all 
but present (cf. Rom. ii. r5, 16). (See on 
the subject, Grimm, ‘Clav. N. T.’ p. 191 and 
p- 247.) It is well to note the Johannie 
phrase (7 ®pa tis epicews avrov) Apoc. xiv. # 


lows 
we. 


v. 18—21.] 


18 There is no fear in love; but 
perfect love casteth out fear: because 
fear hath torment. He that feareth 
is not made perfect in love. 

19 We love him, because he first 
loved us. 

20 If a man say, I love God, and 


18. A great Christian thinker reminds us 
here that there are two kinds of fear, one 
servile, the other holy—the fear of him who 
quails before punishment, and the tender fear 
of him who loves righteousness. ‘‘If there 
were at first no fear, there would be no en- 
trance for love. As in sewing, we see the 
thread passed through by the needle. The 
needle is first pushed in, but the thread cannot 
be introduced until the needle is brought out. 
So fear first occupies the mind, but does not 
remain permanently, because it entered for 
the purpose of introducing love” (August. 
‘Tract. in Evang. Joann.’). 

fear brings punishment with it] 
Nor ‘‘fear is punished,” zor ‘‘leaves a con- 
sciousness of punishment,” but there is punish- 
ment in fear. (6 goBos Kodaow exer. ‘The 
verb €ym sometimes means that which some- 
thing brings with it in its train or company. 
So here and James i. 4, ‘‘let patience bring 
with it.” Bretschn. s.v.) ‘‘For him who 
abides in love, there is no subject of fear.” 
Among other such subjects, the fear of being 
judged by God tends to disappear; not that 
the Christian passes superficially over that 
most solemn truth, or entertains a shallow 
and deceptive security. But the guilty agi- 
tation which lays hold of the wilful sinner 
so lung as he sees in God nothing but a 
severe and awful Judge—the trouble which 
is spread over the soul by a conviction of 
the ‘‘wrath of God”—gives place to quiet 
confidence in all who cherish those loving rela- 
tions with God established by Jesus Christ, 
of which St John has just spoken. The foun- 
dation of such confidence is not laid in the 
personal merit or sanctity or emotions of the 
Christian; that would be a precarious and 
tottering foundation. The sole support upon 
which any sinner can rely is the love of God 
revealed in Christ, by which he is united with 
his Saviour. There are two opposite points 
of view in the spiritual life; one considers 
God as a Father, to whom we remain united 
by love, and whom Jesus Christ has revealed 
to us—the other as a Judge, who acts upon 
us by the dread of punishment. This is the 
Apostle’s point. It may well be that, even 
in a soul which has arrived at the liberty of 
love, there are reactions of the spirit of bon- 
dage, returns to the yoke of fear broken by 
the Gospel. But St John speaks in the verse 
of an ideal spiritual condition, in which love 
reigns with undivided sway, so as entirely to 


New Test.—Vot. IV. 


I. JOHN. IV. 


hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he 
that loveth not his brother whom he 
hath seen, how can he love God 
whom he hath not seen ? 

21 And this commandment have 
we from him, That he who loveth 
God love his brother also. 


have banished fear. (So Neander.) St Augus- 
tine beautifully illustrates the two kinds of 
fear—one here mentioned by St John as ine 
consistent with love—the other inseparable 
from love. ‘*Suppose two wives. The one 
who is faithless fears her husband’s coming— 
such are they who fear the coming of the 
day of Judgment. The other, who loves her 
husband, desires his coming. Both fear. Ask 
one ‘Do you fear your husband?’ She will 
answer ‘I fear.’ Ask the other; she too will 
say, ‘I fear.’ The words are the same; 
the feeling is different. Ask them why they 
fear? One says, ‘I fear that my husband will 
come;’ the other, ‘I fear that he will go away.’ 
One says, ‘I fear to be condemned by him;? 
the other, ‘I then fear to be deprived of him.’ 
Transfer this to the Christian life—and you 
have the fear which is inconsistent with love, 
and the pure sweet fear which lasts on.” (‘In 
Epist. Joann. Tract.’ Ix. 5.) 

He that feareth| He that continues fearing, 
the principle of whose spiritual life is fear (6 
poBovpevos). 

19. We love (omit him), because he first 
First (mparos in the sense of mrporepos),. ¢ 
John i. r5, 18. ‘‘Our soul is defiled by sin; 
by loving God it is made beautiful. What a 
love is that which makes him who loves beau- 
tiful! How shall we grow beautiful? By 
loving Him who is beautiful.” (St Aug. ut 
Supra, 2051.) Was St John thinking of his 
own gracious and unmerited call? (Gospel i. 
38, 39-) 

20. he that loveth not his brother] The 
neg. here gives a subjective tinge to the cast 
of the expression—‘‘any one of whom we 
conceive as belonging to such a class.” 

hath seen...hath not seen| ‘The perfect 
‘‘sometimes equivalent to ‘I (have looked and) 
see. John ix. 37; 1 John iv. 20.” (Winer, 
‘Gr. of N. T. D.’ Part 111. § xi. p. 290.) 

bow can he love God] ‘* While men are con- 
tinually bidden dyanav r. Gedy (Matt. xxii. 
37; Luke x. 27; 1 Cor. viii. 13) and good 
men declared to do so (Rom. viii. 28; 1 Pet. 
i. 8; x John iv. 21), the gure 7. bedv is 
commanded to them never.” (Archbp 
Trench, ‘Synon. of N. T.’ p. 40, where see 
the explanation of this.) Cf. also Hammond, 
‘Practical Catechism,’ Lib. 1, Sect. 3, p. 56. 


21. he who loveth God] He that continues 
loving, the principle of whose spiritual life is 
love. The present partic. with the definite 


Y 


337 


338 


article has almost the force of a substantive. 
See v. 18 supra. In the example and teach- 
ing of St John’s Gospel, we have not only 
the moral law which is to rule the con- 
science, but the socia/ law which is to govern 
society, So the love of man is taken up into, 
and becomes inseparable from, the love of God. 
St John not only exalts our duty towards our 
brethren; he makes it divine. ‘‘It is hard to 
love men as men. Humanity in the mass is 
so vulgar, or so perverse. We must have de- 
spaired of social and human love altogether, 
if upon the human object proposed to our 
love God had not cast an elevating grandeur, 
and the beauty of a superhuman transfigura- 
tion. It is a point specially explained by the 
disciple of Jesus in his First Epistle. ‘If 
a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, 
he is a liar’ (1 Johniv. 20). The law which 


I. JOHN. IV. 


we have received from Him is a law of love, 
‘that he who loveth God, love his brother 
also’ (ibid. v. 21). Such is the moral law 
which is also the law of holiness, of p: 

of the future. It is going on for nearly two 
thousand years since the Epistle of St John 
presented us with its formula. Humanity and 
the world have as yet only drawn from it its 
first consequences, These essays, poor and 
incomplete as they are, have made civilized 
humanity what it is. Ask then of this love 
all that it can give. Do not mutilate it, by 
changing its very nature. Do not separate the 
love of God from the love of man. Do not 
preach a sterile human fraternity by over- 
looking the Divine paternity, which is the 
trunk of the tree of life. Do not isolate at 
your own pleasure the law of religion from 
the law of society.” (Baunard, pp. 342—345.) 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Cuap. tv. 3, 9 AND 16. 


3. Socrates asserted that ‘‘ Nestorius was 
ignorant that in the old copies of the Catholic 
Epistle of John it was written, ‘every spirit 
that dissolveth Jesus is not from God’ (av 
mvedpa 0 Aver Tov “Incody amo TOD Ocod ovK 
€ott). But this thought those who wished to 
separate the Divinity from the economy of the 
Manhood erased from the old MSS. Where- 
fore the old interpreters indicated this very 
fact when they related that some dealt deceit- 
fully with the text of St John’s Epistle, wish- 
ing to dissolve (or sever) Him who is Man 
from Him who is God.” (‘ Hist. Eccles.’ vii. 
32.) It would seem as if Socrates himself 
were the only Greek evidence who remains. 
For (1) no Greek MSS., nor any version, 

or author, except Latin!, support this; (2) 
several, even of the Latins, cite the passage 
as it stands in the Greek texts (see Tert., 
St Augustine, Fulgent., in Reiche, ‘Comment. 
Crit.’ 1. 321). The reading is apparently 
of Latin origin, either from the old Latin 
version or some author of repute, probably 
Tertullian. The aim is clearly ‘ polemical, 
against heretics, who distinguished between 
the Man Jesus and the Divine Hon, Christ 
—or the Divine and Human Nature—and 
who as thus isolating the true Humanity, 
might be said to separate the Man Jesus from 
Christ as God, and as it were to ‘‘dissolve” 
Him. This became inserted in the text. In 
the great Latin Epistle of Leo the Great (‘ad 
Flavianum,’ X. cap. 5 *), which was declared 
orthodox by the Council of Chalcedon (A.D. 
451), translated into Greek, and elevated 
almost to the rank of a symbol, this passage is 


1 “(munis spiritus qui solvit Jesum Christum,” 
Cou. Amiat. Tertullian, however, knew of this 
reading and combined it with the common 
reading, ‘Adv. Marc.’ v. 16. 

© «Epist.’ xxvii. (al. xxtv.). See the Ep. 
with Notes in Prof. Bright’s ‘ Sermons of S. Leo.’ 


146—153- 


quoted more than once as so/vit Jesum” (see 
Reiche in Joc. and on 1 Tim. iii. 16). 

9,16. For dyamn, see 1 Cor. xiii. and the 
Additional Note, Vol. 111. 376. The present 
writer arrived independently at the same 
general conclusion, viz. that ayamn alone is 
best rendered charity, with ‘defining con 
text” Jove. His reasons are these. ) No 
reverent student of the N.T. can doubt that 
the exclusion of épws from its pages is not 
accidental. The sole Greek word for /Jowe, 
untainted by degrading associations and un- 
confined by special limitations, sprang up not 
indeed within the circle of Christianity literally 
speaking, but ‘‘ within the sphere of revealed 
religion.” (Archbp Trench.) (Ayam is de- 
rived from dyaraw, which is connected with 
dyapat, wondering and reverential admiration. 
The word is not found outside the circle of 
sacred thought, and is unknown to classical 
Greek as a substantive—for the reading in 
Plut. ‘Symp. Quest.’ VII. 6, 3, seems to be 
erroneous. It appears as the translation of 
MINN in the LXX., possibly from phonetic 
resemblance.) (See e.g. Eccles. ix. 1; Cant. 
viii. 6.) (2) The exclusion of épws from the 
N.T. imposes upon the translator a corre- 
sponding carefulness. The old Latin version 
bears witness to this. (Augustine certainly 
refuses to recognize a distinction in the Latin 
Scriptures between amor or dilectio as bad, 
and caritas as good, ‘De Civ. D.’ xxv. 7; 
but the argument is incomplete as regards 
caritas at least.) Dilectio is too cold, amor too 
dubiously ethical for dyazn, in spite of the 
‘‘ Deus amor est” of Bengel. Now the word 
caritas as compared with amor is predomi- 
natingly ethical. The distinction is excel- 
lently drawn by Quinctilian. ‘‘ Amor ma6os, 
caritas Hos.” (‘Instit. Orat.’ Lib. vi. Cap. 
Il. 21, Tom. 1. 495, edit. Spalding.) ‘The 
great rhetorician leaves no doubt as to his 
meaning. ‘The word #6os denotes that which 


IL, JOHN. V. 


is less intense, more soothing, and is at once 
commended by its irresistible goodness. Cari- 
tas is love prescinded from selfishness and 
passion. The word seemed providentially de- 
signed for the sacred dydrn. Thus charity 
passed into English. It is to be hoped that it 
will never be ultimately allowed to disappear 
from the English N. T. or from the Collect 
and Epistle for Quinquagesima Sunday. For 
(3) some moral and spiritual loss may ensue. 
It is often objected that charity is narrowed 
and vulgarized into the hard metallic form of 
alms—mere money or money’s worth. But 
against this, or anything of the kind, there is a 
perpetual stream of protest from quarters which 
are not theological. (Thus in his address to the 
Medical Congress, August 3, 1881, Sir James 
Paget said :—“ And to this we shall attain if 
we will remind ourselves that, as in every 
pursuit of knowledge there is the charm of 
novelty, and in every attainment of truth 
utility, so in every use of it there may be 
charity. I do not mean only the charity 
which is in hospitals or in the service of the 
poor, great as is the privilege of our calling in 
that we may be its chief ministers, but that 
wider charity which is practised in a constant 
sympathy and gentleness, in patience and self- 
devotion. And it is surely fair to hold that, 
as in every search for knowledge we may 
strengthen our intellectual power, so in every 
practical employment of it we may, if we 
will, improve our moral nature; we may 
obey the whole law of Christian love.”) After 
a careful search, the present writer is unable 
to find in Shakespeare one single instance 
where the word “charity” is used in any other 
sense, than that of pure, noble, disinterested 
gentleness (‘M. of Venice,’ Iv. 1; ‘2nd Part 
of Henry VI.’ mr. 1; ‘Richard III.’ 1. 3; 
‘Ilenry VIII.’ 1. 2). Nay, in one passage, 
love itself is distinguished from charity as a 
part from the whole, or a fruit from the 
principle whence it springs. King Edward 
says, 
1c Brother, we have done deeds of charity, 
Made peace of enmity, fair Jove of hate.” 
(‘Richard III.’ Act 11. 1.) 
Granting, however, the force of the obiection, 
the people may be constantly reminded to cor- 
rect and ezlarge their conception of charity 
by x Cor. xiii. 3. But no amount of teach- 
ing, it is to be feared, can absolutely purify 
“love” for some, or spiritually elevate it 
for others of our race and language. Poetry, 
romance, history, common conversation, asso- 
ciations almost as wide and strong as human 
life, have fixed love in the region of passion. 
The writer has examined more than 300 pas- 
sages in Shakespeare in which the word is 
*--22 It is only used in fifteen or twenty 
for cae 2ifection of brother, sister, parent, or 
for general benignity (then mostly qualified 
by an epithet, «zg. “kind,” “ fair,” “‘comely,” 


‘“‘unfeigned ”), in all other cases it signifies the 
passion which has been glorified by chivalry, 
the theme of poets and novelists. For all 
these reasons, the present writer deeply regrets 
the disappearance of ‘“‘ charity” from the Re- 
vised Version of the N.T. (The rendering 
‘Sof love” in r Peter v. 14 seems to him to be 
specially unadvisable.) When new ideas are 
projected into the realm of thought, new words 
necessarily come into existence. It has been 
remarked that the French Revolution at once 
added largely to the French dictionary. When 
God created a new thing upon the earth, and 
bestowed a new gift upon regenerate human 
hearts, His Word gave it anewname. Ordinary 
speech, even Greek speech, could not render 
the idea; @idia, PitavOpamia, oropyy, Epas, 
were inadequate or worse. The very fact of 
‘charity’ being a word out of the ordinary 
sphere gives it an advantage as a rendering of 
aya. 

[The derivation of the word seems to 
throw little light upon the question. How- 
ever, by the kindness of a friend, deeply versed 
in comparative philology—the Dean of Clon- 
fert—the writer is enabled to add the follow- 
ing interesting note. ‘‘ There can be no doubt 
“that Eng. Jove, Ang.-S. /ufu, Goth. /ubo, 
‘‘are all the same root as Sans. /ubb—cupere, 
‘“desiderare. The essential element of its 
“meaning is the tension of desire; but not 
‘“necessarily of concupiscence. On the con- 
‘trary, in Goth. the same root is applied in 
‘the substantive /ubains to express hope; and 
‘there is a kindred root /aub which expresses 
‘estimation, approval. Galaubs kas (vessel) 
‘is Ulfilas’s translation of eis riuny ocxedos in 
“Rom. ix. 21, and ga-/aub-jan is Goth. for 
“‘ glauben to believe, and us-/aub-jan for er- 
‘* Jauben to permit. No doubt also /ibet, ubet, 
“]jbido are kindred words, and Ximropa, Au- 
“ apns, iy expressing the tension of eagere 
*‘ness. Of the same family, but more remote, 
“is Goth. /iban, Eng. live, expressing the 
‘“‘inner force of life. It is hard to find any 
‘*root which can be identified with amo, but 
‘‘T think it appears from its uses and from 
“amicus and amoenus that it expresses not the 
“tension of desire but the relaxation of enjoy- 
“ment. That this is also the Grundbedeutung 
“of ayan7 is evident from the passages quoted 
“in Liddell and Scott under ayazaq ; but it 
‘is as difficult to identify this with any other 
‘*root as it is for amo. Carus is precisely 
‘dear and caritas dearness. There is little or 
“no desire in it, still less relaxation of enjoy- 
‘¢ment, but rather the tension of prized pos- 
‘*session which becomes want in the absence 
‘of possession. There is no other root to 
‘“‘which carus can be affiliated though the 
‘ Greek yp- is akin to its latter meaning, and in 
‘it the tension or bond may be ethical, ypeia, 
“yon. Sanskr. wr—desiderare, petere, optare, 
‘‘ eligere, is the same root as that of Fépes.”] 


Y2 


339 


340 


CHAPTER V. 

1 He that loveth God loveth his children, and 
keepeth his commandments: 3 which to the 
JSaithful are light, and not grievous. 9 Fesus 
is the Son of God, able to save us, 14 and to 
hear our prayers, which we make for our- 
selves, and for others. 


HOSOEVER believeth that 

Jesus is the Christ is born of 
God: and every one that loveth him 
that begat loveth him also that is be- 
gotten of him. 


Cuap. V. 1. him that begat] The aorist. 

him that is begotten] The perfect participle. 

2. By this we know that we love the chil- 
dren of God, when we love God] St John’s 
meaning is finely analysed by Augustine: 
‘“« How is this? A little before he spoke of the 
Son of God, not of the sons of God. Christ 
alone was proposed to our contemplation, and 
it was said (wv. 1)—then follows v. 2— 
therefore, he who loves the sons of God loves 
the Son of God; and he who loves the Sz of 
God loves the sons of God; nor can any man 
love the Father unless he love the Son; and 
he who loves the Son loves the sons. What 
sons of God? ‘The members of the Son of 
God. And by love he too becomes a mem- 
ber, and by love is knit and compacted into 
the body of Christ ; and thus there will be one 
Christ loving Himself. (x Cor. xii. 26, 27.) 
A little above St John said of brotherly love 
(a John iv. 20), But if you love your brother, 
can you love him and not love Christ? How 
can this be, since you love the members of 
Christ? When then you love the members 
of Christ, you love Christ; when you love 
Christ, you love the Son of God. Love can- 
not be separated. Choose any one of these 
objects of love; the rest necessarily follow. 
You say, ‘I love God the Father alone.’ 
False! If you love Him, you love the Son 
also. But, you say, I love the Father and the 
Son; but this alone. False! For if you love 
the Head, you love the members; and if you 
love not the members you love not the Head. 
Let no man excuse himself from one love by 
another. ‘That love is so compacted into one 
that it makes all the loves which hang from it 
one, and fuses them as a fire. Unless the flame 
of love be kindled, the fusion of many loves 
into one cannot be. When we love God, we 
know that we love the children of God.” (St 
August. ut supra.) 


SECTION IX. wv. 3 sqq. 

8. In reading A.V., alter the punctua- 
tion so as to connect v. 4 directly with the 
close of v. 3. His commandments are 
not grievous, because all that is born 
of God overcometh the world. (‘Tum 


I. JOHN. V. 


|v. I—§. 


2 By this we know that we love 
the children of God, when we love 
God, and keep his commandments. 

3 For this is the love of God, 
that we keep his commandments: and 
his commandments are not grievous. 

4 For whatsoever is born of God 
overcometh the world: and this is 
the victory that overcometh the 
world, even our faith. 

5 Who is he that overcometh the 





to the two commandments Matt. xxii. 37, 39. 
The whole of this Epistle is full of these two 
commandments.” St Aug.) In hearing that 
‘“weare toobserve His commandments,” one 
thought may well occur—‘t The command- 
ments spoken of are those observed by Jesus, 
whose picture we see developed in the Sermon 
onthe Mount. There we have a law of sanc- 
tity beside which all human morality is pale. 
The task is difficult, impossible.” Nay, St 
John says the contrary. “They are not 
heavy.” Such a declaration could only come 
from his own life and experience! (Cf. for 
the beginning of the verse the words of 
Raphael : 
“Him whom to love is to obey, and keep 
His great command.” 
‘ Paradise Lost,’ VIII. 634.) 

Here is one proof that His commandments 
are not grievous—a proof co-extensive with 
the world-wide spiritual combat of God’s 
children. ‘‘ They are not grievous; for what- 
soever is born of God overcometh the world.” 


4. whatsoever is born of God] The neuter 
substituted for the masculine is an advance 
upon it. It designates a mark of the new 
nature abstracted from incidental peculiarities 
—a characteristic of the entire body as an 
integral whole. From a different point of 
view the masculine (John vi. 40) is an advance 
upon the neuter (ibid. v. 39). In the first, 
our Lord promises Resurrection to those who 
are given to Him in the mass, and as a whole, 
In the second, he obviates the idea of a sort of 
pantheistic absorption, and individualizes the 
promise (cf, in vi. 37, the neuter immediately 
exchanged for the masculine). 

born of God| For the perfect here see 
note, supra, ON ill. 9. 

the Conquest that has conquered the 
world—the victory that sas been victorious 
over it (the aor. denoting action completed 
once for all). ‘The victorious power of Him 
who said I have overcome the world (xvi. 33), 
streams over upon redeemed humanity. The 
victory is won, the mortal wound given, the 
head bruised. 

our faith| here runs into the objective 


v. 6.] 


world, but he that believeth that Je- 
sus is the Son of God ? 

6 This is he that came by water 
and blood, even Jesus Christ; not 





sense—the faith, i.e. the Christian religion 
objectively as received by faith subjectively. 
This sense of the word is found in Acts vi. 7, 
xiv. 27; Rom.i. 5. Observe that the faith is 
spoken of, not merely as the szeans of victory, 
but as a victory in itself. ‘There is something 
very noble in this deep, silent, unexcited 
triumph—our faith zs a victory! [So Words- 
worth addresses Duty—“‘ Thou who art vic- 
tory!” ‘Ode to Duty.’] 


6. This 1s he that came by water and blood, 
even Jesus Christ; not with the water only, 
but with the water and with the blood] 
Let us (i) attempt to bring out the exact 
force of the words here, and (ii) pass on to 
grasp their meaning. 

(i) The force of the words is—“This is 
He who came, conditioned (so to speak) 
by—with the intervention of (d.a)—water 
and blood, not accompanied only by (éy) 
the water, but by the water and the blood.” 
(See Additional Note at the end of the chap- 
ter.) (ii) A full examination of the meaning 
which is to be constructed out of these ele- 
ments, and which must include the following 
verses, will occupy some space for its due 
development. The Epistle and Gospel (as 
we have so often seen) must be constantly 
read together. ‘There is a perpetual reference 
in the former to the latter. ‘The most per- 
plexing incident in the Gospel” (xix. 34) is 
followed up in “the most perplexing pas- 
sage in the Epistle” (Bishop Lightfoot) 
(1 John v. 6). Now wv. 6, 7, 8, 9, ro are 
pervaded by, and are unintelligible without, the 
consideration that St John’s Gospel aims at 
being a Gospel of manifold witness to Jesus. 
(a) A witness of men to Christ, with the 
attesting cries wrung from their hearts. (i. 7 
—49, ili. 2, iv. 39, Vi. 69, vii. 46, Xli.17, XX. 
28.) The Gospel is a tissue woven out of 
many lines of human evidence. In wv. 9, infra, 
“cif we receive the witness of men,” &c. the 
Apostle refers to his Gospel as that of buman 
witness. (6) It is also the Gospel of Divine 
witness in various forms: (1) Scripture (v. 
39—46), (2) His own (viii. 17, 18), (3) His 
Father's (vill. 18, xii. 28), (4) Miracles (v. 
36). In all these ways it is a Gospel of wit- 
ness, human and Divine. ‘The very word 
studs almost every page, and occurs in 
the Gospel nearly as often as in the whole 
of the rest of the New Testament. Now, 
it aas scarcely been sufficiently noticed by 
interpreters of 1 John v. 6—12 that these 
verses advert to this great characteristic of the 
Gospel This is indicated by the otherwise 
anaccountable prolixity of iteration of the 


I. JOHN. V. 


by water only, but by water and 
blood. And it is the Spirit that 
beareth witness, because the Spirit is 
truth. 


word #en times in five short verses. The Epi- 
stle points out (wv. 7, 8) that there is in the 
Gospel another series of witnesses, not obtru- 
sively visible, not outwardly audible, yet whose 
shadow falls upon every page, whose voice 
may be heard by the attentive ear. Mysterious 
fact! they are three. And thus it is: St John 
records in his Gospel that ‘‘ one of the soldiers 
with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith 
came thereout blood and water” (xix. 34). (This 
blood and water is the order of fact and history.) 
To this St John adverts (x John v. 6) when 
he tells us ‘‘this is He who came,. .not accom- 
panied only by the water but by the blood.” 
(The water and blood is the ideal, mystical, 
sacramental, subjective order; the blood and 
water is the historical and objective order. 
The first, therefore, is appropriately adopted 
in the Epistle; the second in the Gospel.) 
To us, no doubt, this may seem strange. 
Yet let us pause and consider St John’s point 
of view. If any one fact remains historically 
sure it is that Cerinthianism prevailed in Asia 
Minor, and that St John wrote in part to 
meet its advances. Now Cerinthus separated 
Christ, the Divine AZon, from Jesus, the 
good but mortal and finite man. The two, 
he said, met at the waters of Jordan, upon 
the day of the Baptism, when Christ united 
Himself to Jesus for a few years, to leave the 
man for ever. Before the Passion the Divine 
ideal Christ withdrew, the man Jesus suf= 
fered, while the impassible, immortal Christ 
was far away in Heaven. This St John 
utterly denies in v. 6. There is no such 
fortuitous juxtaposition of two beings. There 
is one Lord Jesus Christ—declared to be one, 
not only by His Baptism, the witness of 
water, but by His Passion, the witness of 
blood, not only in Jordan but on Calvary. 
Look at the pierced side, and we have a 
visible type and summary of this, not only 
the water but the blood! But, lying behind 
this, in deep and tender distance, there is 
assuredly something more than an allusion to 
a temporary controversy—something eternal 
as the Gospel. The historical order, as we 
have seen, is in the Gospel (xix. 34), the ideal 
and sacramental in the Epistle (v. 6). The 
water, the blood, the Spirit are three great 
factors in the Gospe/: it is full of them. (The 
water, John iii. 5, cf. i. 26—33, ii. 9, iti. 
23, IV. 13, Ve 4, ix. 7. The J/ood, vi. 53, 
54, 56, xix. 34. The Spirit, vii. 39, xiv. xv. 
xvi. Xx. 22.) Now the wafer centres, so to 
speak, in Baptism (iii. 5), and the blood is 
symbolized, exhibited, applied, in Holy Com- 
munion (vi.); and the Spirit, by His Divine 
power, is perpetually making them effectual. 


341 


342 


7 For there are three that bear re- 
cord in heaven, the Father, the Word, 
and the Holy Ghost: and these three 
are one. 

8 And there are three that bear 

‘witness in earth, the spirit, and the 


Thus the water and the blood in the Gospel 
and in the Church, in the Book and in the 
Sacraments, are abiding witnesses of the In- 
carnate Lord. For, if all else were swept 
away, these would be His witnesses. Why 
all these millions, generation after generation, 
baptized with water? Why that cup, blessed 
wn so many churches in all lands with the 
words “This is my Blood”? Round this 
the whole external order of the Ministry is 
drawn. And before these stands a third 
Witness, who is Divine. Not only Sacra- 
ments—all the marvels of Christianity; the 
onward progress of its powers; the new 
creation perpetually called from the dust of 
human life; its peaceful and glorious vic- 
tories come from one source. It is the Spirit 
who calls forth in long succession preachers, 
missionaries, martyrs, reformers, healers, saints. 
The outward and inward in the Church are 
harmonious, Her master has given her an 
outward administration and an inward power. 
The water and the blood warn the Church 
not to spiritualize the material. The Spirit 
saves the Church from materializing the spi- 
ritual. See Additional Note at the end of the 
chapter. 

[This interpretation would not exclude a 
_ Yeference to expiation and sanctification—to 
the sacrifice and cleansing, the altar and the 
laver (Exod. xxx. 18, 21, xl. 6), so wonder- 
fully significant of the benefits of Christ’s 
death. It is not inconsistent with the symbo- 
lical hint of the Divine and Human Natures 
of Jesus seen by so many ancient writers in 
the incident (John xix. 34), and constantly 
remembered, as they supposed, in the primi- 
tive usage of mixing water with wine in Holy 
Communion. It would include the quickening 
by the Spirit and the cleansing from sin—the 
ideas of the outpoured Spirit and of the sacri- 
ficed human life ‘‘ which underlie the two sacra- 
ments” and St John’s use of the terms ‘‘ blood” 
and “water.” See on St John xix. 34. 

And the Spirit is that which is wit- 
nessing that the Spirit is the Truth] 
The self-attestation of the Spirit crowning and 
perfecting the outward and historical. On the 
Spirit as The Truth see Additional Note 3 John 3. 


7. For three are they who are wit- 
nessing. ‘Thus we have a Trinity of testi- 
mony, ‘‘the three genuine witnesses” (Bishop 
Lightfoot on ‘Rev. of N. T.’ p. 24). ‘ This 
trine array of witnesses on earth is clearly 
supported, and has behind and above it the 


I. JOHN. V. 


[v. 7—9 


water, and the blood: and these three 
agree in one. 

g If we receive the witness of 
men, the witness of God is greater: 
for this is the witness of God which 
he hath testified of his Son. 


Trinity which is heavenly, archetypal, funda- 
mental, immortal” (Bengel). See Additional 
Note at the end of the chapter. 

The numerical principle in human witness, 
and the notion of God as witness, were ime 
pressed upon St John from the lips of Christ 
(Gospel viii. 17, 18; cf. 3 John 12). While 
he writes here vv. 7, 8, his eye is fixed upon 
Three personal witnesses. Observe the mas- 
culine partic., v. 7 (rpeis ciow of pa 
podvres), and then, though he mentions three 
subjects markedly in the neuter, with the 
thrice-repeated neuter article (v. 8)—and 
though his style generally has a tendency 
to prefer the neuter—as if the unexpressed 
Personal witnesses who occupied his thought 
overshadowed the page, overpowered his 
language, and could not be put aside—the 
repeated masculine after the three neuters (oi 
tpeis). ‘The ‘Schol. apud Matth.,’ quoted by 

ischend., observes—‘‘he speaks of these three 
in the masculine, because these are symbols ot 
the Trinity.” It may be that after the express 
mention of the Spirit first (in consequence of 
the last words of the previous clause), the 
Father who regenerates is symbolized by the 
water (Titus iii. 5; 1 Peteri. 3; Jamesi. 17, 
18), and the Son who redeems by the blood. 

and these three agree in one] (oi tpeis eis 
TO €v eiow) co-operate to one end,—‘‘to the 
subject of the leading clause, that Jesus is 
Christ” (Diisterd); perhaps “to overcoming 
the world” (v. 5). Bishop Wordsworth 
translates — ‘‘ these three” (masc.) ‘ are 
(joined) into the one (the one Substance, 
neuter),” and compares St John x. 30 and 
Xvii. II, 22, in which the unity of the Persons 
is described by the neuter, There is high 
ancient authority for this interpretation. But 
a theological difficulty is suggested by Dr 
Burton, ‘ Bampton Lectures,’ Note 85, p. 526. 


9. If we receive the witness of men] The 
form of the expression implies that we do as- 
suredly receive human witness. We receive 
it naturally as men, not merely supernaturally 
as Christians—necessarily and as matter of 
course. This is at once an appeal to the 
principle of rational, historical common-sense, 
and to the Gospel which that principle under= 
lies (see note, v. 6, and Additional Note at 
end of the chapter). 


10, 11. Read these verses with the central 
clause in parenthesis, thus: He that believeth 
on the Son of God hath the witness in him (or 
in Him). (He that believeth not God hath made 


v. 10O—13.] 


10 He that believeth on the Son 
of God hath the witness in him- 
self: he that believeth not God hath 
made him a liar; because he believ- 
eth not the record that God gave of 
his Son. 

11 And this is the record, that 





him a liar; because he hath not believed 
the witness that God hath witnessed of 
his Son.) And this is the witness, that God 
gave te us eternal life,and this life is in his Son. 


10. the witness in him, i.e. in himself | 
Not probably Him, with reference to the 
on of God as ‘‘ the living theology of Chris- 
tians,” the sphere in which the witness exists. ] 
From wv. 6, we have had a summary of the 
Gospel as a Gospel of witness; the witness 
of the Spirit, of the water, of the blood, of 
men, of God. Precisely the subjective addi- 
tion is now made which is natural. [The 
reading ¢y éavr@ found in S and received by 
Lachm. is probably not correct. But avros 
sometimes has a reflexive force. The Vulg. 
translates in semetipso.] All the objective wit- 
ness is crowned and perfected when it passes 
inwardly into the soul, into the heart and life 
—when the believer on the Son of God hath 
the witness in himself. The evidential im- 
portance of the inner witness is well stated by 
Baxter. ‘‘I am now much more apprehen- 
sive than heretofore of the necessity of well 
grounding men in their religion, and especially 
of the witness of the indwelling Spirit; for I 
more sensibly perceive that the Spirit is the 
great witness of Christ and Christianity to 
the world. And though the folly of fanatics 
tempted me long to overlook the strength of 
this testimony of the Spirit, while they placed 
it in a certain internal affection or enthusiastic 
inspiration, yet now I see that the Holy Ghost 
in another manner is the witness of Christ 
and his agent in the world. ‘The Spirit in the 
Prophets was his first witness; and the Spirit 
by miracles was the second; and the Spirit 
by renovation and sanctification, illumination 
and consolation, assimilating the soul to Christ 
and heaven, is the continued witness to all 
true believers. dnd therefore ungodly persons 
bave a great disadvantage in their resisting 
temptations to unbelief.” (Richard Baxter, 
History of his own Life and Times in 
Wordsworth’s ‘ Ecclesiastical Biography,’ 
Vol. v. p. 568.) 

him] This is not logically a proof to 
others; but it is the proof of proofs to our- 
selves. (See Rom. viii. 16.) ‘‘ The first ques- 
tion asked of Laud was, what was the com- 
fortablest saying which a dying man could 
have in his mouth; to which he meekly made 
answer, cupio dissolvi et esse cum Christo. 
Being asked again what was the fittest speech 


I: JOHN. V. 


God hath given to us eternal life, and 
this life is in his Son. 

12 He that hath the Son hath life; 
and he that hath not the Son of God 
hath not life. 

13 These things have I written 
unto you that believe on the name 


a man could use to express his confidence and 
assurance, he answered with the same spirit 
of meekness, that such assurance was to be 
found within, and that no words were able to 
express it rightly.” ‘Life of Laud,’ by P. 
Heylin. Part 11. Lib. v. 55. Thus once more 
the Epistle appears as the subjective comple- 
tion of the whole Gospel of St John. 

he that believeth not God| One uncial only 
(A) here reads, that believeth not the Son. 
This reading is not only weak in external 
support. For St John is not speaking of faith 
in the Son—but of God’s witness to His Son; 
to which witness of God Himself he who 
gives not credence is guilty of impiety, be- 
cause in disbelieving it he makes God a liar. 
(Reiche, ‘Comment. Crit.’) 

he that believeth not God hath made him a 
liar; because he is not a believer in the 
witness that God gave| There is a double 
refinement of distinction in these words, which 
it is difficult to indicate in translation. (1) 
‘‘He that believeth not God...because he be- 
lieveth not” (6 yy mortevov TO Oc@...0T ov 
meriorevxev). In the last words the objective 
negative makes it pass from supposition to fact. 
The supposed case of the unbeliever has 
passed into reality, and St John represents to 
himself an actual unbeliever, (2) Further, 
the first ‘‘he that Jelieweth not God,” rather 
signifies—‘ not taking Him at His word,” 
“not putting faith in His veracity’—the 
second, ‘‘believeth not the witness as Divine.” 
[‘‘mor. ets twa, i.e. honor Deo soli adhi- 
bendus,...sed miorevew tii, Cum sit univer- 
salius, aliquando Deo, aliquando hominibus 
convenit” (Lampe). This gives great force to 
John v. 38. ‘‘If they did not believe Him, 
how much less could they delieve in Him?”] 
It is unbelief, not only denying His Divinity, 
but insulting His veracity. The translation 
of the same word in A.V. by witness and 
record (vv, 10, 11) is unfortunate. 


12. He that hath the Son hath the life] 
He that hath not the Son hath not that life. 


18. These things have I written 
unto you that ye may know that ye 
have eternal life—ye believers in 
the name of the Son of God! 

‘There is great variety of reading here. But 
the readings may be divided into two classes, 
the contracted and uncontracted, with many 
slight shades of variation. The uxcontracted 


343 


8 Or, con 


of the Son of God; that ye may 
know that ye have eternal life, and 
that ye may believe on the name of 
the Son of God. 

14 And this is the confidence that 
we have 'in him, that, if we ask 


I. JOHN. V. 


[v. 14, 15- 


any thing according to his will, he 
heareth us: 

15 And if we know that he hear 
us, whatsoever we ask, we know that 
we have the petitions that we desired 
of him. 





may be represented by A. V.—the contracted 
by Tisch. (radra éypawa tpi iva eidqre ort 
Cony €xeTe aidviov, of muarevovres cis TO Gvopa 
Tow viov Tov Oeod). 

This reading is found in A, B, &, Cod. 
Amiat. (so the very old Coptic version word 
for oS and is approved by Lachm., 
Liicke, Huther, and many others. But the 
longer reading is less likely to have been intro- 
duced into the text, and copyists might think 
that the passage admitted of easy and judicious 
abbreviation. According to the T.R. and the 
translation of it in the A. V., the design of the 
epistle was twofold: (1) That, though be- 
lievers, they should know and be warned again 
that eternal salvation can only be by faith in 
Christ. (2) That they should persevere in the 
same faith—that believing they should continue 
to believe. But this is the very hinge on 
which the Epistle turns. The repetition of 
the same words—“ believe on the name of the 
Son of God”—may not find favour in the 
schools of human rhetoric; but it is quite in 
the style of St John, who loves to engrave 
his weightiest sentiments upon the minds and 
hearts of his readers by a repetition of words, 
or even of phrases. 

These things have I written} In letters, 
éypaya is used for ypadpa, as seripsi in Latin, 


-in reference to the epistle which is being 


written. But we should be careful not to set 
down the former in all cases as an epistolary 
aor. Sometimes it points to a previous epistle 
(3 John wv. 9). Sometimes it alludes to an 
epistle already concluded, or to a portion 
already finished of the letter in hand (x John 
ii, 2I—26, v. 13). Winer, ‘Gramm. N. 
T. D. Part ur. § xl. p. 294. (Disterd, 
Ebrard, Bengel, however, consider these words 
as a formal conclusion of the whole Epistle.) 

believe in, &c.] The construction here 
denotes to give honour to, to trust in, as 
Divine; for the more usual expression em- 
ployed to signify belief in man as well as faith 
in God, see above, v. Io. 

believe in the name] ‘‘ Name denotes the sum 
of a personality. Wahl interprets the Name 
of Jesus as Jesus, with all the ideas and me- 
mories connected with His Name.” (Tholuck, 
‘Gospel of St John,’ p. 335.) The name in 
the absolute sense, in the eye of God, is that 
by which the true essence of the being named 
is characterized, and not only a connotative 
mark. ‘This verse is very important, as un- 
equivocally teaching that the main object of this 
Epistle is practical and spiritual, not polemical. 


14. And the confidence that we have to- 
wards 4im consists in this, that] (Cf. 
Gospel, iii. rz, xvii. 3, &c.), #.e. “we have full 
confidence that....” 

he heareth us| Not exactly equivalent to 
‘fulfil our petitions” (that is first mentioned, 
v.15), but as in St John’s Gospel for é£axovew 
(ix. 31, Xi. 41, 42). 


15. if we know] A peculiar form, ex- 
pressing a very strong confirmation (é€ay with 
perfect indic., the only instance in the New Tes- 
tament)—“ If we know, as we certainly do.” 

we know that we hbave| In the pregnant 
Johannic sense. It is almost parallel to the 
way in which the word is applied to future 
rewards and punishments to indicate their 
certainty (Matt. v. 46; Mark iii, 29; John 
iii. 15; Hebrews x. 35; see Bretschn. s. v. 
éyw). Note in this passage two conditions 
on acceptable prayer—conjidence, and harmony 
with God's will. 

the desires that we have desired 
from Him] St John’s language here is 
strikingly like x S. i. 17, LXX 


16,17. Under the general head of prayer, 
a special case requires to be considered. This 
difficult passage may be treated most satisfac- 
torily by a continuous paraphrase of vv. 12 
—21. 

‘* All the things contained in this Epistle 
I have written for two great ends to you who 
believe on the name of the Son of God—that 
ye may know that ye have already eternal life, 
and that ye may continue to believe on that 
name. 

“Continuing in this knowledge and belief 
we have confidence towards Him consisting in 
this—that if we ask aught according to His 
will He heareth us. And if we know—as we 
do—that He heareth us whatsoever we so ask, 
we know that we have the petition which we 
ask from Him. 

‘* Here is a case to be considered however. 
If any man see his brother sinning sin 
we will suppose it to be not to death, he shall 
ask, and God shall give him life, i.e. in the 
case of those whom we suppose not to sin 
unto death. There is sin to death. I do not 
say that he shall inquire concerning that. All 
unrighteousness is sin, and there is sin which 
as a matter of fact is not unto death. 

‘*But be comforted. We know that every 
one who having been born of God continues 
in that blessed state is not an habitual sinner; 
but the true everlasting Son of God keepeth 


v. 16, 17.] 


16 If any man see his brother sin 
a sin which is not unto death, he shall 
ask, and he shall give him life for 
them that sin not unto death. There 


I. JOHN. V. 


is a sin unto death: I do not say that 
he shall pray for it. 

17 All unrighteousness is sin : and 
there is a sin not unto death. 





him, and that wicked one toucheth him not. 
Yea, we know that we are of God, and the 
world lieth wholly in the power of the wicked 
one. Not so with us. We know further that 
the Son of God is present, and hath given us 
an understanding to know the one True God. 
And in His Son Jesus Christ [this is the true 
God and eternal life] we are in the True God. 

‘Children! who are in the one true God and 
in the true God His Son, guard yourselves by 
one decisive act of self-defence from the idols.” 


16. There is sin unto death] As to this, 
four tests are positively discoverable in the text 
itself. (a) It does not seem to be any single sin, 
but sin of a particular find (there is sin). 
(8) From the emphatic way in which drotéer is 
used, it could only occur among Christians, 
in the full communion of the Church. (y) It 
would seem to be such sin as was, in some 
sense, perceptible and visible—‘‘if any man 
see.” (6) According to the Johannic sense of 
the word, the death spoken of cannot be bodily 
death from the judgment of God; or the mere 
spiritual losses—however grave and real—of a 
deserved excommunication. It must mean 
moral and spiritual death (1 John iii. 14), 
deprivation of the life (supra, v. 12). It 
might seem as if its lineaments were traced in 
the previous part of the Epistle. By heresy, 
by unbelief, by obstinate wordliness, by want 
of love issuing in a Cainlike hatred, we may 
reverse the blessed transition ‘“‘from death 
unto life” (z John iii. 14), and pass from 
‘life to death,” i.e. to a state of spiritual 
(not yet necessarily eferza/) death. The com- 
pletion of this state is the passing out from 
the light of Christ and of His Church into 
darkness—possibly into apostasy and idolatry, 
or into atheism. This explanation seems to 
meet the whole context from v. 16 on. St 
John does not state whether such a sinner’s 
case is absolutely hopeless, whether he is de- 
finitively incapable of conversion. But he 
will not desire Christians to intercede for 
those who, as far as in them lies, have volun- 
tarily dipped the roots of their souls in poison, 
and sought to destroy their Christian life. 
The reference is here, as so often, to the 
Gospel of St John. Even among Christians 
there was the possibility of incurring the 
doom of which Jesus warned the unbelieving 
Jews—“‘ Ye shall die in your s:...in your 
sins” (John viii. 2124). See Additional 
Note at the end of the chapter. 

He shall give to him (avr@) life, for them 
that sin not unto death (rois duaptavovow py 
wgos Oavarov). These words may ex- 


plained in two ways. (1) Apposition does 
not necessarily extend to gender and number. 
A plural in appos. may refer to a collective 
singular (x Cor. i. 2; cf. 1 K. xii ro, LXX.). 
‘* He shall give life to him, 7.e. to those sinning, 
in a way which may be conceived of as not 
unto death.” (2) ‘To him” may, more pro- 
bably, refer to the person asking. ‘* God shall 
give to him who asks in faithful prayer life for 
those (dativ. comm.) not sinning unto death.” 

There is sin unto death. I say not con- 
cerning that, that he shall inquire. 

I say not. ‘I say not that he (é.e. the 
Christian brother) shall pray for it. Which 
may seem cautiousiy set. Not that he for- 
bids, but only doth not did, to pray for them, 
or did not promise good success to prayer 
offered for such an one.” (Hammond.) Cf. the 
prohibition: ‘‘ Pray not thou for this people, 
neither lift up cry nor prayer for them, neither 
make intercession to Me” (Jer. vil.16). (‘It 
is not for any one to heal this sin but Christ 
only.”) ‘I do not command him to pray.” 
(Augustine, iz Joc.; cf. however ‘ Retract.’ 1. 
19.) A Lap. paraphrases well: ‘‘I have 
said above ‘that, if we ask anything accord- 
ing to His will He heareth us...that we know 
that we have the petitions that we desired of 
Him’ (vv. 14, 15). Yet I except one case, 
that of ‘sin unto death,’ i.e. if a brother 
have, to thy knowledge, sinned not unto 
death, pray for him, and I am full sure that 
this will be heard. But, if it be sin unto 
death, I must not, I cannot, engage. Yet I 
do not absolutely forbid intercessory prayer. 
Pray if thou wilt, but be not sure that thou 
wilt be heard.” 

Observe ‘‘sin not unto death” (v. 16), and 
again (v.17). ‘‘In the former clause py is 
used as suitable to a subjective observation, 
dependent upon if 4e see. In the latter clause, 
ov occurs intentionally, since an objectively 
valid principle is expressed, a dogmatically real 
idea is established ” (Winer). 

inquire] This word (€pwrjo7) stands 
with marked emphasis at the close of the sen- 
tence, and is distinguished from ask (airjoes 
at its beginning. See on John xvi. 23, an 
Archbp Trench, ‘Syn. N. T.’ XL. 


18,19. The Apostle marks by a threefold 
we know three great general principles of the 
Epistle. 

(a) We are conscious that he who having 
been born of God continues in that blessed 
state, continues not in sin, kept as he is by 
the Son of God. (wz. 18.) 

(4) We are conscious of a new nature 


345 


346 


18 We know that whosoever is 
born of God sinneth not ; but he that 
is begotten of God keepeth himself, 
and that wicked one toucheth him not. 


I. JOHN. V. 


19 And we know that we are of 
God, and the whole world lieth in 
wickedness. 


20 And we know that the Son of 





and of lofty privileges which come from God, 
as contrasted with the world’s entire devotion 
to the evil one. (wv. 19.) 

(c) We are conscious of the presence of the 
Son of God, and of the faculty of knowing 
God given by Him. (v. 20.) : 

The Epistle is pervaded by three relations— 
(2) to holiness, (4) to the world, (¢) to the 

erson of Christ. See for (a) i. 6, ii. 3, 13, 
20, 27, lil. 3; for (4) ii. 8, 15 sqq., ili. 135 
(c) li. 22-—22. 

18. We know (oidapev)] A rare form 
elsewhere. The spirit of St John was one 
with that of his readers. Not only he, 
but the Church; not only an Apostle, but all 
Christendom. His own personal conviction 
enlarges, as it were, into that of the Church. 

The idea in the latter part of this verse is 
exactly opposite to that which is derived from 
A.V. It is not that ‘‘he that is born of God 
keepeth himself ;” but that ‘‘ the Begotten of 
God (6 yerynbeis ek Tod cod), i.e. Jesus, keep- 
eth him.” The perf. not the aor, (see beginning 
of this v.) is used by St John for the human 
~ child of God. See for the idea—‘‘ He that 
is of God” (6 dv mapa rod Gcov), John vi. 
46, where a hasty reader thinks of the pri- 
vilege of every true Christian, not of the 
sole dignity of the everlasting Son otf the 
Father. The expression used by Chrysostom 
’ in commenting upon the latter passage throws 
light upon the verse before us—‘ what this 
essence is no one knoweth, save only He that 
was Begotten of Him” (6 yevynbeis ¢& avrod). 
S. Joann. Chrysost. ‘In Joann. Homil.’ xv. 
(Tom. vit. 99, edit. Migne.) We have here 
the statement of the Son of God (John xvii. 
12) generalized as a principle of the Christian 
life. Besides this, in the Gospel the Father 
is prayed by Christ to ‘‘keep” Christians 
(xvii. 14, 15). Indeed, it may almost be said 
that neither in St John’s writings, nor any- 
where else in the New Testament, are Chris- 
tians spoken of as absolutely and universally 
‘keeping themselves.” For x Tim. v. 22; 
James i. 27; Jude v. 21, refer to ‘“ keeping 
themselves” in some special department of 
Christian duty or life. ; 

toucheth him not} (prob. an allusion to touch 
not Mine anointed, 1 Chro. xvi. 22, LXX.). 
The promise implied in this is fulfilled in him 
who having been born of Gyi ~sxtinues in 
that condition. 


19. We know that we are from God, and 
the world lieth wholly. 

Lieth wholly (6 xoopos Odos év 7. 7. Kel- 
va). Wholly, with emphasis, like Milton’s— 


‘‘ where armies whole have sunk” (cf. “ Thea 
wast wholly born,” John ix. 34). 

lieth wholly in the evil one 
(‘‘ Mundus totus in Maligno” (not in malo) 
‘* positus est.” Vulg.) The meaning here ap- 
pears to be determined by the evil one of 
v. 18, and cannot therefore have any weight 
(additional to v. 18) in justifying the trans- 
lation (‘‘deliver us from the evil one,” Matt. 
vi. 13). The image may be taken from a 
child on a parent’s lap. Note the advance 
from toucheth in last verse to lieth wholly in 
this. 

We know that we are from God. ‘In an 
age when the purifying influences of the Spirit 
had no operation beyond the walls of the 
Church—and when, moreover, qwithin those 
limits the Gospel was exerting its fullest influ- 
ence—Christians, conscious as they were of 
both hopes and virtues to which none but 
themselves could pretend, were liable to ne 
embarrassment (whatever grief) in taking up 
the Apostle’s profession, we know that we 
are of God. While the Church and the world 
are in any such relative position, each exhibits 
its proper internal quality in the most con- 
spicuous manner. Purity belongs to one, 
shameless confusion to the other. The last 
living Apostle in the age of Trajan, he looked 
abroad upon the Roman world, and myst 
inspiration apart, boldly decide between the 
friends and foes of his Master” (I. Taylor, 
‘Saturday Evenings,’ pp. 59, 60). 


20. is here] (xe) ‘“‘to have come and 
be here” (Winer, p. 290). Cf. Ps. xl. 7, 
‘NN (Feo, LXX.), the very motto and Ich 
dien of the Son of God in N. T. “ Venio 
quasi symbolum Domini fuit.” (Bengel on 
Hebrews x. 7. See passages in ‘ Bampton 
Lectures for 1876,’ p. 245, note 1, 2nd edi- 
tion.) 

and hath given us an understanding] (8:a- 
vocav) that we may &zow Him that is true. 
4n understanding, a faculty, a new sense, 
‘* We have five senses by which the visible 
world comes before us. Faith is a new sense, 
a new eye, by which the invisible world come 
before us” (Tholuck). 

that we may know] Knowledge only in the 
deeper sense of the word. When it treats 
of the relations of two persons, it designates 
the ‘perfect intuition which each has of the 
moral being of the other” (Gedet, ‘Sur l’Ev. 
de S. Jean,’ 11. 542). 

him that is true) Or, the Very God (r, 
dAnOwov Geov). Is this the true reading? It 
is supported by A among uncial MSS., and a 





v. 21.] 


God is come, and hath given us an un- 
derstanding, that we may know him 
that is true, and we are in him that 
is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. 





preponderance of versions and Greek Fathers. 
(See especially Athan. ‘Orat. mI. c. Arian.’ 
19.) It might indeed have been inserted by 
copyists for perspicuity, but it would not so 
constantly have appeared in quotations uuless 
justified by ancient MSS. (cf. also John xvii. 
3; 1 Thess. i. 9). 

And in His Son, Jesus Christ [this 
is the Very God and Eternal Life], we 
are in the Very (sc. God). 

Waiterland says, ‘“‘ Admitting this reading 
it confirms this view: ‘ We are in the true 
God, viz, the Father, by being in His Son, be- 
cause that Son is the True God.’ This is very 
expressive and significant, intimating that there 
is none so certain way of knowing the true 
God as by a teacher who is true God: nor 
any other way of being reconciled to God but 
by being united to one who is God;—that the 
Son of God alone can be able to unite us to 
the true God, and that because He Himself 
is true God: who by being Incarnate could 
join Divine and human natures, God and 
man, in one.” (Cf. Irenezus: “ No man can 
know God, unless God has taught him—that 
is to say, that without God, God cannot be 
known.” Quoted by Waterland. Moyer, 
Lecture vI.) 

‘“‘ Allowing that a pronoun may sometimes 
refer to a remote antecedent, yet it is not 
so usual, nor so natural, neither should it be 
presumed without manifest necessity” (sbid.). 

eternal life| Eternal life is a title of Jesus 
(supra, i. 2). ‘‘He began his Gospel with 
observing that the Father is God, and the Son 
God also; so he ended his Epistle teaching us 
to believe in the Father as True God, and in 
the Son as true God too.” 

the Very God] ‘The Very, not the true. 
He who alone is really God, as distinguished 
from all idols. It seems most desirable to 
distinguish, when possible, in translation be- 
tween adyOns and adnOwos. ‘The latter, as 
applied to God, denotes the Being who alone 
is worthy to be so called, because He alone 
realizes the idea expressed by God. As op- 
posed to idols, the one word Very implies all 
that is expressed in 1 Cor. vill. 4, 5,6. This 
truly Johannic word is found thirteen times in 
the Gospel and First Epistle of St John, ten 
times in the Apocalypse—only in six other 
places of the New Testament. ‘‘The Son, 
according to John, is not simply God, but 
Very God.” (St Athanas. ‘Orat. Iv. c. Arian.’ 
26, p. 648, edit. Thilo.) 


91. Children! guard yourselves from 
theidols. Guard yeurselves—the aor. (pvda- 


I. JOHN. V. 


This is the true God, and eternal 
life. 

21 Little children, keep yourselves 
from idols. Amen. 


fare) as if by one decided act. Do so—and 
have done with it (See Bp Andrewes, ‘Anglo= 
Cath. Lib.’ I. p. 430; quoted by Donaldson, 
‘Greek Grammar,’ 413). (Cf. the present 
imperative in ‘“‘keep fleeing from idolatry.” 
1 Cor. x. 14.) The present imperative rather 
denotes ‘‘ measured and dispassionate” moral 
precept ; the imperat. aor. is emotional and 
stringent (Winer, ‘Gr. N. T. Diction.’ Part 
111. § xliii. 329, 330.) The word which we 
render guard occurs only in this place in 
St John’s Epistles, and three times in his 
Gospel (xii. 25, 47, xvii. 12). It is dis- 
tinguished from the other word rendered 
keep in the A.V. (znpeiv) as the outward 
guard of a gate or bulwark, from the inward 
principle of watchful observation. ‘Guard 
yourself by the bulwark of the Church—you 
have a strong city.” (Ps. xxxi. 21; Isaiah 
XXVi. I.) The idols (azo rav cidddwr). 
These words must have had great emphasis 
in Ephesus; see Introd. 

Two important inferences from this passage 
should not be overlooked. (1) The horror of 
idols, indicated by the eloquent shudder with 
which the Epistle closes, is a characteristic 
which its writer possesses in common with the 
author of the Revelation. (Apoc. ix. 20, xxi. 
8, XXli. I5.) Cf. also for the idols, note on 
t Thess. i. 9. (2) To St John is often attrie 
buted an intentional and exaggerated develope 
ment of the glory of our Lord. If it were so, 
ne took part in a successful conspiracy to give 
the honour due to God to one whom in his 
heart he believed to be a created being. But 
the instinctive fear and loathing of idolatry, 
manifested by the emphatic close of the First 
Epistle, supplies a moral contradiction to this 
supposition. One curious fact may perhaps 
be noted as a possible effect of St John’s 
teaching. It has been mentioned as singular 
that no example of a heathen temple, con- 
verted into a Christian church, has been found 
in Asia Minor, anywhere on or near the track 
of the earliest line of the progress of Chris- 
tianity. (‘Byzantine Architecture ; illustrated 
by Examples of Edifices erected in the East 
during the Earliest Ages of Christianity, with 
Historical and Archeological Descriptions.’ 
By Charles Texier, Member of the Institute 
of France, and R. Popplewell Pullan, Esq., 
F.R.I.B.A.)—It may be added that both the 
exhortation here, and the abstinence from 
direct use of the Old Testament throughout 
the Epistle, distinctly shew that St John was 
primarily addressing Gentile Christians. (The 
references in iii. 8—12 are to very elementary 
facts of Bible history.) 


347 


348 


I. JOHN. V. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Cuap. v. 6, 7, 8, 9, 16. 


I 


6. The view of this difficult passage given 
in the text is the result of anxious and pro- 
longed consideration. The writer feels sure 
that he has arrived at his conclusion without 
prejudice at least, as he commenced his special 
study of the verse with a leaning to a different 
interpretation. There are some remarks which 
he is desirous to add. (a) It may be objected 
to the sacramental interpretation of the d/ood 
at least that the Holy Communion is in 
Scripture spoken of rather in connection with 
the sacred symbol of the Body than of the 
Blvod of Christ. It should not be forgotten, 
however, that there are two passages in which 
the two sacraments are summarily referred to, 
in each of which the Holy Communion is 
described not by the bread but by the other 
element which stands for the Blood of Christ. 
(Matt. xx. 22, 23; 1 Cor. xii. 13. For the 
double sacramental reference of the second 
text, see Waterland’s powerful argument, 
‘ Works,’ Iv. 669sqq. Cp. also the language 
of Ignatius, év wornptov eis €vwow Tod aipatos 
avrov. ‘Ad Philad.’ Iv.) (2) The view 
taken in the Commentary has been dear to 
many of the greatest divines of the Church 
of England. [‘‘ Behold the Fountain that is 
set open for sin and for uncleanness; a 
fountain not of water only, but of blood too! 
O Saviour, by that water we are washed, by 
that blood we are redeemed. Those two 
sacraments, which Thou didst institute alive, 
flow also from Thee dead; the water of bap- 
tism, which is the laver of regeneration; the 
blood of the New Testament shed for remis- 
‘sion of sins; and these together with the Spirit 
that gives life to them both are the three wit- 
nesses on earth whose attestation cannot fail 
us.’ (Bishop Hall, ‘Contemplations,’ Book 
Iv. Contemp. xxx1I.) ‘I stand upon the 
number fqwo, because they are put together 

1 Cor. x. 3, xii. 13), or learn it from St 
Joan. Christ came not by water alone, but 

y water and blood. And there are three 
that bear witness; the Spirit that is the mi- 
nistry of the Gospel; the water, that is bap- 
tism, and the blood, that is the Lord's Supper.” 
(Bishop Taylor, ‘ Christian Consolation.’ Of 
Sacraments. Chapter v. Works I. xliv. 
Bohn’s edition.) 


‘‘ That they will pierce my side I full well 

know, 
Thatas sin came so sacraments might flow.” 
George Herbert, ‘ The Sacrifice.’ 


The words of the prayer in our Baptismal 
Service, by referring the water from the pierced 
side to Baptism, would seem to imply the 
application to the other sacrament also: ‘‘ Who 
for the forgiveness of our sins didst shed out 
of Thy most precious side both water and 
blood, and didst command Thy disciples that 


they should go and teach all nations, dap.tusng 
them...Sanctify this water to the maysti 
washing away of sin,” &c. (This form is 
taken from ancient Liturgies. See Palmer, 
‘Orig. Liturg.’ 11. 1s It may be added 
that St John’s view of the sacramental life as 
twofold and twofold only exactly corresponds 
with St Paul’s. x Cor. x. 1—4. 


II. 


Otros éorw 6 eOav 8 ddatos Kat atpa- 
ros, “I. X. With verbs such as elvat, yiveo- 
Oat, pxeoOar, and the like, dia expresses the 
state or condition in which the person is, 
comes, &c. (cf. Rom. ii. 27; 1 Cor. xvi. 3; 
2 Cor. ii. 4; Ephes. vi. 18, &c.)—‘* This is 
He who came under the conditions, as it were, 
of water and blood.” See instances from 
classical writers, the LXX. and Josephus in 
Bretschn. ‘ Lex. Man.’ p. 93. 

Ovx ev 7G date povov, ddd’ ev re Vdare 
kai €v 7@ aipatt. "Ev with verbs of coming, 
going, &c., denotes accompanied by, ‘‘ with 
them” (see Num. xx. 20, cai e&jAGev els cuvar- 
THOLW avT@ ev OxA@ Papel, Kai ev xetpt ioxupa, 
LXX.), Luke be 31 5 Rom. me: eae 
iv. 21; 2 Thess. ii. 9; Heb. ix. 25. [Ev ad 
eam conjunctionem que est in com:tatu, ubi 
convenit cum gvy vel pera, quo sensu plerum- 
que legitur cum verbis veniendi, eundi et simi- 
libus, ut proprié sit in medio aliquorum, i.e. 
cum iis in comitatu eorum, et maximé, quam- 
quam zon semper, dicatur de pluribus.” 
Bretschn. ‘ Lex. Man.’ p. 138. Thus Rom. 
XV. 29, €v mAnp@uare evA. EAevoouat, “I will 
so come, as to bene with me fulness of bless- 
ing.” Heb. ix. 25,6 apxepeds eioepyerar ev 
aipari, ‘‘the High Priest enters, accompanied 
by, bringing with him, blood.” The whole 
manifestation of Jesus was, so to speak, under 
the condition of water and blood. He came 
bringing with Him, accompanied by, not the 
water only, but the water and the blood. 

[The supposed polemical allusion to the 
disciples of the Baptist in the words ‘‘ not by 
water only,” would seem to have arisen from 
a failure in perceiving St John’s motive in the 
prominence which he gives to the Baptist. 
The whole Gospel contains a series of wit- 
nesses, of whom the Baptist is the first and 
not the least important (i. 7, v. 36). More- 
over, writing, as St John did, after the other 
Evangelists, partly to supply and fill up, he 
naturally added some particulars about the 
precursor (Tischend. ‘ Pref. Synop. Evang.’ 
p. xxiv., and Eusebius, ‘Hist. E.’ there 
quoted). M. Renan finds this polemical allu- 
sion in the text, which he interweaves into 
his theory with his usual adroitness ‘The 
school of the Baptist did not expire with its 
founder. Many years after the death of the 
two Masters, the Baptism of John was still 
administered. Later (about A.D. 80) the Bap- 


I. JOHN. V. 


fast’s: sect was in opposition to Christianity, 
especially in Asia Minor. The Apostle ap- 
pears to combat it indirectly (Gospel i. 26, 
33, iv. 23 1 John v. 6; cf. Acts xix. 1—4). 
One of the Sibylline poems seems to come 
from the school. As to the sects of Heme- 
robaptists, Baptists, Elchasaites who filled 
Syria, Palestine, and Babylon in the second 
century, and of whom fragments remain to 
our own day in the Mendaites, or so-called 
Christians of St John, it may not be sure 
that they have the same origin with the move- 
ment of John Baptist, or that they are of 
authentic descent from John. His own true 
and peculiar school, half fused into Chris- 
tianity, fell into the position of a petty Chris- 
tian heresy and passed into obscurity.” (‘ Vie 
de Jésus,’ pp. 203, 204.) Niemeyer, ‘de 
Docetis,’ discusses the question whether the 
“School of the Baptist” is referred to here 
and in the Gospel (i. 7, 8, 1s —20, 23, 26— 
29, 34, ili. 2736, v. 36, x. 4). He quotes 
some fragments brought to light by Norberg 
upon the disciples of John, or Sabians}, 
In this sect some critics think they can 
detect a different school of Johannites from 
those who supposed John to be Messiah—a 
type of doctrine which indeed asserted that 
Messiahship belonged neither to our Lord nor 
to John, but (as in the Gnostic and Doketic 
speculations) to a heavenly nature only ap- 
parently endowed with a human body. But 
the gravest doubt rests upon the whole inter- 
pretation, and the question cannot be answered 
—when and 4ow did those dogmas and terms, 
to which St John is supposed to refer polemi- 
cally in his Gospel and in x John v. 6, pass over 
to the Sabians? On the whole, the existence 
of a ‘‘ School of the Baptist,” not only dehind 
the full Pentecostal development of Christia- 
nity but in fierce dogmatic opposition to it, 
seems extremely uncertain. And the general 
object of St John’s Gospel, together with the 
well-ascertained heretical tenets of the Cerin- 
thians—not to mention the purpose of the 
writer of the Epistle to refer constantly to the 
Gospel—supply us with a sufficient key to 
the text.] 

The following remarks from the pen of the 
Rey. Samuel Haughton, M.D. of the Uni- 
versity of Dublin, add to the stores of in- 
formation in the notes on St John’s Gospel, 
and to Dr Stroud’s often-quoted discussion 
on ‘The Physical Cause of the Death of 
Christ.’ They are inserted here by the kind 
permission of the great physiologist by whom 
they were written (see also ‘ Church Quarterly 
Review,’ Jan. 1880) :— 

*H)6ov ody of orparidrat Kat Tod pev Tpa- 
Tov Katéa£av Ta oKEAN, Kal TOU GAAov Tov oU= 
oravpadertos aire’ emi dé Tov "Incody eAOorres, 


1 Norberg, ‘Commentatio de Rel. et Lingua 
Sabzorum’ (in ‘Commentst. Reg. Soc. Goet- 


tingensis’ 1780). 


@s eidov avrop “Fan teOvnxota, ov Katéaéay 
avtod Ta oKéAn* GAN’ eis Tov otpaTiaTaY 
Aoyxn avrov thy mAeuvpayv evuke, xai edOds 
e&n\Oev aipa cai vdwp" Kai 6 €wpakds pepap= 
TUpnKe, Kat dAnOiwy avtov éotiv 7 paprupia® 
kKdkelvos oidev ott GAnOy héyet, iva Kai vpeis 
mioTevonre.— JOhN xix. 32—35. 

Oirds éorw 6 éXOav Bt Ddaros Kat atuaros, 
"Ingots o xpiords, ov év TO Oat povow, 
GAN év ra DOate ai €v To atpare—1 John 
v. 6. 

‘* When the soldier pierced with his 
the side of Christ, He was already dead; and 
the flow of blood and water that followed 
was either a natural phenomenon explicable 
by natural causes or it was a miracle. That 
St John thought it, if not to be miraculous, 
at least to be unusual, appears plainly from 
the comment he makes upon it, and from the 
emphatic manner in which he solemnly declares. 
his accuracy in narrating it. 

‘Repeated observations and experiments. 
made upon men and animals have led me to. 
the following results— 

‘“ When the left side is freely pierced after 
death by a large knife, comparable in size 
with a Roman spear, three distinct cases may 
be noted : 

“rst. No flow of any kind follows the 
wound, except a slight trickling of blood. 

“and. A copious flow of blood only fol- 
lows the wound. 

‘“3rd. A Sow of water only, succeeded by 
a few drops of blood, follows the wound. 

‘© Of these three cases, the first is that which 
usually occurs; the second is found in cases 
of death by drowning and by strychnia, and 
may be demonstrated by destroying an animal 
with that poison, and it can be proved to be 
the natural case of a crucified person; and 
the third is found in cases of death from pleu- 
Tisy, pericarditis, and rupture of the heart, 
With the foregoing cases most anatomists. 
who have devoted their attention to this sub- 
ject are familiar; but the two following cases, 
although readily explicable on physiological 
principles, are not recorded in the books (exe 
cept by St John). Nor have I been fertunate 
enough to meet with them. 

‘4th. A copious flow of water, succeeded 
by a copious flow of blood, follows the 
wound. 

‘sth. A copious flow of blood, succeeded: 
by a copious flow of water, follows the 
wound, 

“Assuming for the present, what I shall. 
shortly prove, that death by crucifixion causes. 
a condition of blood in the lungs similar to- 
that produced by drowning and strychnia, the 
fourth case would occur in a crucified person- 
who had previously to crucifixion suffered 
from pleuritic effusion; and the fifth case 
would occur in a crucified person, who had 
died upon the cross from rupture of the heart, 
The history of the days preceding our Lord’s- 


349 


35° 


crucifixion effectually excludes the supposition 
of pleurisy, which is also out of the question 
if blood first and water afterwards followed 
the wound. There remains, therefore, no 
supposition possible to explain the recorded 
phenomenon except the combination of the cru- 
cifixion and rupture of the heart. 

“That rupture of the heart was the cause of 
the death of Christ is ably maintained by Dr 
William Stroud!; and that rupture of the 
heart actually occurred I firmly believe; but 
at the same time I do not think that mere 
rupture of the heart without crucifixion can 
account for the flow of blood as well as water. 
The order of the phenomenon was the follow- 
ing: the spear of the soldier pierced in succes- 
sion the pleura, the lung, and the pericardium. 
From the pleural cavity nothing lowed; from 
the lung was poured out the dark fluid blood, 
characteristic of crucifixion; and from the 
sac of the pericardium followed the copious 
flow of water (serum), separated after death 
from the blood that had filled this cavity and 
caused instantaneous death, when the sufferer 
closed His long agony, and having said ‘It is 
finished’ bent His head and gave up the 
ghost, because His heart was broke. It re- 
mains now to investigate the causes of death 
in ordinary crucifixion, and to shew that it 
can explain the copious flow of blood that 
followed the wound inflicted after the death 
by the spear of the soldier. 

“‘In crucifixion, as commonly practised by 
the Romans, the sufferer was nailed by the 
feet to the upright beam, and his hands were 
fastened by nails or cords to the cross-beam ; 
while a projecting bar, passing between the 
legs, afforded a partial support to the weight 
of the body. In this constrained position the 
operation of breathing, as far as it is per- 
formed by means of the intercostal muscles, 
was seriously interfered with, because the ribs 
were fixed by the strain caused by the suspen- 
sion of the body from the arms by the in- 
tervention of the great pectoral and serrate 
muscles connecting the upper limbs with the 
trunk; and the unfortunate sufferer was thus 
mechanically reduced to the condition of one 
whose intercostal muscles have been tetanized 
by the action of strychnia or lock-jaw, or 


1 ©A Physical Treatise on the Cause of the 
Death of Christ.’ 8vo. London. Hamilton and 
Adams. 1847. 

I am permitted by the widow and son of an 
eminent physician who recently died from rup- 
ture of the heart to mention the following par- 
ticulars, which may be regarded as typical in 
such cases :— 

1. The pericardium contained a pint and a 
half of fluid. 

2. This fluid consisted of half a pint of soft 
clot, tolerably well separated, and one pint of 
clearish serum. 

3- The examination was made fifty hours 


after death. 


I. JOHN. V. 


other cause capable of producing this result. 
In consequence of the shove-anlie one inter- 
ference with the free action of the intercostal 
muscles, the breathing was conducted alto- 
gether by means of the diaphragm; a condi- 
tion sc painful after a short time, that the 
sufferer involuntarily raised his body by bear- 
ing upon the nails that secured his feet, or by 
swinging himself from the points of suspension 
of his hands, notwithstanding the agony thus 
occasioned, which was easily endured in com- 
parison of the greater agony produced by his 
diaphragmatic breathing. It thus frequently 
happened that a strong man of resolute will, 
by raising himself by the hands, or lifting 
himself on his feet, remained alive upon the 
cross for three or four days, during which his 
blood, in consequence of imperfect oxidation, 
became more and more venous and fluid, and 
was lodged in a larger proportion than was 
natural in the substance of his lungs, so that 
if pierced after death, these organs would have 
given forth a copious flow of Auid black 
blood, like that observed to flow from the 
lungs of an animal killed by strychnia, or 
suffocated in water after much struggling. 
When it was not convenient for the soldiers 
to remain for three or four days on the watch 
beside the cross to prevent the interference of 
their friends, or when, as in the case of Jewish 
criminals (Deut. xxi. 22, 23), it was necessary 
to terminate their sufferings before sunset, 
death was hastened by breaking the bones 
of the legs and arms, near the ankles and 
wrists, by means of an iron mallet. The 
effect of the fracture of the legs and arms was 
to prevent the sufferer from relieving the agony 
of diaphragmatic breathing by restoring the 
action of the intercostal muscles, and he thus 
perished miserably in a few hours of horrible 
suffering, instead of prolonging his life for 
some days by the painful process of relieving 
the intercostal muscles by lifting himself by 
the muscles of the arms and legs. In either 
case death was ultimately produced by defi- 
cient oxidation of the blood, and a post- 
mortem wound of the lung would be followed 
by a copious flow of dark and fluid blood. In 
the case of the Divine Redeemer, this ow of 
blood caused by crucifixion was followed by 
the flow of water due to the rupture of the 
substance of the heart, and the effusion some 
time before death of a large quantity of blood 
into the cavity of the pericardium.” 

The importance of this is obvious. It 
shews that the narrative in St John xix. could 
never have been invented; that the facts re- 
corded must have been seen by an eye=qwitness 5 
and that the eye-witness was so astonished 
that he apparently thought the phenomenon 
miraculous. 


7, 8. This passage stands as above in A.V. 
Elz. has in addition to the Greek words, ors 
Tpeis eiow of paprupodvres, the following :—d» 





I. JOHN. V. 


t} ovpare o Taryp, 6 Aéyos, kal To “Aytov 
Tvevpa" kat ovrot ot Tpets ev elgi. kat Tpets 
elow of paptupodrtes ev TH yp. It is not 
within the scope of the present undertaking to 
enter minutely into a question which is so 
purely one of critical scholarship. It may 
suffice to say that the additional words (1) 
break the continuity of the context, (2) are 
unsupported, (a) by any uncials, (4) by any 
cursives, except three of comparatively recent 
date, (c) by any good MSS. of ancient ver- 
sions, (¢) by any Greek Fathers of the first 
four centuries, (e) by any older Lectionaries. 
Those who still seriously defend the addi- 
tional words are obliged to content them- 
selves, either with attempting to shew the 
relevancy of the interpolation to the context, or 
with trying to decide the issue upon writings 
of Latin Fathers of the African Church. 
There can be no doubt that the sagacity of 
Cardinal Wiseman, and the learning of M. 
Lehir, have added to the evidence of a dispo- 
sition on the part of the teachers of the Afri- 
can Church from Tertullian to Fulgentius, if 
not to quote the words in the fuller form, at 
least to make the addition in full or in part 
an almost inseparable gloss. Fulgentius not 
only cites the words, but asserts that they 
were quoted by St Cyprian (‘Respons. ad 
Arian.’ ad fin., ‘De Trinit. ad Felicem’). In 
the confession of faith of 400 Bishops at the 
Conference of Carthage, convoked by Hun- 
netic (A.D. 484), the passage occurs in part 
at least. St Victor of Vita transcribes the 
confession. In it occurs the sentence: ‘‘ Et 
ut adhuc luce clarius unius divinitatis esse 
cum Patre et Filio Spiritum Sanctum docea- 
mus, Joannis evangeliste testimonio compro- 
batur. Ait namque—‘tres sunt qui testimo- 
nium perhibent in czlo, Pater, Verbum, et 
Spiritus Sanctus; et hi tres unum sunt.’” 
(‘ Hist. Persec. Vandal.’ Lib. 111.) It is, 
therefore, scarcely accurate to assert that 
Vigilius Tapsensis is ‘the first of the 
Latin Fathers who quoted the spurious 
words.” (Tischendorf, ‘N. T. Grecé,’ Edit. 
7, Il. 226; Griesbach, ‘ Dissert.’? at end of 
Tom. iI. Crit. Edit. of N.T., 1806.) Inge- 
nious attempts have also been made to find 
allusions in St Augustine. ‘‘Habeto duo vel 
tres testes, P. et F. et Sp. Sanctum.” ‘In 
Joan. Evang. Tract.’ XXXVI. 10,—‘* Deus 
itaque summus et verus cum Verbo suo, et 
Sp. Sancto, gue tria unum sunt.” ‘De Civ. 
D.’ v. 11. St Cyprian writes in one 
passage—‘‘de P. et F. et Sp. Sancto scrip- 
tum est ‘et tres unum sunt’” (‘De Unit. 
Eccl.”), and in another, ‘‘cum tres unum 
sint.” (‘Epist. ad Jubaien.’) Tertullian also 
quotes the words ‘‘tres unum sunt” (* Adv. 
Iren.’ c. XXvV.), and in a way which might 
not unfairly be contended to indicate that he 
drew his citation from v. 7 (mot v. 8), and 
that he used the words as words of Scripture. 
There can be no doubt that in the chain of 


African witnesses (Tertullian, Cyprian, Au- 
gustine, the Bishops at Carthage, Victor of 
Vita, and Fulgentius) there is something re- 
markable. But there is no passage from these 
African Latin Fathers which cannot be ac- 
counted for by the Trinitarian allusion which 
unquestionably underlies the authentic pas- 
sage, or by the words tres unum sunt specially 
impressing themselves upon the Church of 
Africat. It is impossible to shew any reason 
for believing that the African Churches alone 
Were in possession of the contested verse, or 
to account for a passage of such dogmatic 
importance having disappeared from the Greek 
MSS. and from the versions of every other 
branch of the Church. Why should Africa 
have enjoyed a more ancient Latin version 
of the N. T. than Rome itself, drawn directly 
from Greek MSS., older and more complete 
than any which we now possess? (The argu- 
ment in favour of the interpolations is drawn 
out fully in ‘Two letters on 1 Joh. v. 7, 
containing also an inquiry into the origin 
of the first Latin version of Scripture, com- 
monly called the Itala.. By N. Wiseman, 
D.D. Rome, 1833. M. Lehir’s treatise has 
not yet been published, but an abstract of 
its contents is given ‘Introd. au N. T.’ par 
H. de Valroger, Il. 552568. Bentley’s 
golden words may well re-assure any who 
suppose that the candour of Christian criti- 
cism has weakened the proof of the great 
Christian dogma of the Trinity: “If the 
fourth century knew that text, let it come in, 
in God’s name; but if that age did not know 
it, then Arianism in its height was beat down 
without the help of that verse; and let the fact 
prove as it will the doctrine is unshaken.” 


(‘ Letter,’ January 1, 1717.) 


Q. It will be seen how directly this meets 
the objection of perhaps the most learned and 
certainly the most eloquent of the opponents 
of St John’s Gospel: ‘‘ The School of St John 
in Asia Minor was characterized by a ten- 
dency, commoner in antiquity than now, but 
very articulately marked in all mystic ideolo- 
gists, viz. indifference to historical reality. 
Without the slightest scruple that school 


1 Bentley appears to have supposed that ‘‘Cy- 
prian’s words were transcribed into the margin, 
or between the lines of v. 8, of a book of some 
one who had a great veneration for that Father, 
as a gloss, which is very common in MSS. Next, 
a copyist, finding the words so inserted, ima- 
gined that the former copyist had by mistake 
omitted them, and therefore put them in the 
Text. And thus the insertion might rest till a 
long time after, and then the sham Preface must 
be made, complaining of the unfaithful Trans- 
lator for leaving it out!” See Bp Wordsworth’s 
reasons for supposing that the remarks in Cas- 
ley’s ‘Preface to Catalogue of Royal Library’ 
represent Bentley’s Preelection of May 1, 1719. 
ONG ie sles nik 24 


35! 


352 


applies the principle which was destined to 
become Hegelian, ‘it ought to be, therefore it 
és. See the fourth Gospel. It is evident to 
rigorous criticism that that Gospel systemati- 
cally subordinates chronological order and the 
tendency of its narratives, to the dogma of 
the Incarnate Word.” (M. Réville, ‘ Irenzus.’) 
Surely this “‘ mystic ideology,” this ‘ indiffe- 
rence to historical reality,” is inconsistent with 
the profession in x John v. 9, of the essentially 
historical principle of belief upon evidence. 
The tradition of the Church credits St John 
with a grave and awful reverence for histori- 
cal truth. It asserts that he degraded from 
the ministry a Presbyter of Asia Minor who 
confessed that he wrote the apocryphal acts 
of Paul and Thecla from excessive zeal for 
the honour of that Apostle. This very an- 
cient tradition is an indication of that which 
was felt to be St John’s view upon such 
matters. The guilt of the Asiatic Presbyter 
would have been light indeed compared with 
that of St John himself had he placed words 
in the mouth of the Saviour which He never 
spokel, [The dramatic truth of St John’s 
narrative in his Gospel, the delineation of 
character, the consistency of language, in the 
various persons introduced, should be studied 
and dwelt upon as a proof of its historical 
veracity. A great master of fiction has said 
for himself—‘‘I neither can, nor do pretend, 
to the observation of complete accuracy even 
in matters of outward costume, much less in 
the more important points of language and 
manners ;” and he speaks of ‘the fair license 
due to the author of a fictitious composi- 
tion” (Sir W. Scott, Preface to ‘ Ivanhoe.’) 
. Now in point of ‘language and manners,” 

St John has never been proved to fail. Either 
the delineator of the Samaritan woman, the 
blind man, Thomas, Martha and Mary, was 
a consummate artist, or a true chronicler. 
Certainly he was not the former; therefore, 
he was the latter.] 


16. The general principle laid down in 
the note (supra) will enable us to deal with 
most of the interpretations which have been 
given of ‘‘sin unto death.” 

The different views may be briefly tabulated 
thus: 

1. Obstinate unbelief. 

2. Sins punished with mortal disease (ac- 
cording to the synagogue) or made capital 
by the civil power (Michaelis—Serenfeld. 
* Syllog. Dissert, Theol.’ p. 470). 

3. Sin against the Holy Gas (Matt. xii. 
31) [but if so, it would more explicitly 
described]. (Schol. Matth. Beza, Wolff. So 
many of the Fathers.) 


1 This tradition is at least as old as Tertullian, 
born A.D. 190 (Tertullian, ‘De Bapt.’ 17; Hieron. 
*de Script. Eccles.’ vii. See Tischend. ‘Act. 
Apost. Apoc.’ Prolegomena, XXI. sqq.). 


I. JOHN. V. 


4. Sin, obstinate and unrepented, ‘* when 
a man sins without any feeling leading to 
repentance.” Grav ris auaptiav advaicOnres 
€xn mpos peravo.ay, Schol, Matthai, 146—-230. 
oni seems to adopt this, referring to 
Judas’ example (Schol. Matth. GEcumenius). 

5. After true knowledge of God, sinning 
against the brotherhood of the Church, and 
resisting the grace of reconciliation. (Augus- 
tine: ‘‘ Peccatum fratris ad mortem puto esse, 
cum post agnitionem Dei per gratiam Domini 
nostri Jesu Christi quisquam oppugnat fraters 
nitatem et adversus ipsam gratiam, qua re 
conciliatus est Deo, invidentie fecibus age- 
batur” (afterwards, “si in hac perversitate 
finierit hanc vitam”). ‘‘ Peccatum autem non 
ad mortem est si quisquam non amorem @ 
Jratre alienaverit, sed officia /raternitatis 
debita per alienam infirmitatem animi non 
exhibuerit.” ‘Opp. Aug.’ Tom. m1. P. 2, 
197 (quoted by Licke). Aquinas, Suarez.) 

6. Sin leading to death and hell. 

7. Final impenitence. 

8. Blasphemy (: S. ii. 25), or apostasy to 
idolatry. 

g. Sin from its enormity practically incor- 
rigible, like that of Judas, Sodom, &c. 

to. Views which may be called Eeclesias- 
tical. 

(a) The excommunicate—for whom ne 
solemn public prayers were made, thougr 
private intercession was not forbidden (‘* A man 
for whom intercessory prayers of the Church 
might be hurtful”). Neander. Grotius : 
‘Qui cum peccaverint moniti peccare per- 
gunt, aut certé discipline, que in ecclesia 
instituta est, se subjicere nolunt,” but com- 
pare 2 Tim. ii. 25, 26. 

(4) The state of sin described Heb. x. 28, 
29, and referred to by the Second Council of 
Nicza, i.e. after Church censure ad.dpOwrov 
peeve. So there were among the Jews three 
degrees of sin, of which Schammatha (‘there 
is death”) was third. Bp Wordsworth cites 
Schoettgen to this effect, who states that 
John’s language (x John v. 16) is “‘ grounded 
in Hebrew thought, law, and language.” 
(See especially Liicke, Commentary on this 
passage, who has supplied much of the ma- 
terial here employed.) This note may close 
with a brief extract from a great English 
divine. 

‘This passage led Jovinian to teach that a 
baptized man should never sin. Hence it was 
inferred that if a man falls away, he is lost 
beyond hope (St Hieron. ‘adv. Jovinian.’ 
Lib. 11. Tom. Iv. Part ii. p. 193). Some 
acts of sin are so incident to the con- 
dition of men that the man who hath com- 
mitted them is still within the methods of 
pardon. But “‘unto death,” i.e. some men pro- 
ceed beyond the measures and economy otf 
Gospel, and the usual methods and probabili- 
ties of repentance, by obstinacy, or despising 
offers of grace and means of pardon. For 


I. JOHN. V. 


suck a man John does not encourage us to 
pray: if he be such our prayers will do him 
no good. But because no man can tell the 
last minute or period of pardon, therefore 
Scripture left us under indefinite restraint and 
caution—discretory enough to represent the 
sad state of things in which the impenitent 
have immerged themselves, yet so indefinite 
and cautious that we may not be too forward 
in applying it to particulars, nor in prescrib- 
ing measures to Divine Mercy, nor in passing 
fina) sentence pon our brother before we 


New Test—Vor. IV. 


have heard our Judge Himself speak. Ev 

act of sin ae away something from the 
contrary grace; but if the root abide in the 
ground, the plant is still alive, and may bring 
forth fruit again. But he only is dead who 
hath thrown off God for ever, or entirely, 
with his very heart.” (Bishop Taylor on 
‘Repentance.”) So St Ambrose, Eph. ii. 1, 
‘Sinners sin into death, i.e. habitual, refrac- 
tory, pertinacious and incorrigible sinners, in 
ee there is scarcely any hope or sign of 


353 


2. gldsee User byl salty Nene sot 
=) en gid Mrree [nen ane Fae Me 
Hr nike fun Sit We Nid. ere ee . ; 
wart afin bak “eile (RS a tt od Bites BON onB 
Brae fuceh f thie ne Suh divi “Bak toate hee 
etl () ‘Tey meni ated edt 7 aaa ae 
tO | wit. he Sadie Bake 
: ] (4 Lt. iat Pas ' aeiis f 
oil gaspinc* “fhrerwiboat aa 
arr ee Nite WUORGRRLT ED SPIE.» re , TONE a 
on tO wid yoR vows ved Mode « gricee) OF 0G Poe 
“atl ve. ertxl adios 
< 






TE. JOFN. 


Senior ergo, cui scilicet cycnea suppeteret quedam gratia senectuts. 


(S. Ambros. ‘In Psalm.’ xxxvi. 25.) 


INTRODUCTION. 


iB 
1. To whom is the Epistle addressed ?— 


fo a Christian woman, Kyria. 
2. Reasons for this conclusion. 


II. 


1. Whois ‘the Elder” spoken of? 

(a) The style and contents point to St 
John, zegatively and positively. 

(4) Two conclusions adverse to St John’s 
authorship both of the Epistles and of the 
Gospel drawn from the title of Elder. 

A. The title of Presbyter could not have 
been assumed by an Apostle. 

Answel. 

B. Objection from Eusebius’s interpreta- 


I. 


, 1. Among the first questions which 
naturally suggest themselves to readers 
of the Epistle are those connected with its 
opening words. To whom is the letter 
inscribed—to the Church in geveral, or 
to a particular Church personified? Or, 
if addressed to an individual, what is 
her name? 

The writer of the present notice has 
slowly, and almost reluctantly, come to 
- the conclusion that the Second Epistle 
of St John was sent to an individual 
Christian woman, Kyria*. The reluct- 


1 The name seems to be Kyria—(z1) Because, 
had the name been Electa the order of the words 
would, probably, have been different. (2) Be- 
cause the position of the word Kupla (v. 5) best 
corresponds with the notion of its being a proper 
name. (3) Because the sister of her to whom 
the Epistle is inscribed is also spoken of at the 
close as “‘thine e/e¢¢ sister” (ra téxva Tijs ddeA- 
is cov Tis éxAexTNs, V. 13). (4) Because there 
is ample evidence that st the time to which the 
letter must be referred Kyria was in use as a 


tion of the passage of Papias preserved in his 
History. 
Answer. 
III. 


Interest and importance of the letter as 
addressed 1. to a Christian widow— 

2. toan Ephesian widow. 

3- The difficulty in accepting the fact that 
the Epistle is addressed to an individual 
woman arises to many minds from . to. 


IV. 

Analysis of the Second Epistle of St John. 
Vv. 

External testimony. 


ance arises partly from the weight of 
authority agains? this interpretation. It 
is observed by Bp Wordsworth that “in 
an ancient painting at St Maria in Tras- 
tevera at Rome, Christ is represented as 
enthroned with the Church as the Queen 
on His right hand, and in it a book 
with the words inscribed—‘ Veni, Zlecta 
mea, et ponam te in thronum meum’.’” 
This is the representation in pictorial 
form of the interpretation of St Jerome’, 


proper name, which can scarcely be said of 
Electa. (See references in Liicke, ‘Comment. 
iib. die Brr. des Johann.’ p. 35.) Kyria is in 
meaning equivalent to the Chaldaic NAY 
(Mdp6a, domina). E 

1 New Testament, Vol. 11. ‘Catholic Epistles,’ 
pp- 127, 128. 

2 After quoting ‘‘una est columba mea...una 
est matri suz, e/ecfa genitrici suze” (Cant. vi. 8), 
that father adds—‘‘ad guam scribit Johannes 
epistolam, senior electe, dominz et filiis ejus.” 
‘Epist. ad Ageruchiam,’ CXXIII. (xXcI. edt. 
Benedict. Opp. Tom 1. 1053, Edt. Migne.) 
et ke Athanas.’ has, however, ypages 

y, 


Z2 


356 


and of many others, ancient and modern, 
from whom one is unwilling to separate. 
The reasons for a respectful dissent from 
this interpretation are the following. 

2. It seems easy to see why many 
writers thought themselves constrained 
to have recourse to allegory. (a) The 
person addressed by St John, if person 
it were, was lost in obscurity. This was 
sufficiently indicated by the fact that 
even the name was not. absolutely cer- 
tain. But the first verse interpreted of 
a woman, Kyria, and her children, 
would imply that they were known 
and loved far and wide through the 
Church, by “all who knew the truth’.” 
A personification of a church, or of the 
Church, as a woman with many sons, 
would remove the difficulty. (4) The 
objections which were raised against the 
Epistle to Philemon in some quarters 
will serve to shew how brevity and an 
everyday tone were apt to be considered 
inconsistent with inspiration. The oracle 
of God could hardly condescend to the 
affairs of common life, to the interests 
of a slave, to the feelings and spiritual 
welfare of a widow and her family. But 
exalt the widow into a mystic figure of 
the Church mourning for her Lord, and 
the objection would be removed’. (¢) 
It certainly would appear singular to 
many that a note to a private friend 
should find its place among the Epistles 
known as Catholic. (d) The language 
of St Peter®, whether interpreted of the 
Church in Rome* or of the Church in 
the literal Babylon’, might seem to 
afford an almost exact parallel®. 


1 «¢St John’s Second Epistle impresses us as 
being addressed to a community, for, if a private 
family were signified by ‘the elect lady and her 
children,’ the Apostle could not have said that 
not only he, but all they also that have known 
the truth, ‘loved the children of the elect one’” 
(Dollinger, ‘ First Age of the Church,’ 1. 163). 

2 For a beautiful use of the image of the 
Church as ‘‘a widow indeed, and therefore strong 
indeed,” see Augustin. ‘ Enarrat,’ Ps. cxxxi. 

3 7 év BaBuAGu cuvekdexTy, I Pet. v. 13. 

“ See Buxtorf on the symbolical names of 
Rome familiar to the Jewish mind in his 
* Lex. Chald. Talm. Rabb.’ s.v. OVIN, and M. 
Renan, ‘ L’Antechrist,’ p. 36 and p. 122. 

5 See the profoundly interesting discussion in 
Introd. to 1 Peter in this volume. Cf. also 
Bp Wordsworth, ‘New Testament,’ 11. ‘Catholic 
Epistles,’ pp, 68, 69. 

§ Another objection from v. 10 will be con- 
sidered below. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


Of these objections, the first presses 
the words too closely, and does not 
make sufficient allowance for the elec- 
tric current of sympathy between the 
Churches in St John’s day. The second 
will make no impression upon modern 
Christian thought and feeling. The 
third has been answered by Liicke. “If 
by the term Catholic Epistles we are to 
understand apostolical letters, St Paul’s 
(6 ardaroXos) only excepted, the above- 
mentioned difficulty is entirely removed. 
But even on the other hypothesis (that 
the ancients originally gave the name of 
Catholic to no epistles but such as were 
really encyclical) the difficulty is not 
serious. In some Churches, apparently, 
the Second and Third Epistles were not 
at first incorporated in the collection 
of Catholic Epistles. When these short 
letters were, sooner or later, received 
into that collection, one or other of two 
reasons may have been taken into ac- 
count. Possibly these brief notes may 
have been considered as appendices or 
accompaniments to the First Epistle* 
Possibly no more suitable place in the 
canon could be found for their canonical 
preservation, than just beside the First 
Epistle; which arrangement, as they 
were so brief, did not in the least alter 
the original signification of the term 
Catholic Epistles*.” In reference to the 


1 The tone of this is rather expressed by Ben- 
gel’s beautiful praise of the N. T. “Ad mulieres, 
liberos, servos, adolescentes dirigitur sermo atque 
ad omnes omnino.” (On Heb. xiii. 34.) This 
inspired note to a widow is worthy of the disciple 
of Him who so tenderly considered the widow’s 
circumstances, (Mark xii. 42; Luke xxi. 2.) 
Cf. note on the mention of Apphia in Philem. 
v. 2, Vol. 111. 831. 

2 So Irenzeus seems to have regarded 2 John 
(‘Adv. Heres.’ 111. 18). ‘* Joannes Domini dis- 
cipulus confirmat dicens [Joh. xx. 31]. ...Et in 
Epistola sua sic testificatus est [1 Joh. ii. r8— 
22]. ...Et discipulus ejus Joannes in predicta 
epistola fugere eos [hzreticos] preecepit, ‘ulti 
seductores exierunt in hunc mundum, qui nom 
confitentur Fesum Christum in carne venisse. 
Hite est seductor et Antichristus: videte eos, ne 
perdatis quod operati estis’ [2 Joh. 7, 8]. Et 
Tursus in Epistola ait: ‘multi pseudoprophetze 
exierunt de szculo...non est ex Deo,’ sed ex 
Antichristo est [1 Joh. iv. r—3]. ...Rursus in 
Epistola clamat [1 Joh. v. 1].” It will be ob- 
served that 2 Joh. 7, 8 is cited as from the first 
Epistle—perhaps from a mere fa A 
however, for the reason indicated by Liicke 
the text. 

3 Liicke, ‘Comment.’ p. 355. 


~~ 


THE SECOND EPISTLE OF JOHN. 


last argument for the mystical interpreta- 
tion Bp Lightfoot adds—“ The salutation” 
to the “elect lady” (v. 1) from her “elect 
sister” (v. 13) will then be a greeting 
sent to one Church from another ; just 
as in 1 Peter the letter is addressed at 
the outset éxAexrots Idvrov x.7.A. (i. 1) 
and contains at the close a salutation 
from 7 év BaBuvAdve ouverdexry (Vv. 13) 
This is the strongest point that can be 
raised for the hypothesis, and has unques- 
tionable weight. But the mysterious fone 
of St Peter in the passage, and the sym- 
bolical colouring imparted by the word 
“ Babylon,” makes the passage in St Peter 
very different from the straightforward 
and litera,tone of St John in his Second 
Epistle*. 


II. 


A question not only of greater interest, 
but of much deeper importance, arises as 
to the authorship of the Epistle, and is 
suggested by the first words which meet 
the eye of the reader—(o zpecurepos). 


* Who is the “ Elder” ? 


1. (2) The style and contents of this 
short note point irresistibly to the pen 
and heart of St John—and that negatively 
and fositively. Some words usual with 
the other Apostolic writers, and in all 


1 *Epistles to Colossians and Philemon,’ p. 
305. ‘‘I take the view,” pursues Bishop Light- 
foot, ‘‘that the Kupia addressed in the Second 
Epistle of St John is some Church personified.” 
““The whole tenour of the Epistle,” it is said, 
‘seems to imply this, especially vv. 4—7 sq.” 
But surely the Apostle might well rejoice to 
find some of a private friend’s numerous children 
walking in the truth. And the warning against 
admitting deceivers into the house is, under the 
circumstances of the time, as suitable to an indi- 
vidual as toa Church. The view which makes 
Kyria an individual is not without valuable sup- 
port, ancient and modern, e.g. ‘‘Scripta est vero 
ad guandam SBabyloniam,” Clem. Alexand. 
“Adumbr. ad 11. Joann.’ Opp. Tom, III. p. rorr ; 
and the excellent ‘Synopis S. Script.’ (attributed 
to Athanasius) simply says, radrny ws mpecBirepos 
ypaper Kupia xal rots téxvos airns. Athanas 
Opp. Iv. 410 (edit. Migne). 

? Other arguments for the mystical interpreta- 
tion are derived from the representation of the 
Church under the figure of a woman in the 
‘Pastor of Hermas,’ and from the Scholium in 
Matthai (éxXexrqy. Kuplay Aéyee tTHy & Tur 
téxw éxxAnolay ws THv Tov Kuplov didacKxadlayv 
dxpi89 puAdrroveay) compared with the old title 
mpos IlapGévouvs. See Reithmayer, ‘ Introd. 
Canon. B. oi N. T.’ (Fr. Translat. of Valroger, 
iI. 410). ; 


357 


the range of the earliest Christian litera- 
ture, are not found in it. Language and 
ideas which lie outside the Johannic 
circle of the Gospel and rirst Epistle, 
lie outside the Second Epistle also. 
“Church” does not occur. The opening 
salutation (v. 3) is, in all probability— 
“srace, mercy, peace, from God the 
Father, and from Jesus Christ'”—the 
full title, “‘ Lord Jesus Christ,” not being 
in the Gospel or First Epistle. The 
teaching about Antichrist is peculiar to 
St John and to the First Epistle, and was 
especially needed in the Churches of Asia 
Minor. The wniter of this Epistle says 
with energy—“‘this is that Deceiver and 
that Antichrist*?’’ Much more convinc- 
ing than the many similarities of style is 
the constant reference to the First Epistle. 
High above all the paths by which that 
Epistle led its readers were warnings 
against the ‘Aree especial dangers of the 
time and place. (1) The danger of deny- 
ing the true Christ; the peril of losing 
Christ, and God with Him—for he who 
has not Christ has not God. (2) The 
danger of failing in true love to the 
brethren. (3) The danger of not ob- 
serving Christ’s commandments. Every 
Christian wanted to have these three great 
cardinal warnings constantly at hand, en- 
graven upon his heart. He wanted to be 
able to say to himself some short, sharp 
watchword against the ¢hree perils of the 
time. Precisely the same ¢A7ee dangers are 
presented to us in the Second Epistle 
upon a narrower canvas, and in a more 
concise form. The treatise is compressed 
into a leaflet. Hence the especial value 
of the Second Epistle. Easily copied 
and remembered, it was wafted from 
spot to spot, from city to city, from 
Church to Church It was recognized as 
Catholic in both senses of the word—in 
its universal circulation, and in its claim 
to universal acceptance as having come 
from an Apostle’s hand. To apply the 
language of the time, it was felt that the 
feather, small as it is, had dropped from 


1 See Tischendorf, ‘ Noy. 
Pars Altera, 231 (edit. 7, 1859). 

2 6 wAdvos cai o “Avtixpictos, 2 John v 7. 
The term zAavos, indeed, is not exclusively 
Johannic (cf. Matt. xxvii. 63; 2 Cor. vi. 8), nor 
the kindred verb and substantive, but the verb 
at least is a favourite with St John (John vii. 12, 
47; 1 John i. 8, ii. 26, iii. 7, iv. 6 (wAdyn). The 
verb is found in eigh# places of the Apocalypse). 


Testam. Gree.’ 


> 


> 


358 


the «.gle’s wing.. Here are its three 
talism: ns—(1) Against the peril of losing 
Christ, and losing God with Him. 
“ Many’ deceivers are gone out into the 
world, those who continue in not con- 
fessing Jesus Christ coming in Flesh. 
This is the Deceiver and the Antichrist. 
Every one leading forward and abiding 
not in the doctrine which is Christ’s, 
hath not God. He that abideth in the 
doctrine, he hath both the Father and 
the Son” (2 John w. 7, 9). (2) Against 
the peril of losing true love of the 
brethren. “Not as though I wrote a 
new commandment unto thee, but that 
which we had from the beginning, that 
we love one another” (v. 5). (3) Against 
the peril of ceasing to observe Christ’s 
commandment. “And this is love, that 
we walk after His commandments. This 
is the commandment, that, as ye have 
heard from the beginning, ye should walk 
in it’’ (v. 6). The style and contents of 
the Second Epistle of St John, we may 
confidently conclude, lead us back to St 
John the Apostle as its author. 

(2) The title of rpeoBurepos, assumed 
by the writer of these two short letters 
(2 John 1; 3 John 1), leads us, 
however, into a controversy of much 
importance in its bearing upon the au- 
thorship of the Gospel and the First 
Epistle, which have always been attri- 
buted to the beloved disciple. Two 
conclusions are confidently maintained 
by many modern critics. (A) It is 
allowed, indeed, that the Second and 
Third Epistles of John are from one 
hand, and ¢a¢ the hand of the writer of 
the fourth Gospel and of the First 
Epistle. But the New Testament, it is 
urged, gives us one clear indication of 
the author’s position, which effectually 
excludes the supposition that he can 
have been an Apostle. For the writer 
of the Second and Third Epistles, who 
is undeniably the same with the author 
of the two other great Johannic works, 
twice calls himself o zpeoBvrepos. But 
the title, in such a connection, can only 
designate the official presbyter, the 
minister of a particular Church, and 
cannot possibly have been assumed by 
an Apostle. (B) The scanty fragments— 
of ecclesiastical history have preserved 
us one page written by Papias, which 
enables us to identify the writer of the 


INTRODUCTION TO 


Gospel and the three Epistles with the 
Presbyter John spoken of by that 
writer. 

(A) It is to be observed, however, 
that one expression used by St Peter 
presents a parallel to the language of 
St John (2 John v. 1; 3 John z. 1), 
even if we are compelled to understand 
by it the official term for the ordinary 
minister of a Church, which seems how- 
ever to be unlikely in this case. If St 
John calls himself “the Presbyter,” St 
Peter addresses the presbyters as “ the 
fellow-Presbyter.” This may confidently 
be maintained, in spite of the doubt 
which has been thrown upon the inter- 
pretation by the arguments @f Grotius. 
If it is necessary then to suppose that 
the word Presbyter in this place is tech- 
nical and official (which appears more 
than doubtful as we proceed to shew), 
it would not, therefore, follow that an 
Apostle could not apply it to himself. 

(B) Whatever the word may mean, 
in the famous passage preserved by 
Eusebius? Papias apparently assigns the 
title to several other Apostles by in- 
ference. It would seem more than 
probable that by the Presbyter John he 
simply indicates the Apostle St John a 
second time*. And Papias mentions him 


1 wpeaBurépovs Tovs év vuiv wapaxahe O cup 
mpecBurepos, i Pet. v. I. 

2 ef dé wou Kal mapnKodovOnkds Tis Tots mpec- 
Burépos €Oor, rods Tav mpecBurépwy dvéxpwor 
Abyous—rt’ Avdpéas 7 rh Ilérpos elev" 7 ri Pidur- 
mos’ 9 TL Owuds, 7} "TdxwBos- 7 Tl Iwdvvns, 7 
Mar@aios, 7 tis repos Tav Tod Kuplov uabnrar: 
& te ’Apioriwy kal o mpecBtrepos "Iwavyns, ol Tod 
Kuplov pa@yral Aéyovow. (Papias apud Euseb. 
* Hist. Eccl.’ Lib. m1. cap. ult. See also Routh, 
* Reliq. S.’ Tom. I. 8, and notes, pp. 21—25). 

8 Every one who has looked into the contro- 
versy of course knows that Eusebius draws a 
different inference, that he lays stress upon the 
fact that Papias ‘‘counts John’s name twice 
over” (dts xarapiOpodvrt airy 76 "Iwdvvou dvoya). 
** Another John Papias mentions with those who 
are not of the number of the Apostles, placing 
Aristion before this John, and styling him pres- 
byter. Thus by these things evidence is given 
to the truth of the story that two of the same 
name lived in Asia Minor, and that the two 
have tombs in Ephesus, and that each tomb is 
called to this day the tomb of John. To which 
statements it is well to attend. For it is pro- 
bable that the second—if some will not have it that 
the first—beheld the Revelation which goes under 
the name of John.” The questionable character 
of these inferences of Eusebius has been well 
shewn by Riggenbach, ‘Lieb Jesu (French 
Transl. pp. 59, 60). 


THE SECOND EPISTLE OF JOHN. 


with this attribute, not because the second 
John is a different person from the first, 
but because he wishes to indicate the 
two different ways in which he obtained 
the information which he so much pre- 
ferred, “from the living and abiding 
voice” of man to the less vivid narra- 
tive of books’. In the first place, he 
drew his information from those who 
had themselves followed the Elders— 
those Elders being Andrew, Peter, 
Philip, Thomas, James, John, Matthew, 
#.é. the Apostles. In the second place, 
Papias bethinks himself of the still 
nearer approach to the words and deeds 
of Jesus which he had enjoyed, and 
names two actual disciples of the Lord 
with whom he had himself conversed. 
First, he places Aristion, who was simply 
one of the actual disciples of Jesus; 
then he reserves for the last place, for 
the crown and climax of witnesses, one 
who was not merely a disciple of Jesus, 
but the Apostle (0 zpeoPvrepos) John*.— 
» © The Elder,” then, at the beginning of 
our Epistle signifies the aged Apostle 
who had seen Jesus, the oldest of 
those who had walked with the Lord, 
the one existing representative of holier 
days and a more favoured generation. 
Christian art represents St John in the 
beauty of youth. In these two Epistles, 
written with a feeble hand which 
seems to shrink from the exertion of 
dipping the pen in ink*, we see the 
beauty of old age. Both representations 
are true. St John is ever young and 


1 od yap Ta ék Tay BiBAlwy TocovTov pe wWpe- 
Aeiy UreAduBavoy doov Ta mapa fwons pwv7s Kal 
pevovons (ap. Routh, ‘Rel. Sac.’ Tom. I. p. 8). 

2 aze Apiotlwv kal 6 mpecBitepos “Iwavyns ol 
700 Kuplov pabnral Aéyovow. See Riggenbach 
ut supra. May we not see the vividness of a 
present personal recollection in the present 
(Aéyouow)? What he has heard second-hand 
belongs to the past, to the days when he used to 
inquire—what he is perpetually hearing is the un- 
dying accent of Aristion and of St John the 
Apostle—the things which they are ever saying 
to him. (See Bishop Lightfoot in the ‘ Contem- 
porary Review,’ ut supra.) 

3 Is there not something significant of old age 
in the two passages, 2 John v. 12, 3 John z. 13? 
The author of this note is irresistibly reminded 
of an interview with a distinguished diplomatist 
a few weeks before his death, at an age nearly as 
advanced as that of St John. He kindly traced a 
few lines at the writer’s request, with a gentle and 
courteous smile, asking to have his pen dipped 
in the ink, with an observation to the effect that 
‘*even that becomes an exertion for an old man.” 


359 


ever old. Those only who in youth 
have something of the calm and purity 
of old age carry into their old age some- 
thing of the fire and freshness of youth. 

We conclude that the Second Epistle 
of St John comes from the Apostle, and 
is addressed to an individual. 


III. 


1. The conclusion that this truly Apos- 
tolical letter is addressed to an individual, 
a woman, a widowed mother, seems to 
give it a deeper interest. The great 
question about any religion is not 
whether it is capable of making con- 
verts in a single generation. Can it 
mould and influence those converts to 
the late evening of a prolonged life? 
Can it communicate its power undi- 
minished to a second generation? Can 
it find its way into the life of the family? 
This Epistle answers the question at a 
later date than any other part of the 
New Testament, and thus supplies what 
we scarcely find elsewhere. The ab- 
sence of all reference to Kyria’s husband 
makes us conclude that she was a widow. 
It would appear that she had not had 
daughters, or at least did not possess 
them now’; but she had sons, probably - 
many, at all events three at least’. 
Upon these sons the Gospel had laid 
the strong grasp of its purity. Their life 
had touched the centre of Truth, and 
from it described the perfect circle of 
Love. St John found them making 
their continuous life-walk * in the sphere 
of a truth which was not only specula- 
tive ; for they who had lost one earthly 
parent kept ever in the path indicated 
by a command coming from the Father‘, 
and received by all His children. In 
its main particulars, the naturalinferences 
from the Epistle would correspond with 
the historical tradition of the life of St 
John. Its whole tone, and the title of 
“the Ancient” or “Elder” (o peoBurepos) 
indicate the writer’s old age. Equally 


1 rois Téxvos airns ots ys dyard, 2 John 
D. I. 

2 eupnxa éx Tov Téxvuv cov wepixaroivTas ép 
GAnGelg, 2 John z. 4. 

3 repurarovvTas, v. 4. 

4 adds évrohy éAdBoumey mapa Tov warpbs, 
2 Tohn 2. 4. 


360 


would it seem apparent that the Apostle 
was absent from his usual place of 
abode. ‘That absence might, possibly, 
have been one of the tours of visitation 
for the appointment of Bishops and 
regulation of Churches mentioned by 
an early writer'.. But men are not apt 
to write in such a strain, except to 
those who have been severed from them 
by barriers not easily crossed*. The close 
of the note, after its solemn warnings, 
is irradiated by a gleam of joy at the 
prospect of a meeting, so full and bright 
that we may be tempted to find the rift 
in the clouds through which it falls in 
some circumstance which promised de- 
liverance from the exile in Patmos— 
possibly the death of Domitian and the 
accession of Nerva. 

2. If this general view be correct, 
the Second Epistle of St John suggests 
one striking and interesting contrast. 

’ Kyria was a Christian widow of Ephe- 
sus. But Ephesus was the most disso- 
lute, as it was the most superstitious, of 
cities. “It was entirely plunged in 
insolent idleness,” writes Philostratus. 

“Tt was filled with players upon instru- 
ments, the ministers of every abandoned 
pleasure. The streets were thronged with 
dissolute effeminate wretches. All night 
long one heard nothing but balls, revels, 
and wanton music®.’ And “the Ephesian 
widow” was almost a proverb for evil even 
in acorrupt age. One of the marvellous 
gifts of the Christian Church consisted 
in honouring, consoling, w/z/ising widow- 
hood. For the Gospel ministers to the 
broken-hearted, and soothes the lonely. 
It saves from despair ; it opens the soul 
to an inseparable love; it gives a new 
purpose by calling upon the spirit which 
has been healed to pour out the conso- 
lation which itself has received upon all 
who are wounded in the battle of life by 
sin or sorrow. It is remarkable that St 
Paul should have drawn precisely for a 
Bishop of the Church of Ephesus that 
picture of the true Christian widow, with 
her awful severity to herself and her 
gentle sweetness to others, with her holy 


1 Clem. Alexandr. ‘Quis div. 
Euseb. ‘Hist. Eccl.’ 111. 24. 

2 See note on the force of Bdérere éavrots, 
a John z, 8. 

$ ‘Vit. Apollon. Thyan.’Iv. 1 (quoted ‘ L’Apé- 
tre St Jean,’ Baunard, p. 236). 


salv.’ 433 


INTRODUCTION TO 


and consecrated gravity’. Almost con- 
temporaneously with St John’s Epistle 
to Kyria, the famous story of the “E- 
phesian Widow” was told by Petronius, 
with its cynical insult to all that is best 
in the heart of a woman—to the love for 
the husband of her youth, to the tender 
recollections of her wedded life, to the 
sanctity of the grave, to the majesty 
of death*. Indeed the First Epistle to 
Timothy itself suggests the same contrast 
in another shape. What a difference 
between the younger Ephesian widow, 
touched by grace superficially, at the 
circumference not in the centre of her 
soul, upon whom the breath of the 
truth had blown without its transforming 
power—and such as Kyria, loved by St 
John and all who knew the truth for the 
truth’s sake, which abideth in us—yes, 
and shall be with us for ever®. 

3. It may be well to refer finally to one 
passage, which is often felt to be a moral 
difficulty in the way of accepting the 
reference of this Epistle to a person. 
It probably, indeed, lies at the root of 
the eagerness to accept the mystical 
view on the part of some believing 
critics, who are themselves eminently 
free from mysticism. It is felt by such 
that the stern prohibition against receiv- 
ing heretics who deny Christ into the 
house, or bidding them good-speed, is 
infinitely less difficult to defend as ad- 
dressed toa Church than as addressed to 
an individual. But, it should be remem- 
bered that the heretic here contemplated 
came solemnly to the house*, summoning 
it as it were formally in the name of 


1 1 Tim. v. 3—10. Cf. & xaraorquars lepo- 

mpereis, Titus il. 3. On the quasi-ecclesiastical 
osition of widows in the early Church, see 
icebears ‘ Antiq.’ VII. 4—9. 

2 The story is repeated by Jeremy Taylor, with 
all the many-coloured light which can be thrown 
upon it by his fancy and reading—strangely out 
of place, one is tempted to say—in ‘Rules and 
Exercises of Holy Dying,’ Chapter v. sect. VIII. 
The Ephesian widow’s marriage ‘‘took place 
in the grave of her husband, in the pomp of 
mourning, in her funeral garments.” She advises 
the soldier, in an emergency which arose, “ to 
take the body of her first husband, and place it 
upon the gallows in place of the body of the 
stolen thief.” Taylor’s reference is to Petronius, 
[‘Satyric.’] XVII. 1 

3 Contrast St Paul's caustic touches (crara- 
AGoa...KATATTPNVLaTOVEL...TIY Towryy 
ous) 1 Tim. v. 6, rr with 2 John w,. 2, 3. 

4 el tis Epxerat, Vv. 10. 


THE SECOND EPISTLE OF JOHN. 


Antichrist, admittedly and as downright 
matter of fact bearing with him anti- 
christian doctrine’. The highest welfare 
of some within the house might demand 
that they should not be exposed to the 
contaminating influence. Perhaps the 
best and wisest commentary upon the 
passage has been written by Bishop 
Taylor—‘“ No spiritual communion is to 
be held with heretical persons, when it 
is certain they are such, when they are 
convinced by competent authority and 
sufficient argument. But the persons of 
the men are to be pitied, to be reproved, 
to be convinced, to be wrought upon by 
fair confidences ‘and the offices of civility, 
and invited to the family of faith by the 
best arguments of charity, and the 
instances of a holy life (1 Pet. ii. 12). 
Indeed, if there be danger, ze. if a weak 
understanding may not safely converse 
in civil society with a subtle heretic, in 
such cases they are to be avoided, not 
saluted (Titus ili. 10; 2 John w. 10); 
but as this is only when the danger is by 
reason of the unequal capacities of the 
persons, so it must only be when the 
article is certainly heresy, and the person 
certainly criminal—when interest is the 
ingredient in the persuasion, and a cer- 
tain and necessary truth destroyed by 
the opinions’.” The advice, certainly, is 
not inconsistent with the character of 
St John. To forget this is to err in the 
same direction as that style of art which 
accepts for the type of St John the lan- 
guid grace of an effeminate tenderness. 
The thunder which sometimes suddenly 
rolled through the sky which hung over 
his youth*—the passionate zeal which 
desired to bring down fire from heaven, 
as Elias did*‘—did not quite pass away 
with the new creation in Christ Jesus, 
with the softening of an Elijah into an 
Elisha. At all events this verse, and 
various passages in the first Epistle, in- 
dicate the same type of character®. The 
Apostle, like the truth of which he is the 
messenger, has his sternness as well as 
his indulgence, his intolerance as well as 
his tolerance’. He has been wont for 

1 Note the objective negative (cal ravrny tiv 
Biiaxyv ov péper, zbzd. 

2 “Great Exemplar,’ Part 11. Ad. Sect. XII. 

3 Mark iii. 17. 

4 Luke ix. 54 

5 1 John ii. 19, 22, iv. 3, v. 19- 

* Consistent with this is the indelible impres- 


361 


more than sixty years to confine his 
thoughts within the limits of The Doctrine. 
He is ‘“‘well pleased with the easy condi- 
tions of dwelling at Jerusalem, and not 
passing over the pleasant bounds of the 
sweet banks of Kidron.” To lead for- 
ward over these is for him the negation 
of true progress, the ceasing to have a 
hold upon the living God’. 

But, after all, an age like ours has a 
difficulty—moral or immoral—in any 
such injunction, however explained. It 
may be well if we are led to examine 
how much of our difficulty arises from 
genuine charity—how much from feeble 
convictions, from a superficial courtesy, 
from the canvassing for popularity, from 
the vanity which feels confidence against 
temptation, and the curiosity which de- 
sires to hear what can be said in the 
most piguant form, but is utterly careless 
as to what is true. 


IV. 


Analysis of the Second Epistle of 
St John. 


Salutation to Kyria and her sons, . 1. 

Ground of his affection for them, and that 
of all true members of the Church, wv. 1, 2. 

Benediction upon them with two watche 
words of the Epistle, ¢ruth and Jove, v. 3. 


A. 


First motive of writing—kindly joy in the 
spiritual well-being of her children, wv. 4. 

The source of that—truth as we have 
received commandment from the Father, w. 5. 


B. 


1. The commandment—is not new; ine 
cludes three elements— 


(a) Duty of mutual /ove, v. s— 


(2) of a life directed by His commande 
ments, v. 6— 
(c) of Faith—the commandment, wv. 63. 


sion of St John’s character left in the Church, as 
witnessed by the ancient and well-known story 
of his leaving the bath which Cerinthus had 
entered. Trenzeus, ‘Ady. Heer.’ 111. 3; Euseb. 
SH Ea lllen3e 

1 See notes on 2 John 2. 9. 

2 Note évrodm ypapur, v.53 Kara Tas évrohas 
avrov, v. 6; % évroAn—a commandment, His 
commandments, the commandment. 


362 


2. Warnings (in inverse order). 
(a) Against <Antichristiansm and Anti- 
ebrist, 
The peril of faith, v. 7. 
(4) Against losing the past, 
The peril concerning the commandments, 
wv. 8. 
(c) Against false toleration, 
The peril of misunderstanding the com- 
mandment of /ove, vv. 9, Io, II. 
Joyful anticipation of meeting, v. 12. 
Salutation from her sister’s children, v. 13. 


V. 


The external evidence for the Second 
Epistle of St John is, as might be anti- 
cipated, less than that which can be 
adduced for the First. Still it is con- 
siderable, both in the East and West. 
In the Alexandrian school it was gene- 
rally recognized. Clement of Alexandria 
looks upon it as a note of the simplest 
tone, addressed to a lady of Babylon, by 
name Electa’. Eusebius distinctly states 
that Clement in his ‘Hypotyp.’ gave 
concise summaries of all the books in the 
canon, not excluding those called “ anti- 
legomena—I mean the Epistle of Jude, 
and the remainder which are called 
catholic®.” Dionysius of Alexandria, 
whose doubts about the authorship of 
the Apocalypse give evidence of his 
critical fastidiousness, recognizes the 
second and third Epistles as of St John®*. 
Later on, the evidence is overwhelming. 
The excommunication of the Arian party 
is justified bya Bishop of Alexandria* by 
an appeal to St John’s language (2 John 
v. 10). The ‘Synopsis of Scripture’ at- 


1 Secunda Johannis Ep. que ad virgines 
scripta est, planissima est. Scripta est verd ad 
quandam Babyloniam, Electam nomine. Clem. 
Alexandr. Opp. p. ror (edit. Potter), (among 
the fragments). 

3 Ilaons ras évduaOnxov (sc. év rp diaO7jKy) 
ypagns émirerunuévas werolnrat dunyycets, pnde 
Tas avTieyouévas mapehOuv* tiv “lovda Aéyw Kal 
ras Nouras Kaod.Kas émorodas. (*H. E.’ vi. 14.) 

3 °AXN ovde év rz deurépa Peponévy Iwavy. xal 
tplry, xalro: Bpaxelas ovcass...0 "Iwavy. dvoe 
pacrl mpdxerras GAN dywyipws 6 mpecBvrenos 
yéyparra. (‘H. E.’ vir. 25.) 

* Alexander (an ante-Nicene writer. 
Socrat. ‘H. E.’ 1. 6). 
L 423 


See 
Cf. Routh, ‘Relig. Sac.’ 


INTRODUCTION TO 


tributed to Athanasius not only 

nizes but analyses the second and third 
Epistlesof St John’. St Athanasiushimself, 
in a writing especially intended for a safe- 
guard against apocryphal pieces disguised 
under the same names’, expressly enume- 
rates three Epistles of John among the 
seven Catholic Epistles, as a possession 
of those who hold fast divine Scriptures 
unto salvation. In the West, Irenzus, 
the disciple of Polycarp, the representa- 
tive of the best traditions of the ‘school 
of Ephesus,” quotes the Second Epistle 
(v. 11) as written by “ John, the disciple 
of the Lord*” The ‘Canon Mura- 
torianus, after mentioning the first Epistle 
in close connection with the Gospel, 
adds towards the close an explicit recog- 
nition of ¢wo Epistles of John. In the 
seventh Council of Carthage (a.D. 256) 
under Cyprian, an African Bishop ex- 
pressly cites a passage from the Second 
Epistle in justifying his vote against the 
validity of heretical baptism*.] 


1 «Synops. S. S.’ 35, 56, 57 (Athan. Opp. 
Tom. IV. pp. 410, 411, edit. Migne). 

2 Tlept 6¢ judy ws éxdvTwy mpds cwrnplay ras 
Gelas ypadas’ Kal poBoduae pirws...evruyxavewr 
érépots apiwvrat, Tots eyouevots aaroKpu@ots, dara 
Topevor TH Guwvupia Tav aybwav BiBrwv...7a 
6é rns Kaw7s wadw ovx éxvnréov elreiv’ ore 
yap Tadra...€micToXal kaBonr. Kadovpevar TGv’ Amo- 
oTod\wy énra...cira "Iwavvou ’...raita mnyal tod 
owrnplov. ‘Ex tricesima nona Epist. Festal.’ 
(Opp. Tom. Il. pp. 1176, 1177, edit. Migne). 
The writer, after careful study of these two pas- 
sages, can find no ground whatever for Liicke’s 
qualification—‘‘ Athanasius and the author of 
the ‘Synopsis’ are equally favourable, at /east to 
the second Epistle.’ ‘Epistles of St John,’ 11. 
298 (Biblical Cabinet, Vol. xv.). He, however, 
gratefully acknowledges the assistance which he 
has derived from Liicke in this section. 

3 See quotations from Irenzeus, supra 37, 
note I. 

* Aurelius a Chullabi dixit—“ Johann. Apost. 
in Epistola sua posuit dicens (2 John vz. 10, 11), 
Quomodo admitti tales temeré in domum Dei 
possunt qui in domum nostram privatam admitti 
prohibentur? Aut quomodo cum eis sine ec- 
clesiz baptismo communicare possumus quibus 
si ave tantum dixerimus, factis eorum malis 
communicamus?” (apud Routh, ‘ Reliq. Sac.’ 
III. 130.) For references to 1 John in 2 and 3 
John see Additional Note at close of the Intro- 
duction. Pauline allusions, or touches of style, 
will be found in 2 John wv. 3, 8 2 John ww. 6, 
7, 8. 


THE SECOND EPISTLE OF JOHN. 


[The possible connection of this Epistle 
with Patmos justifies the insertion in this 
lace of the best description of that 
island which the writer has seen, and 
which—so far as he knows—is con- 
tained only in some pages which cannot 
now be procured. 


‘‘ Facing that side of Ionia, so celebrated of 
old by its riches—at the present day only by 
the ruins of so many great cities, Miletus, 
Priene, Ephesus—there rises a group of islets, 
rocks almost without a name, for the most 
part desert, scattered in the Ionian Sea be- 
tween Cos and Samos. One only has become 
famous, and by a singular contrast in the 
midst of this classic country, it owes all the 
fame which it possesses to Christianity alone, 
to the memory of the Apocalypse, and to the 
presence of a monastery. ‘That islet is Pat- 
mos.” 


After an account of his voyage from 
Mycone, and arrival at the Monastery of 
St John in Patmos, the writer thus de- 
scribes the scene. 


* Day fell. The sun set /n a cloudless sky. 
We availed ourselves of its last moments to 
go out upon the roof, and to take in the 
general aspect of the isle.... With one glance 
we took in the isle in its littleness. It is but a 
point lost in the immense sea—indeed, singu- 
larly enough, the impression struck me more 
in the islet than in our little bark in the mid- 
sea. Four hills from 800 to 1ooo feet high, at 
the extremities of Patmos, answer to that on 
which the convent stands. Formed of great 
black broken boulders, they are quite barren. 
The shore and the inner valleys, though with- 


ADDITIONAL 


It has been well said: ‘‘ Certainly if it was 
ever allowable to conclude from similarity of 
features that sons were born from the same 
parent, it is easy to understand from the 


1 2 St John | Gospel 1 St John 
v. I 
GA7nbela (five times | Passim Passim 
in v. 1—v. 4) 
éyruwbtes Thy ad7-| viii. 32 ii. 21 
Jevav 
Vv. 4 
wepitarouvras (also | viii. 14, x. 23, | i. 6, 7, ii. 6, 
twice v. 6) xi. 9, 10, xii.} 41 
v5 35 
Ovx ws evToAnv ypdg. ii. 7 


...kKawwhy G\\XQ WV 
efxouev am’ apxfs 
&.T.d. | 


363 


out trees, shew some verdure—not that of 
pasturage, but of useless brush-wood which 
grows spontaneously, What more can we see? 
Little chapels upon all the heights, shepherds” 
huts made of pine branches, covered sheds, 
miserable parks grazed by thin sheep, fifty 
barks at anchor in the silent port—that is all 
Patmos in its austere poverty. But let us lift 
our eyes above this arid soil and these melan- 
choly rocks. What a splendour of light! 
There seem to be almost as many islets as 
waves sown in the illimitable sea. How beau= 
tiful they look at this happy distance which: 
hides their sterility, while it lets us see their 
majestic forms! ‘There is Amorgos, like the 
upturned keel of a huge ship. ‘There is Paros. 
all white as its own marbles upon the horizon. 
There is Nicaria, indented by a hundred bays. 
There is Samos, partly plain, partly highland. 
There, to the east, is Anatolia, and Asia 
Minor from Miletus to Iassos. A transparent 
vapour, which takes none of the clearness 
from the objects over which it floats, blends. 
all their outlines, and happily melts together 
this sky, this sea, these isles. The sky is blue, 
the sea is blue, the isles are blue—the isles 
more vapourous, the sea deeper-coloured, the 
heaven clear, tender, almost ashen, to the 
horizon..... here is a certain pleasure in feel- 
ing a vast sea between oneself and every public 
event, in knowing nothing of the outer world 
but the white sail of a vessel which gleams. 
upon the horizon without ever casting anchor 
in front of the despised islet....We started 
one morning for the ruins of Iassos. Soon the 
mounds, the convent, the isle itself, was no- 
thing but a dark point upon the horizon, 
which a last high wave suddenly removed 
into the region of memory.” (‘Une visite a 
Patmos,’ par M. P. de Julleville. ‘Revue des 
cours litteraires,’ 2 Mars, 1867, pp. 217— 


222.)] 


NOTE. 


words, sentiments, style, character1, of these 
three Epistles, presenting as they do one andi 
the same image, that they must have been 
written by one and the same author. This 


2 St John t St John 


v. 6 
kal avrn éoTw 7% 
ayamn iva K.T.d. 
eo e , 
auTyn 7 évTod\n ear, 
Kadas jKovcaTe aT’ 
apx7ns K.T.d. 


Gospel 


Vv. 3 


v7 

moNAol mAdvou éé7A- iv. 1 
Gay els TOv Kéopov 
of py 6uodoyoorres 
"Ino. X. épxop. & 
oapkt 

6 avrixpioros 


ii. 22, iv. 23 


ii.18,2,iv.3 


364 INTRODUCTION TO THE SECOND EPISTLE OF JOHN. 


may be shewn at length by a comparison of 
words and clauses. But the frequent mention 
of love and truth in all three letters is alone 
sufficient to convince us that we have the 


2 St John Gospel 1 St John 
v. 9 
kal Tov viov ii. 23 


kai Tov marépa 





ex et 
U. 12 
wa 7 Xapa Nua 7 iil. 29, xv. 11,/ i. 4 
TeTANPwWLevN XVi, 24, XVii- 
| 13 ; 
| 
3 St John | 
v1 | 
€v adnbela (twice v. | Passim assim 
3) U. 4, UV. 8, Ve 12 
U3 
wepimareis (wepira- | Passim Passim 


ToUvTG U. 4) 
paprupolyrww gov TH | ba paprupnow 

GAz7leig 7TH adndelg, 

xviii. 37 


same bright and genuine reflection of St John’s 
rie in the second and third Epistles as in 
the first !.” 


3 St John Gospel 1 St John 
v. 10 
ovre émidéxerat ...| ore dytAnua 
kal kwddvet éxers kal rd 
ppéap éari 
Babb. iv. 11 
v.11 iii. To, 20 


v.12 
ofdare Sr 7 waprupla | xxi. 2, 3 
quay adnOys éorw 


v. 14 
ol pita... Tous Pl-| xi. 11, XV. 13, 
ous 14, 16 


1 Baronius, A.C Cap. ix. (quoted a 
Lapide). cial a 





THE SECOND 


EPISTLE OF 


JOHN. 


a He exhorteth a certain honourable matron, 
with her children, to persevere in Christian 
love and belief, 8 lest they lose the reward of 
their former profession: 10 and to have 
nothing to do with those seducers that bring 
not the true doctrine of Christ Fesus. 


HE elder unto the elect lady 
and her children, whom I love 
in the truth; and not I only, but also 


all they that have known the truth ;. 

2 For the truth’s sake, which 
dwelleth in us, and shall be with us 
for ever. 

3 Grace be with you, mercy, and 
peace, from God the Father, and 
from the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son 
of the Father, in truth and love. 





1. Most probably (as nas been proved 
above in the Introduction), in the important 
and often-quoted fragment of Papias e/der 
signifies no official position, but is used to 
indicate one who belongs to the first genera- 
tion of Christian believers. So here. The 
suppression of the name is quite in accordance 
with St John’s usage in his Gospel. 

to the excellent Kyria] See Additional 
N 


ote. 

her children] cf. v. a. If Kyria in this 
passage be (as we suppose—see Introd.) 
an individual, the expression and I found of 
thy children (infra, v. 4) would shew that she 
had at least three living children. (Lticke.) 
whom I love in truth} with true love. 


2. For the truth’s sake] ‘If, in any in- 
stance, the world’s affections stray beyond its 
own circle, if it extends its regards to a real 
Christian, it is never on account of his being a 
Christian, never for the truth’s sake which 
dwelleth in us.” (Robert Hall.) This is a 
beautiful description of the cause of the love 
of each true Christian to all others—the con- 
formity of faith through the whole Church. 

Est.) ‘‘Truth” is used five times in this 
pistle, szx times in 3 John. ‘The best way 
of loving iz truth is to love for the Truth. 

—yea and it shall be with us for 
ever] This is an instance of the oratic 
wariata. ‘The construction is altered inten- 
tionally, and brings out the thought much more 
forcibly than could have been done by a uni- 
form structure. (Winer, Part 11. § Ikxiii. 
600.) It is half benediction, half prophecy, 
like the beginning of the next verse. ‘The 
‘Truth with us” is drawn from the same region 
of thqught ‘‘as the Love with us.” (See note 
on x John iv. 17, and cf. Matt. i. 23.) 


3 There shall be with us grace, 

mercy, peace] A reference, possibly, to. 
St Pau?s Apostolic salutation in two Epistles. 
only (1 Tim. i. 2; 2 Tim. i. 2). This rush: 
of words is unlike St John’s usual calm 
reserve. Can it be that some circumstance— 
possibly the martyrdom of Timuthy—filled the: 
heart of John and caused him to use in this. ~ 
place a form of salutation which would re- 
mind an Ephesian Christian of the Bishop of 
Ephesus, and of werds which were likely to 
have been constantly on his lips? ‘' Grace 
and peace” are also conjoined in the opening: 
of the Apoc., i. 4. The word grace is very 
rare in St John’s writings; only besides these 
passages in John i. 14, 16, 173 Apoc. xxiL 
21. ‘Grace and peace” are substituted for 
the Hellenic and heathen yatpew (used by. 
St James alone of the Apostles, i. 1). (See 
infra note on v. II.) 

and from Jesus Christ] The word Lord, 
which occurs nowhere in St John’s Epistles, 
should be omitted here. 

in truth and love] As, in very advanced life, 
he draws near the evening of his days, the two. 
things which are dearest to St John’s heart, 
and ever on his lips, are truth and Jove. It 
was said of one (Bonaventura) that ‘‘ what he 
had read in the morning he seemed to have 
known from all eternity.” In St John, on 
the contrary, we see a deep meditative cha- 
racter, slowly maturing and retaining to ade. 
vanced age the master ideas of life received in 
youth from the teaching of Jesus. ‘O 
Truth! O Love!” cries the Church in the 
old prayer at the close of every week, ‘be- 
hold! the day, when after all the sorrows of 
the earth below, we are about to enter into the 
blessedness of your rest.” (Baunard, ‘ L’Apé= 
tre S. Jean,’ p. 399.) 


366 


4 I rejoiced greatly that I found of 
thy children walking in truth, as we 
have received a commandment from 
the Father. 

5 And now I beseech thee, lady, 
not as though I wrote a new com- 
mandment unto thee, but that which 
we had from the beginning, that we 
love one another. 

6 And this is love, that we walk 
after his commandments. This is 


4. have found of thy children} Some 
of the number of thy children. Some find in 
these words a sad and gentle hint that certain 
others of Kyria’s children were ot walking in 
the Truth. 

have found] (cdpyxa) The eureka of the 
saint is different from that of the philosopher. 

‘«Rarum hodié inventum, rarum gaudium!” 
engel.) 


5,6. Cf. 1 John ii. 7, v. 3. I beseech 
thee, Kyria! ‘These verses with them 
irresistible evidence of coming from the heart 
and pen of St John. ‘‘ This is the new com- 


mandment, that we love one another.” But 
the love—the charity—what is it? Walking 
according to His commandments. But the 


commandment, which includes all command- 
ments—what is it?—-Why, the Love! The 
Love expanded issues in the commandments. 
The commandments, essentially enfolded in 
the commandment, contract again into the 
Love. 


_ « As if the rose should shut and be a bud 
again.” 


6. That...ye should walk in it] i.e. in the 
Love more probably than in the commandment. 
This passage in which the Love (charity) is 
identified with the commandment suggests the 
best definition of dyamn. It is the compres- 
sion into one word of the whole saying of 
Jesus in Mark xii. 29—31, the idea of His 
first and second commandment embodied in 
Him and reproduced in us by the Spirit. 


7. many deceivers...This] ‘‘many deceivers;” 
used collectively, and taken up by ‘‘réis” in 
sing. 

are gone out into the world (e&j\Oav eis 
tov Koopov)| A,B, 8 (Cod. Amiat. exierunt) 
approved by Lachm., Tischend., Liicke, for 

ese reasons. (a) The expression occurs in 
1 John ii. r9, iv. 1, while there is no reason 
for supposing it carried in from these passages, 
as ecic7AGoyv is easier, and not without pre- 
cedent in New Testament (Rom. v. 12); (4) 
the meaning ‘‘gone out” is more suitable here, 
for ‘“‘come in” is said of things or persons upon 

their first use or introduction. But, in the 


Il. JOHN. 


[v. 4—8. 


the commandment, That, as ye have 
heard from the beginning, ye should 
walk in it. 

7 For many deceivers are entered 
into the world, who confess not that 


1 Or, 


7 





esus Christ is come in the flesh. 
J cette 


8 Look to yourselves, that we whichge 


lose not those things which we have fined 
that 
yereceiva 
ee, 


This is a deceive: and an antichrist. 


‘wrought, but that we receive a full 
reward. 





case of these “‘ seducers,” they fad been in the 
Church, and then left it. They did not enter 
into the world, but went out from their place 
in the Church into the world. (See Reiche, 
‘Comment. Crit.’ 111. 332.) The same word 
is used in Apoc. vi. 4, ‘‘ There qwent out (sc. 
into the world) another horse.” 

who conf=ss not| wy with a partic. indicates 
a supposed genus or class. ‘The phrase is not 
equivalent to ‘“‘many deceivers, viz. those 
who do not confess” (that would require 
the objective negative), but ‘* many deceivers, 
those of the class who do not confess,” qui- 
cunque non profitetur (Winer, ‘Gr, of N. T. 
Diep: 5051): 

Jesus Christ coming in the flesh] 
The Incarnation is here viewed as a present 
living principle. Cf. note on x Joh. iv. 2. 

This is the deceiver and the antie 
christ. ‘‘ The proceedings against the wAa- 
vos, the seducer (Mésith), who makes an 
attempt upon the purity of religion, are ex- 
plained in the Talmud with details.” (R 
‘Vie de Jésus,’ p. 393, 1st edit.) The word is 
technically and characteristically applied to 
our Lord by the chief priests and Pharisees 
(Matt. xxvii. 63, 6 mAdvos, that deceiver). 
The name and idea are Jobannic (John vii. 
12,47). The many deceivers are looked upon 
as concentrated and gathered into one. 


8. Look to yourselves] The emphatic ¢o 
yourselves implies St John’s absence very 
strongly. (Cf. Phil. ii. 12.) 

““That ye lose not those things that ye 
wrought (4 cipyacacde, perf. pass. used ac- 
tively, Winer, p. 274), but that ye receive 
reward in full,” &c. We have here to 
choose between three verbs in first person 
plural, or the three same verbs in the second 
person plural. The second person plural is 
best supported by authority, and also by the 
context. ‘The second person might be sug- 
gested to copyists by the words which 
had just written, Look to yourselves, and is 
apparently very easy. But it is much more 
logical and cogent for the Apostle to charge 
those to whom he wrote by ¢4cir ouw eternal 
interests, than by those of himself and other 


¥. 9—10.] 


Whosoever transgresseth, and 
abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, 
hath not God. He that abideth in 


Il. JOHN. 


the doctrine of Christ, he hath both 
the Father and the Son. 
to If there come any unto you, 





ministers. Surely, too, it would not be pre- 
cisely true or scriptural to assert that the 
Apostles or Christian teachers suffered eternal 
loss by the failure of their converts. For 
the scriptural idea of wrought in its bearing 
on salvation cf. John iii. 21, vi. 27; for re- 
ward, 2 Chro. xv. 7; Matt. v. 12, vi. 1, 
X. 41, 42 (the ov py admodéoy Tov poor 
avrod of this verse, possibly alluded to here), 
Luke vi. 35; Rom. iv. 4; 1 Cor. iii. 14 (See 
especially Melanchthon on the ‘August. Conf.’ 
Opp. I. 33, 34). ‘The true notion of reward 
fills up what would otherwise be a gap upon 
one side of Gospel truth. This verse may 
have been in the minds of those who changed 
the old Collect—‘‘ ut divini operis fructum 
propensius exequentes pietatis tue remedia 
majora percipiant "—into ‘that they plente- 
ously bringing forth the fruit of good works 
may of Thee be plenteously rewarded” 
(Collect for the Twenty-fifth Sunday after 
Trinity). The reward in full (yi06ov 
mAnpn amoAaSnre) would seem the echo of 
Ruth ii. 12 (yévorro 6 pucbos cov mAnpns. 
LXX.). 


9. Every one leading forward and 
not abiding in the doctrine which is 
Christ’s sath not God] (1) leading for- 
ward. (mpoayoy is the true reading; so A, 
B, &. omnis qui precedit, Cod. Amiat.) The 
word is perhaps more than simply going for- 
ward. In classical Greek it is used of an 
officer /eading on his troops, pushing forward. 
It seems here to include two ideas—going 
beyond the line of truth in what seems to him 
an advance, with an allusion to the vaunted 
progress of advanced Gnostic thought—carry- 
ing others with him, leading them with bold 
and self-willed ambition. outside the barriers. 
There may possibly be a reference to a 
haughty imitation by the servants of Anti- 
christ of the Great Shepherd, of whom the 
_word is used by Hin:self and by others (Matt. 
XXVi. 32, Xxvili. 7; Mark x. 32). (2) “The 
doctrine which is Christ’s.” Not, pro- 
bably with genitive of the object “doctrine 
about Christ,” nor again ‘‘ doctrine which is 
Christian” or “with which Christ works,” 
but ‘doctrine which has Christ for its 
4uthor, which He taught.” (Cf. Matt. vii. 
28, xxii. 33; Mark i. 22, xi. 18; Luke iv. 
32; John xvii. 19. ‘The doctrine of Ba- 
laam” is that which Balaam taught. Apoc. 
ii. 14.) Here, once more, we have an instance 
Of suggestion, an gsterisk pointing to the Gos- 
pel. (introd.to First Epistle, p. 284.) ‘The 
doctrine which is Christ’s.” What is that? 
and why so called? The answer is in St 
John’s Gospel, vii. 16, 17. It is the doctrine 


which Jesus delivered, and called emphatically 
“‘ my doctrine, the doctrine.” ‘‘ The doctrine 
which is Christ’s” is the norm of all true 
thought and doctrine. Every development 
beyond that is a leap into the darkness, Every 
supposed progress, outside the limit, is rather 
a retrocession, a feeble restlessness which will - 
not allow the soul to ‘“‘abide,” a ceasing to 
‘hold God fast.” Thought must be chastened 
as well as free. One step outside the circle 
of the Truth is ruin and sin and death. (See 
Additional Note.) 

He that abideth in the doctrine] of Christ 
is notto be repeated here. (See Additional Note.) 


10. This verse reminds us that the Gospel 
has its intolerance as well as tolerance. The 
well-known story of St John’s flying from the 
bath where Cerinthus was, scarcely, perhaps, 
indicates a stronger abhorrence of such errors 
as would lead us away from the real, living, 
Incarnate Christ. ‘The earlier indications of 
St John’s character in the Gospels (Mark ix. 
38; Luke ix. 53) are recalled to our memory. 
Some important distinctions between the 
Church and world then and now are cer- 
tainly to be taken into account. (1) ‘The 
world lieth wholly in the wicked one,” cried 
St John in his first Epistle. The words are, 
in a measure, true yet. But “the dark- 
ness,” which in his day was ‘drifting by,” 
is now, in Christendom, partially dissipated. 
(2) The only hope of the world lay in 
the Incarnation, and in the ideas which it 
brought, and the powers which it implanted 
in humanity. We, who are under the new 
moral and spiritual order, created by the 
Gospel, do not see the danger which to St 
John seemed so near and pressing; we can 
scarcely even conceive it. We live in the 
security achieved by a battle which has been 
won along the whole line, and relax in peace 
some of the precautions which were necessary 
in days of warfare. Our toleration may often 
have intermingled with it a selfish love of a 
quiet life. (3) The honour of Jesus was dear 
to His apostle. In the estimate of him who 
wrote—‘ the Word was God ”—to deny that 
Jesus was the God-Man was to question His 
legitimacy and impugn His truth. If this 
Epistle is supposed to be addressed to a Church, 
the verse before us would leave a somewhat 
different impression. See Introduction. 

Tf...any...bring not this doctrine...and good 
speed bid himnot. The liturg‘cal . ractice 
of repeating ‘“‘the Lord be with you” after the 
Creed, as ‘ta symbol and bond of peace,” has 
been traced to this verse. ‘‘St John (2 Epist. 
vv. Io, 11) forbids us to salute any that 
cleave not to the right faith. But, when the 


367 


368 


and bring not this doctrine, receive 
him not into your house, neither bid 
him God speed : 

11 For he that biddeth him God 
speed is partaker of his evil deeds. 

12 Having many things to write 


minister hath heard every one profess his faith 
in the same words with himself, then cheer- 
fully and without scruple may he salute them 
as brethren, and they requite his affection with 
a like return.” (Comber, ‘The Temple,’ 1. 
318.) 

This dogmatic severity, this moral indigna- 
tion against certain forms of heresy, breathes 
in the language of Ignatius to the Ephesians, 
I5 or 20 years later. ‘‘ They who destroy the 
peace of families shall not inherit the King- 
dom of God. If then they who do these 
things after the flesh died, how much more 
if any one destroy the faith of God by evil 
teaching.” (ignat. ‘ Epist. ad Ephes.’ XvI.) 

ll. that biddeth him good speed] yaipev, 
the Greek form of salutation (James i. 1; 
Acts xv. 23). The Hebrew salutation was a 
wish for the peace, the Latin for the 4ealth,. 
the Greek for the Aappiness, of the person 
addressed. 

The three salutations are eminently charac- 
teristic of the general view of life and its aim 
entertained by the three races. The Roman, 
to whom health and strength seemed all in all, 
said Salve. The Greek, whose existence 
aimed supremely at ‘‘light and sweetness,” 
_ said Xatpe, looking upon joy as the highest 
aim. The Hebrew, who had a revelation, 
and knew the blessedness of reconciliation 
with God and conscience, said Peace. 

is partaker of those deeds of his, 
those evil deeds] Contradictions of the 
Creed are in some circumstances entirely evil 
deeds, (Gal. v. 20.) There are sins against 
faith as well as against morals. For the notion 
of a common partaking in evil, cf. Ps. l. 18; 
1 Tim. v. 22. 


12. I would not write] ovx éBovdnbnv, the 
principle of the “epistolary aorist ” (Winer). 


Il. JOHN. 


[v. 1x—23, 


unto you, I would not write with 
paper and ink: but I trust to come 


unto you, and speak ‘face to face, {Gn 
mouth, 


that our joy may be full. 
13 The children of thy elect sister 
greet thee. Amen. 





‘Paul sent Tychicus to give information 
by word of mouth upon his position—details 
which he did not consider it prudent to com- 
mit to paper. These sorts of precautions may 
be remarked in several Epistles, cf. 2 John v. 
13” (Renan, ‘ L’Antechrist,’ p. 90). 

with paper and ink] ‘* Faith was all in all— 
each bore it in his heart, and cared little for 
loose sheets of paper (ydprys), 2 John v. 12. 
The passage, 2 Tim. iv. 13, does not prove 
that the Epistles were written on t. 
Parchment was peculiarly used for books.” 
(Renan, ‘Saint Paul,’ p. 134.) See Addi- 
tional Note. 

trust] Rather, hope. 

face to face] lit. ‘*mouth to mouth.” Cr 
Gal. iv. 19, 20, and Bengel’s note. ‘‘He 
writes gently, but would speak more gently 
again. The voice can be inflected, as the 
turn of discussion requires. Speaking in this 
respect is best, writing vicarious and subs- 
diarv, 2 John v. 12; 3 John v. 13” (Bengel). 

that our joy may be fulfilled] This ex- 
pression links the present Epistle with the 
Gospel (iii. 29, xv. 11, xvii. 13), and with the 
First Epistle (i. 4). The high associations 
with which it is connected lead us to sup- 
pose that it would scarcely have been applied by 
St John to any meeting but one of peculiar 
solemnity after a cruel and prolonged separa- 
tion which had threatened to be eternal. See 
Introd. to this Epistle, supra, p. 359. ‘‘ Habet 
nescio quod latentis energie vive vocis actus, 
et in aures discipulorum de auctoris ore trans- 
fusa fortius sonant.” (S. Hieron. ‘Ad Paulin.’ 
quoted by a Lapide.) 


18. The children of thy sister, that 
excellent sister] See Additional Note on 
v. 1. Nephews of Kyria were with St John 
at this time. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on 2 St Joun 1, 9, 12; 3 STJOHN 13. 


2 St John 1. 

The word éxdexrds here is, probably, not 
used in the sense in which baptized Christians 
are generally so termed (Col. ili. 12; 1 Pet. 
i. 1). If so, we should, in the case of an 
individual, expect an addition (as in the case 
of Rufus, the only individual so designated, 
outside this Epistle, in the N. T.—dondoaobe 
‘Povdoy rév éxAexrov év Kupia, Rom. xvi. 13). 
It rather signifies that which as most choice of 
its kind is chosen out—singular, as in the old 


English phrase ‘‘ my ssmgular good friend "— 
precious—so gems are spoken of in the apo= 
cryphal Book of Henoch as Aidos éxdexrol. 
Cf. x Pet. ii. 3,6. (See Bretschn. ‘ Lex. Man. 
N.T.’ 5...) 


2 St John 9. 


mas 6 mpodyayv is not exactly equivalent to 
mas mpodywv. The latter simply means ‘ 
one that leads forward.” But the o joined to 
a participle has the force of Soris and signifies 


Il. JOHN. 


one of the class who is such as to 
‘lead forward.’” On spo in a bad sense, see 
Tholuck ‘On St John’s Gospel,’ p. 260. 

It seems, on the whole, wise to retain here 
the old word doctrine, rather than to substi- 
tute teaching, Of the original term (é:day7) 
it has been said by a lamented writer :—‘‘ For 
example, the very word ‘doctrine,’ perhaps 
not from the fault of the translators, but from 
the change of meaning which has taken place 
in the lapse of time, has undergone a trans- 
formation which converted a perfectly general 
expression into one synonymous with dog- 
matic teaching. ‘This error, if so we may call 
it, has been removed almost uniformly in the 
present Revision, which renders the word 
8:3ax7, not by ‘doctrine,’ but by ‘teaching.’ ” 


(‘Revised Version of N.T. in the ‘Times,’ © 


July 20, 1881.) But no one can doubt that 
if the word is sometimes merely ‘“‘act of 
teaching” (Mark xii. 38), and sometimes ‘‘a 
mode of public instruction” (1 Cor. xiv. 6), 
it came to be used for the body of faithful 
doctrine which followed the received norm 
accepted by the Church. (Cf. rod xara rj 5:8. 
miatod Aoyov, Titus i. 9; Rom. vi. 17, with 
the text before us.) Thus the term passes 
over from the act or mode of teaching to its 
subject-matter, whether dogmatic or precep- 
tive. (Cf. also Acts xvii. 19; Matt. xvi. 12; 
Acts v. 28; Heb. xiii. 9.) The word doc- 
trine therefore, is to be retained (not only 
in the single text, Rom. xvi. 17), but in this 
place, in John vii. 16,17; Rom. vi.17; Titus 
i. 9, and some other passages, just because the 
pertectly general expression ‘‘underwent a 
transformation which converted it into one 
synonymous with dogmatic teaching” in the 
hands of the sacred writers themselves. 


2 St John 12; 3 St John 13. 


dia yaptov Kat péAdavos (2 St John 12); 
81a wéAavos Kai Kadduov (3 St John 13). 

The three materials for writing here spoken 
of require some notice. © Paper (xaptns, 
Lat. eharta), properly a leaf of paper made 
from the separated layers of the papyrus. We 
find this material, with pen and a black pig- 
ment, in constant use in the times of Cicero 
and Horace. (Cic. ‘de Nat Deorum,’ 11. 
50; Opp. XIV. 3028; ‘ Epp. ad Quint. Frat.’ 
i. 15; Jbid. X11. 2102. Horat. ‘Satir.’ 11. 
3, 7- ‘Ars Poet.’ 447.) A very full and 
interesting account of this ‘paper,’ its 
varieties and manufacture, is given by Pliny. 
**Before we leave Egypt, it will be well to 
speak of the papyrus ; since by the use of leaves 
of paper the culture of human life, and the 
memory of events, is established and preserved. 
Varro is our authority for saying that we owe 
this to the victory of Alexander the Great, at 
the ume of the foundation of Alexandria in 
Egypt. Before this paper was not employed, 
but the leaves of palm, and the inner bark of 


New Test.—Vot. IV. 


other trees, Then public records were ine 
scribed upon sheets of lead, and at a later 
period private documents on cloth or waxed 
tablets. In remote antiquity, before the Tro- 
jan War, we find from Homer that sheets or 
tablets of wood were used.” 
[Pliny refers to 
mropev & Gye ojpata Avypa, 
yoawas ev mivaxt mruxt@ OupopOdpa wodXa. 
‘Iliad’ vi. 168, 169.] 


After tracing historically how paper came 
into universal use, and describing the Egyptian 
papyrus-plant in the marshes (cf. Isaiah xix, 
7, LXX.), Pliny gives an account of the 

tion of the sheets of paper from 
the plant. The manufactory was transferred 
to Rome, where it was improved by the 
sagacious industry of the great house of 
Fannius [Fannii sagax officina|. (Plin. ‘ Nat. 
Hist.’ xt. 21—26, Tom. v. pp. 2283— 
2293, edit. Brotier.) One of the most 
elegant and playful of the Epistles of St 
Jerome, however, connects Asia Minor with 
another and more permanent writing material, 
of which St John probably speaks ; “I come 
plain of the shortness of your letter. I cannot 
suppose that paper (charta) was wanting, 
while Egypt continues her commerce. Even 
if Ptolemy, a new enemy, had closed the seas 
against that trade, yet King Attalus would 
have sent parchments from Pergamos, that the 
want of paper might be made up by skins; 
whence the name of Pergamene is given to 
parchments to this very day.” (An allusion 
to a jealousy on the subject of his library, 
which made Ptolemy Philometor suppress the 
foreign Egyptian paper-trade. Plin. ‘N. H.’ 
XII, 21; S. Hieron. ‘ Epist.” vi. Tom. L 
339, edit. Migne. Cf. 2 Tim. iv. 13. 

It thus appears that the making of paper 
(mepyapnyn) in the peculiar form of that n= 
dustry in Asia Minor was stimulated in the 
highest degree by Ptolemy Philometor cutting 
off the Egyptian supply. The incident is 
another illustration of the violent rivalry 
between Alexandria and Pergamos, which in 
a different department issued in the opposition 
of ‘“‘the Pergamene school of grammar against 
the Alexandrine, and the system of anomaly 
(dvepadia) against that of analogy (dvadoyia).” 
This Asiatic paper was made of sin—not 
only in the thicker form for books—but in 
thin sheets for ordinary use. And the latter 
was popularly termed yaprys. (‘ Dict. of 
Greek and Roman Biog.’ s. v. Crates, Vol. I. 
884.) Between Eumenes II. of Pergamos and 
his successor and Ptolemy Philometor there 
was a furious jealousy upon the subject of 
their respective libraries. And Crates, the 
grammarian, is specially connected with the 
development of the trade in Pergamene paper. 


1 Our word sarchment is a corruption of fere 
gamene—as vellum of velin. 


AA 


369 


37° 


Plin. ‘N. H.’ ut supra.) It is, there- 

, scarcely probable that mich foreign- 
made paper would have found its way to Asia 
Minor; and this incidental mention of paper 
(probably Pergamene) may be one other indi- 
cation of the general Asiatic surroundings of 
St John at the time of writing these Epistles. 
It is not without interest to turn to the 
curious manuscript preserved in the Convent 
of Patmos, and attributed to Prochorus, a 
disciple of St John (Ai repiodor rod Beodayou 
ovyypapsioa rapa Ipwxopov). This manu- 
script of an apocryphal writing, composed 
probably in the sth or 6th century, and over- 
loaded with poor legendary stories, bears, 
notwithstanding, ample witness to local and 
geographical knowledge. While the piece 
curiously makes no mention whatever of the 
Apocalypse, it contains an account of the 
alleged composition of the Gospel upon one 
of the mountains of Patmos, which seems to 
be of a finer stamp and more primitive 
materials than the rest of the works. Singu- 
larly enough the writer incidentally assumes 
that paper and ink were easily to be procured 
in Patmos. (rékvov Ipyope, eicedOe ev TH 
mode kai AaBe pédav Kai xXaptHy Kai ayaye 
por @0e...xat AaBav xapras Kai peéAay éro- 
pevOny mpos avrov...kai eire pot Téxvoy Toa 
Ope, A Akovelts amo TOV OTO"ATOS pou ypaDe 
€mi tous yapras.) (See M. Guérin’s aie 
of the Mammcrne ascribed to Prochorus. 


II. JOHN. 


‘Description de I'Ile de Patmos,’ Chap. mL 

. 20—42. 

(2) Ink (uéhav) in the form of some kind 
of coloured pigment, was in use from a 
early period. A colour for writing, 
according to Josephus (‘ Antiq.’ XII. 2, 10), 
in different kinds, like the German finte from 
tincte, is spoken of in the O. T. (°F Jerem. 
xxxvi. 18). Cicero and Horace speak ree 
peatedly of it as black (atramentum) in their 
day. So St Paul, 2 Cor. iii. 3, and St John here, 

(3) The reed pen (xadapos) appears some- 
times in the LXX, as the translation of the 
Hebrew (OY—properly sti/us—graving-pen. 
Psalm xliv. (xlv.) 1; Jerem. viii. 8); it never 
signifies a quill , as with us. It appears 
probable that alphabetical writing was em- 
ployed generally by the Ionian earlier than by 
the European Greeks, and that special attention 
was devoted by them to the manufacture of 
the chief material for writing. The best paper 
(the charta Pergamena) was prepared at Per- 
gamos, some two days journey from Sm 
This, it may fairly be inferred, St John used, 
and not the Alexandrian or Roman papyrus— 
the charta of Pergamos, not of the Egyptian 
marshes. (See for the early Ionian knowledge 
and use of alphabetical writing, Heyne, 
‘ Homer,’ vill. pp. 814, 815.) Paper of the 
modern kind is said to be first mentioned in 
a letter of Joinville to S. Louis of France, 
(Brotier’s note, Plin. * Nat. Hist.’ v. 2293.) 





Pina) Ook N. 


"Apy?) pév miotis, TéAos S€ ayarn. 


(S. Ignat. ‘ Epist. ad Ephes.’ x1v.) 


L’on voit de la flamme aux yeux des jeunes gens, 
Mais dans l’ceil du vieillard on voit de la lumiére. 


(V. Hugo, ‘ La Legende des Siécles.’ 


‘Boaz Endormi,’ I. 36.) 


INTRODUCTION. 


PAGE 
3) Amalysis .  . 371 
Explanatory remark. sae 

(ii) Probability that the Caius addressed is 
Caius of Corinth 372 

(a) Trait of character (ow. 5, 8) cor- 
responds with Romans xvi. 23 372 


(b) Circumstances mentioned about Dio- 
trephes answer to the state of 


J. ANALYSIS. 
I. Salutation (z. 1). 


___ St John’s pleasure at the favourable account of 
Caius brought back to Ephesus (vv. 2, 3, 4) 
11. The main subject of the Epistle. 

(2) The hospitality of Caius gratefully ac- 
knowledged by the Ephesian brethren on their 
return to Ephesus (z. 5). 

Exhortation and encouragement to the grace 
"of hospitality (vv. 6, 7, 8). 

(4) The rejection of St John’s letter of com- 
munion and the bearers of it by Diotrephes (zz. 
Q, 10). 

” Transitional precept and maxim (z. 11). 
1. Contrast to Diotrephes. 


Demetrius—threefold witness to him ; (1) the 
World, (2) the Truth, (3) the Church (z. 12). 

Allusion to the Gospel which would be recog- 
nized by Caius (¢wvavra ouveroic.)—the great 

ainter’ s mark at the corner of the little picture 
wal meets, 6é baprupotpev, kal oléare 8re 9 pap- 
tupla Tov adn Ons éorw, 3 John 12. ovrés éorw 
r) wadnrys 6 paprupav mept TOUT UM, kal ypawas 
TavTa’ Kal oldapev Gre aAnOys avrov 7 paprupla 
éorly, John xxi. 24). 


Iv. Close—hope of meeting—salutation and 
message (vv. 13—15)- 


It is believed that this analysis suggests 
a consistent and intelligible account of 


PAGE 
things at Corinth described by St 
Clement of Rome 372 
(ili) Characteristics and peculiar function 
of these two short letters . 
(iv) Jnterest given to St Fohn’s Epistles by 
their connection with Ephesus and 


Asia Minor . ; . 374 


verses which have often appeared to be 
confused and almost inexplicable. It 
would seem that St John (probably after 
his return from Patmos to Ephesus) had 
sent certain members of the Ephesian 
Church for the purpose of missionary 
labour, or of constituting the inter-com- 
munion of the churches, to the Church 
over which Caius presided, or in which 
he exercised considerable influence, pos- 
sibly at Corinth. (See zzfra’.) In that 
Church, or in one of its neighbouring 
communities, a man of jealous and 
haughty spirit (probably in an official 
ministerial position), by name Diotrephes, 
watched for an opportunity of gratifying 
his ambition by rejecting the authority 
of an Apostle. When the brethren dele- 
gated by St John were insultingly re- 
jected by Diotrephes, who threatened 


1 The chief objection lies in the éd» Ow (v. 
to). It is, of course, very difficult to imagine 
that St John could have projected a voyage to 
Corinth. The note on z. 10, however, will shew 
that the supposition in édy €\@w is one of faint 
probability. The hoped for meeting inv. 14 may 
refer to an expected visit of Caius to St John. 


AA2 


372 


with excommunication any members of 
his Church who should receive them, 
they were welcomed by Caius with the 
affection which became a true Christian 
heart. To him they turned in their need, 
because in such circumstances it seemed 
highly inexpedient to apply for a loan 
or for other assistance to unbelievers 
with whom they might be acquainted’. 
On the return of these brethren, after a 
reception so Christian and hospitable, 
they witnessed to the goodness of Caius 
before the Church (z. 6), z.e. the Ephe- 
sian Church. These brethren, when they 
presented themselves to Caius, were 
“strangers,” and hence the expression in 
v. 5 is strictly appropriate according to 
the explanation (cis rods adeApovs Kal 
Touro févovs). 


II. 


This Epistle is addressed to Gaius. 
The name, which represents the Latin 
Caius, was, it is needless to say, a very 
common one. Three persons of the 
name are mentioned as disciples in con- 
nection with the earliest records of 
Apostolic Christianity. One is spoken 
of together with Aristarchus, as a Mace- 
donian*. A second belonged to Derbe*. 
A third is honourably commemorated in 
St Paul’s Epistle to the Romans*. The 
same Caius is spoken of as a Corinthian®. 
The name of Caius also stands in v. 1 of 
this Third Epistle of St John. 

Making all due allowance for the 
precariousness imparted to any hypo- 
thesis by a name so common as Caius, 
there would seem to be something, at 
least, to say for the opinion of those 
who identify the Caius of this Epistle with 
the Corinthian Caius. (a) The trait of 
character indicated (3 John wv. 5—8) is, 


1 See on the meaning of undév NauBdvorres 
aro tav é6vav (3 John 7) Additional Note at 
the close of the Commentary on 3 John. 

2 **Caius and Aristarchus, of Macedonia,” 
Acts xix. 29. 

3 “*Caius of Derbe,” Acts xx. 4. 

4 «*Caius mine host, and of the whole church,” 
Rom. xvi. 23. (For the curious and impro- 
bable tradition that this Caius was the son of 
Caius Oppius—the centurion who stood by the 
Cross (Matt. xxvii. 54), and who first preached 
the Gospel in Spain,—and that he became Bishop 
of Milan, see quotations in 4 Lap. ‘ Comment. in 
Scrip. S.’ xx. 639, 640.) 

5 “T thank God that I baptized none of you 
but Crispus and Caius,” 1 Cor. i. 14. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


as far as it goes, exactly of a piece with 
the generous and noble character indi- 
cated in Rom. xvi. 23. The house of - 
Caius, the Corinthian, was a shrine ot 
worship, and a centre of hospitality for 
missionaries’. (4) But this is not the only 
thread of connection which conceivably 
links the Caius of St John’s third Epistle 
with Caius the Corinthian. St John 
mentions with pain certain schismatic 
troubles which disturbed some portion 
of the Church—not more precisely indi- 
cated—perhaps caused by some haughty 
priest or prelate who brought his mean 
and selfish ambition within the same 
sphere where Caius exercised his gentle 
virtues. This man, whose very name, 
may indicate high birth, or possibly even 
an arrogant self-assumption of a quasi- 
royal rank’, rose in unholy rebellion 
against the authority of the Apostle. His 
wicked and mischievous words did not 
refrain from defaming a soul so pure, and 
a life so beautiful, as that of the old man 
whose holy presence made Ephesus at 
that time the true centre of Catholic 
Christendom (3 John 10). This Di 
trephes tried to cut off from the Church’s 
communion those whose only offence 
was that they did not belong to his 
party, and would not yield to his unjust 
sentences of exclusion (v. 10). Now, if 
the Caius of this Epistle be Caius of 
Corinth, then absent from Ephesus at his 
former home, we have indubitable evi- 
dence of a state of things in the Church 
of Corinth which singularly illustrates 
this Epistle—a coincidence of time, 
place, and circumstances. The Third» 
Epistle of St John most probably be- 
longs to the close of the first century, 
towards the end of the Apostle’s life. 


1 Hospitality was ‘‘no new virtue upon that 
soil where Herodotus and Homer had received 
and celebrated it.” Under the Gospel, hospi- 
tality to Christians as such became one of the 
first and most necessary of Christian virtues. 
With 3 John aw. 5—8 cf. Rom. xii. 13; Heb. 
xiii. 2. ‘‘ Having freely received they wished 
to give freely. Charity therefore managed to 
arrange, from distance to distance, stations of 
hospitality, where the missionaries and preachers 
found asylum, assistance, safe conduct, not wish- 
ing to impose any charge upon the heathen, 
whose souls and nothing else the Church aspired 
to possess.” (Baunard, p. 401.) 

Acorpegpis (3 John v. 9) “‘trained, oF 
cherished by Zeus.” In Homer especially, @ 
frequent epithet of kings and nobles. 


THE THIRD EPISTLE OF JOHN. 


The style and turn of thought and ex- 
pression :onfirm the impression that it 
is the production of a very old man. It 
was about the same time, somewhere 
close to the year 95, that St Clement 
wrote his Epistle to the Corinthians. 
The painful picture drawn by Clement 
of the feuds in the Corinthian Church’ 
would quite agree with the expressions 
of St John to Caius (3 John vz. 9, 10). 
(3) The author of the singularly learned 
and acute ‘Synopsis of Scripture’ attri- 
buted to Athanasius, who must have 
had the use of materials to which we 
have no access, not only identifies the 
Caius of our Epistle with Caius the 
Corinthian of whom St Paul speaks 
(Rom. xvi. 23), but connects him with 
St John, with Ephesus, and with the 
publication of St John’s Gospel’. We 
have, indeed, no means of deciding who 
Diotrephes was. If the language of the 
Epistle (v. 10) absolutely precludes us 
from supposing that Diotrephes was 
directly and locally connected with 
Corinth, we are unable to shew exactly 
how the schismatic spirit which unques- 
tionably prevailed at Corinth just at the 
time extended itself to Ephesus. Certain 
it is that in the Epistle of Clement we 
see, very much as in St Paul’s time, the 
excitable nature of the Corinthian Chris- 
tians, and the further development of 
ecclesiastical democracy, invading the 
Presbyterate, if not the Episcopate. The 
Roman Church— more tranquil and 


1 See especially XLIV. to XLVIII. in the edi- 
tion of the Epistles of St Clement to the Co- 
rinthians by Bryennius, pp. 77—89. 

2To 68 xara wavy. Kuayy. vrnyopevOn re vr 
avrod Tov ay. Iwavy. Tov door. kal wyaTnuévou, 
évros ééoplarov év aruy TQ vnow, Kal vrd TOU 
avrov é£€060n év "Edécw dud Tatov tov dyamnrov 
kal Eevodbxou TOY amogTé\wy, mepl ov Kat IavAos 
*Pwualois ypapwy pyot (Rom. xvi. 3), ‘ Synopsis 
S. S.” 76. (S. Athanas. Opp. Iv. 433, edit. 
Migne). One touch in the third Epistle of St 
John certainly appears to refer Caius to the 
Gospel of St John in a way which has more in it 
that meets the eye for those who can ‘“‘fine 
footing trace.” When we consider the evidently 
direct reference in the Epistle (jets 6¢ uaprupov- 
prev, kal oldare re 7 waprupla nuwy adnOys eri, 
3 John v. 12) to the Gospel (odrés éoruw...6 
paprupwv mepl TovTrwy...kal oldapey OTe adAnOys 
avrov 7 paprupla éorly, John xxi. 24), we feel that 
there must be a special reason forit. It would 
seem to imply a peculiar knowledge of the fourth 
Gospel on the part of Caius whom St John ad- 
dresses 


a 


373 


solid in the presence of her livelier but 
less practical sister—offers the latter her 
haughty advice, and establishes the 


austere order of ecclesiastical discipline’. 


The picture of feud and insubordination 
drawn by St Clement is of the darkest 
kind; and the schismatic spirit among 
people of the same blood and language 
is intensely contagious. Communica- 
tion between Ephesus and Corinth was 
constant and easy, and the Corinthian 
origin of Caius would give him especial 
interest in a schism which it was pos- 
sibly attempted to extend from Corinth 
to Ephesus. The supposition, then, that 
the Caius of St John’s Epistle is the 
Corinthian Caius, is at least not impro- 
bable. 

The external authority for the Third 
Epistle of St John has been incidentally 
stated in the examination of the similar 
evidence for the Second*. The instinct 
of the Church after deliberate thought 
and examination—the brevity of the 
letters—and the entire want of conceiv- 
able purpose in drawing up Epistles so 
free from doctrinal peculiarity, and so 
completely Johannic in thought and style, 
are amply sufficient to entitle the two 
Epistles to their place in the Canon. 


III. 


The Second and Third Epistles of St 
John occupy their own place in the 
sacred Canon, and contribute their own 
peculiar element to the stock of Christian 
truth and practice. They lead us from 
the region of miracle and prophecy, out 
of an atmosphere charged with the 
supernatural, to the more average every- 
day life of Christendom, with its regular 
paths and unexciting air. There is no 
hint in these short notes of extraordinary 
charismata. The tone of their Chris- 
tianity is deep, earnest, severe, devout, 
but has the quiet of the Christian 
Church and home very much as at pre- 
sent constituted. The religion which 


1 See the striking passage of Hilgenfeldt, 
quoted in the first edition of the entire Epistle 
of St Clement to the Corinthians by Bishop 
Bryennius, ‘‘IIpo\eyéueva pxd’. KAHM. EMIZK. 
PQM. EILI2T.”—Constantinople, 1873. 

* The subject is discussed by Dr Routh. 
‘ Reliq. Sac.’ 1. 423; cf. 111. 208. It may be 
added that 3 John 7 seems to be quoted im 
Ignat. ‘Ad Ephes.’ VII. 


374 


pervades them is simple, unexaggerated, 
and practical. The writer is grave and 
reserved. Evidently in possession of the 
fulness of the Christian faith (2 John 3, 
7,9), he is content to rest upon it with 
a calm consciousness of strength. The 
sword of controversy strikes one down- 
right blow, and is returned to its scab- 
bard (v. 7). In the Second Epistle the 
loftiest region of dogmatic theology 
stands out for a moment from among 
the clouds (2 John 3). The Incarnation 
of Jesus is indicated, not only, as in the 
First Epistle, as a past fact with con- 
sequences lasting on into the present 
(Ino. Xpuc. ev capxi €AnAvbora, 1 John 
iv. 2), but as a permanent continuous 
principle in a living Personal embodi- 
ment (‘Iyjo. Xpiot. epxopevov ev capki, 
2 John 7). In the Third Epistle God 
occurs twice (v. 11), the word Jesus or 
Christ is not mentioned. Yet how much 
is implied in “for the sake of The 
Name” (izép yap tod ovopartos, v. 7)! 
These two letters also add their own 
special contribution to Christian thought 
—or at least accentuate and underline 
thoughts before written. In the Second 
Epistle, the idea of a fixed norm of Chris- 
tian faith is embodied in The Doctrine 
by which every teacher was to be tested 
(2 John 9, 10). Heresy, at least under 
certain conditions and in some of its 
developments, was boldly stated to in- 
volve moral guilt (ibid. v 11). There 
was a delimitation of the region gro- 
gress beyond which is loss of Christ 
and of God (v. 9). In the Third Epistle, 
a solemn hint was given—how much 
needed, and for a time how much neg- 
lected, events too clearly proved—of the 
dangers to which the Church might be 
exposed by ambitious aspirants after 
ecclesiastical primacy (0 dirorpwtrevwv 
avtav Avotpepys, 3 John g). The moral 
guilt of schismatic resistance to Apostolic 
authority was boldly and bluntly stated 
(Adyos rovypots PAvapav quas, ibid. v. 
10). By the conception of the Incar- 
nate Lord, the Creator and Light of all 
men, and of the universality of Redemp- 
tion, which the Gospel and the First 
Epistle did so much to bring home to 
all who received Christ (John i. 3, 4, 9; 
1 John ii. 2), germs were deposited in 


the soil of Christianity which necessarily - 


grew from an abstract idea into the 


INTRODUCTION TO 


great reality of the Catholic Church. In: 
these two short occasional letters St John 

provided two safeguards for that great 

institution. Heresy and schism are the* 
dangers to which it is perpetually ex- 

posed. St John’s condemnation of thes 
spirit of heresy is recorded in the Second 

Epistle ; his condemnation of the spirit 

of schism is written in the Third Epistle. 

Every age of Christendom up to the 

present has rather exaggerated than 

dwarfed the significance of this con- 

demnation. 


EV: 


The view which has been taken 
throughout the Introductions to these 
Epistles of the connection of St John’s 
later life with Ephesus and Asia Minor 
may, it is hoped, add to the interest 
with which the letters will be read by 
some. Ephesus may seem to rise once 
more, as it was seen by St John, 
in the valley between Mount Preon 
and Mount Coressus. The now green 
and marshy plain, bounded by the blue 
line of the sea, may exchange its ‘ ma- 
jestic sadness” for life and animation. 
‘Christian recollections are the greatest 
recollections of Ephesus; they suit well 
with the majesty and the melancholy of 
these spots. According to the tradition 
of the first ages, St John, ‘the great light 
of Asia,’ as the bishop Polycrates called 
him, lived for years and died in this 
city’.” Whilst Ephesus rises before us as 
it was in St John’s time, the Apostle 
and some of those with whom he must 
have been familiar become more life- 
like. Aquila and Priscilla appear at 
Ephesus during St Paul’s visit to that 
city? (A.D. 56). The Bishop of Ephesus 
salutes them by St Paul’s desire (A.D. 66) 
about ten years later*. Thirty years have 
passed, but it is possible that St John 
may enter the house of the aged tent- 
maker. Alexander, the bronze-worker ‘*, 
may have learned the lesson which St 
Paul designed to teach him*®. Tyrannus® 


1 ¢Une course dans l’Asie Mineure’ (‘La 
Gréce, Rome, et Dante.’ Par T. T. Ampére, 
60). 
yet a os 
3 2 Tim. iv. 19. 

4 6 xaAxeus. 
5 , Tim. i. 20; 2 Tim. iv. 14. 
6 Acts xix. 9. 


fob, LHIRD EPISfLE OF JOHN. 


may still be there, with his indelible 
memories of the teaching of St Paul. 
From time to time St John may enter 
the house of the saintly widow, Kyria; 
or meet the missionaries of the cross 
under the roof of his beloved Caius. 
- Demetrius may, perhaps, come to visit 
him. If we suppose the Third Epistle 
to have been written after the Apostle’s 
return from Patmos, one dearer and 
more venerable still—Timothy, the Bi- 
shop of Ephesus—had almost certainly 
gone to his rest. There is no impos- 
sibility in the conjecture that the apo- 
calyptic message to the Angel of the 
Church of Ephesus was addressed to 
Timothy, and its praise and blame are 
alike consistent with all that we gather 
of the character of Timothy in the Acts 
of the Apostles and in the two Pastoral 
Epistles written to him by St Paul’. 
One tradition of the Church at least 
represents Timothy as having died a 
martyr’s death at Ephesus, just about 
the period of St John’s return from Pat- 
mos, at the close of his two years’ exile 
—beaten to death with clubs by the 
fanatical devotees of Artemis, against 
whose excesses he protested at the xara- 
ywyov of the goddess*. If we might 
follow the tradition as given by a Greek 
author of the ninth century, we should 
see the Apostle from day to day—“ not 


1 This is well drawn out by Professor Plump- 
tre in his interesting article upon Timothy. 
“Dictionary of the Bible,’ 111. 1507. 

2 The authorities will be found in Professor 
Plumptre’s article (uf supra), or in Baunard, 
*L’Apétre S. Jean,’ 11. 393. If the fact is his- 
torical, it would give a deep meaning to 2 Tim. 
iv. 3—8. 


375 


startling the minds of the citizens by the 
splendour of his public preaching, but 
walking in wisdom and redeeming the 
time ; of tender mind, of quiet manner, 
of unpretending garb, of gentle speech, 
allowing easy access to all who ap- 
proached him. But in all the order of 
life, in varied and perfect goodness, he 
was unapproached and venerated’.” Pos- 
sibly too we shall find him occasionally at 
the port*. For St John’s Gospel shews us 
the hand and eye of the son of Zebedee. 
He has the practised ken, which cam 
calculate distances on the water, whether 
in the darkness of a wild night or in the 
golden haze of an April morning®. A 
thoughtful study of the writings of St 
John will enable us to understand in 
some measure how the son of Zebedee 
and Salome, the fisherman of Galilee, the 
disciple of the Baptist, became the 
Apostle of Jesus, the herald of the Word, 
the Plato of the Evangelists, the prophet 
of Patmos, the inheritor of the work of 
Paul and Timothy at Ephesus, the mis- 
sionary of lonia—may we not almost add, 
the Pnmate of Christendom ? 

1 Nicetas David. Paphlag. ‘Orat. Encomiast.’ 
(‘Bibliotheca Patrum,’ Tom. XXVII. pp. 393, sqq-) 
This citation, and much also throughout this In- 
troduction, is due to the interesting book of the 
Abbé Baunard, ‘ L’Apdtre Saint Jean,’ p. 248. 

2 «That early passion still survived the snows 
of age and the trammels of office, and it was 
touching to see the almost regretful pleasure 
with which he would scrutinize the rigging of 
barks from Hull, or with which he would 
the pier and watch the vessels that crowded the 
roads, and look on with the approval of no 
inexperienced eye. He seized the opportunity 
of addressing them on their moral and religious 
duties.” ‘Memoirs of Edward and Catherine 
Stanley,” pp. 94, 95- 

3 John vi. 19, xxi. 8. 


THE THIRD 


EPISTLE OF 


J QUEEN: 


He commendeth Gaius for his piety, 5 and 
hospitality 7 to true preachers: 9 complain- 
ing of the unkind dealing of ambitious Dio- 
trephes on the contrary side, 11 whose evil 
example is not to be followed: 12 and giveth 
spectal testimony to the good report of De- 
metrius, 


HE elder unto the wellbeloved 
Gaius, whom I love !in the truth. 
2 Beloved, I 'wish above all things 


'0r,ra> that thou mayest prosper and be in 


health, even as thy soul prospereth. 


1. beloved, as in vv. 2, 5, rr. The 
word occurs four times in this short letter. It 
is characteristic of St John (1 John ii. 7, iii. 
21, 1V. X, 7, 11). 

2. in or concerning all things I pray] 
(evyxoua). ‘This prayer of St John for a dear 
friend (possibly in bad health) may act as a 
corrective to the unnatural mysticism of a 
certain form of pseudo-spirituality. ‘‘ Sick- 
ness,” said Pascal, ‘¢is the natural state of a 
Christian.” Some have pushed this saying 
with its measure of undoubted truth so far as 
to pray for sickness—a contradiction surely to 
the meek spirit of the petition ‘“‘lead us not 
into temptation.” We may turn with profit 
to the wholesome Christian common sense of 
the beloved disciple, who knew so well the 
mind of Christ, the Healer. St John here 
prays that the promise to the godly man in 
Ps. i. 3 (wavta 60a Gy rouj Katevodwbycerat, 
LXX.) may be fulfilled to his friend. 

that thou mayest prosper (evododcGa.—the 


rendering of nby and myn, to be pros- 
perous)—and be in bealth (vyaivew, cf. for 
this meaning of the word Luke v. 31, “they 
that be whole,” A.V.). Cf. also for the 
first of these two words, “laying by him 
in store whatever he prosperously obtains” 
x Cor. xvi. 2). In this verse Hooker finds 
the justification of our Prayer-Book in con- 
taining prayers for temporal blessing. (‘E. P.’ 
v. 35-) In Naples the comprehensive new 
year’s salutation is buon capo d’ anno, con buona 
salute, santa e vecchia, ‘‘a happy new year, 
with good health, and a holy old age.” The 
closing formula of the Papal Epistles in Latin 
is, ‘‘omnem tibi 4 Domino cupit et adprecatur 
tum animi tun corporis prosperitatem.” 

3. witnessing to thy truth] The 
order of the words here is very emphatic, and 
seems to point to an implied contrast with 


3 For I rejoiced great.y, when the 
brethren came and testified of the 
truth that is in thee, even as thou 
walkest in the truth. 

4 I have no greater joy than to 
hear that my children walk in truth, 

5 Beloved, thou doest faithfully 
whatsoever thou doest to the bre- 
thren, and to strangers ; 

6 Which have borne witness of 
thy charity before the church: whom 





Diotrephes and others (cov rg dAnbeia; cf. 
cou TH ayamn, V- 6). 

even as thou truly walkest] i.e. sincerely, 
without deception (év adn@eia). 


4. “Greater joy than these (joys) I have 
[not], viz. that I should hear of my children 
walking truly,” i.e. sincerely, as at the close 
of the last verse—each child so walking is, 
as it were, a separate joy. The occasion of 
St John’s joy may be compared with that of 
St Paul on hearing of Philemon’s faith and 
love. (Philem. v. 4.) 

The older commentators quote a passaye 
beautifully illustrative of this from Seneca, in 
which he describes his delight in the mental 
and moral progress of a favourite pupil. 
‘ Epist.’ XXXIV. 


5. thou doest faithfully whatsoever thou 
workest (morév roveis 6 éav épyatn). The 
neuter is used adverbially, ie. suitably to 
Christian faith, and as is worthy of a Chris- 
tian believer. Thou doest...qhatsoever thou 
workest. Note the different words, the 
second signifying foilful work (Matt. xxi. 
28, &c.), “thou art doing well in all thy 
toilful work.” (Fideliter facis quicquid - 
raris.) Some commentators hold (umprobably) 
that the phrase is equivalent to the classical 
“giving a pledge,” i.e. here of character and 
conduct. (So mora roreicOa, Herod. Il. 8.) 

to the brethren, and to strangers| A various 
reading here has a large amount of support— 
‘to the brethren, and that (i.e. ‘‘ who besides,” 
Alford) are strangers.” = A, B, C, &.) 
Reiche, however, supposes this to be a gloss. 
St John seems to refer to brethren from the 
Ephesian Church, received by Caius though 
peaieasee  Yy the hospitality of Caius, see 
supra, In ] 

6. witnessed to thy charity before the 
church] Like witnessed to thy truth, v. 3. The 


v. 7—9-] 


if thou bring forward on their journey 
after a godly sort, thou shalt do well : 

7 Because that for his name’s sake 
they went forth, taking nothing of 
the Gentiles. 


construction here is Johannic (John xviii. 


Dy 
: eis the church] i.e. the Church from 
which they had been sent forth—the Ephe- 
sian Church to which they had now returned. 
This is the first occurrence of the word church 
in St John’s writings—without the article 
here. This singular fact may, it is sub- 
mitted, be accounted for in one way and 
one only. Our Lord never used the word 
Church in His public addresses. Before the 
multitudes He could not at this stage of 
His work make intelligible the disruption of 
Judaism, and the establishment of a spiritual 
Kingdom as wide as the world. Only before 
His disciples, far on in His Ministry, did 
He ever use the word Church, and that 
only three times. (Matt. xvi. 18, and twice 
in xviii. 17.) But it did not fall within the 
purpose of St John’s Gospel to record these 
words of Jesus. And it was a fixed principle 
with him in his First Epistle not to use any 
great term of the spiritual order which was 
not employed in the Gospel. Hence the 
word Church is absent from the Epistle, 
because it is absent from the Gospel. But the 
reason for abstaining from the use of the word 
ceased with the First Epistle. And we find it 
three times in the Third Epistle. 

speed forward on their journey] (mpo- 
méuyvas) helping them on their journey. In 
the O. T. this is sometimes the translation of 


mov (Piel of Mv), and signifies to accom- 
pany one departing, to send him on his way 
(cupmporéurev, Gen. xvill, 16, LXX.). 
When valued and beloved guests took their 
departure, the hosts accompanied them some 
way, in token that they clung to their society 
to the last moment. This was often accom- 
panied with presents and provisions for the 
way. (Kalisch, ‘Histor. and Crit. Comm.’ 
Genesis, 404, 556. Gen. xviii. 16; Xxxi. 27.) 
The curious academic word in the Oxford 
language of the last century, “‘to propemp 
any one,” #.e. to provide with a ceremonious 
escort on public occasions, preserved very little 
of the original force. The word is Pauline 
(Rom. xv. 24; 1 Cor. xvi. 6—11; Titus iii. 
12. Cf. also Acts xv. 3, xxi. 5.) 
after a godly sort] lit. “*worthily of God” 
—‘‘he who honours such faithful servants of 
God, honours Christ, our God, who sends 
them.” 

worthily of God (cf. Col.i.10; 1 Thess. 
ii. 12). The Apostle exhorts Christians to 
do this action wortbily of God. He implies 


III. JOHN. 


8 We therefore ought to receive 
such, that we might be fellowhelpers 
to the truth. 

9 I wrote unto the church: but 
Diotrephes, who loveth to have the 


then that it is the standard by which every 
action is to be measured—to make it, as far as 
possible, worthy of God in every part. The 
gift which we intend to lay before a king is 
rendered complete as far as loyalty and reve- 
rence can ensure. The gift which is pre- 
sented by love and gratitude is made as per- 
fect as gratitude and love can make it. The 
old builders finished details of architecture 
high out of sight on roof and spire with ex- 
quisite exactitude, because they would be seen 
by the angels. So every action of the regene- 
rate life should be finished in every detail, and 
made as complete as it can be made by loyalty 
and reverence, by Jove and gratitude, for the 
eyes of the Lord of men and angels. What 
an ideal of life to say to oneself in this or that 
action, ‘‘do this worthily of God!” 


7. ‘for the sake of the Name” (His 
name’s sake, A.V.). ‘The pronoun is wanting 
in all the Uncials. (It may have been brought 
in from a reminiscence of Rom. i. 5.) Just as 
the Name in the Old Testament is put abso- 
lutely for Jehovah (Deut. xxviii. 58; x Chro. 
xili. 6), So in the New Testament it is used 
for Christ (Acts iil. 16, iv. 12, v. 41. Cf. 
“that beautiful Name,” James ii. 7). The 
same use passed on to the earliest Christian 
writers (see Ignat. ‘ad Ephes.’ 111. vil; ‘ad 
Philipp.’ x.). ‘The argument for our Lord’s 
Divinity, deducible from this, is excellently 
put by Ammon; in the Catena on Acts v. 41, 
‘6 For the Name.” ‘*By using the general 
expression he indicates that Jesus is God. 
For, just as a man solemnly using the word, 
‘ He has said,’ means ‘God has said,* so he 
who uses the name indefinitely equally declares 
the Divinity of Jesus” (quoted in ‘Tischend. 
‘Nov. Test. Grece,’ edit. vi. Tom. II. pp. 
29, 30). Note too that ame implies a true 
personality lying behind it. It is never used of 
qualities, only of persons (see Matt. xxviii. 
20). 

taking nothing of | See Additional Note. 


8. We] The pronoun here standing mark- 
edly at the beginning of the sentence is full of 
significance. It is beautifully like St John’s 
humility to include himself in a confession of 
sinfulness, or in an obligation to perform a 
duty. ‘This verse is morally quite of a piece 
with r John ii. 1. 

therefore| On this, probably the only otp 
in St John’s three Epistles, see Additional 
Note. 

might be fellowhelpers| may become fel- 
low-workers. 


377 


378 


preeminence among them, receiveth 
us not. 

10 Wherefore, if I come, I will 
remember his deeds which he doeth, 
prating against us with malicious 
words: and not content therewith, 


for the truth] Fellowworker is a Pauline 
word (Philem. 24; Philipp. iv. 3; 1 Thess. 
iii. 2). This clause is not however parallel 
with Philipp. iv. 3 or 1 Thess. iii. 2. For 
though The Truth may here run into a 
personal meaning and may signify Him who 
said ‘‘I am the Truth” (john xiv. 6), yet we 
are here called upon to become fellow-work- 
ers fo or for, not with, The Truth. 


9. There are several readings here, of 
which the most important is— Thou wrotest 
somewhat” (¢ypawas 71, B). This reading 
has been supposed to be of a very subtle 
character, introduced by a copyist, to whom 
it seemed a double unsuitability (1) that a 
writing of an inspired Apostle should have 
perished, and (2) that Diotrephes should 
have had the power to reject it, both of 
which are involved in the T. R. I wrote 
somewhat. The common reading, however, 
seems to give a satisfactory sense. St John 
informs Caius that he had written to the 
Church, of which that gentle and hospitable 
Christian was a valued member, but he has 
reason to know that Diotrephes would not 
receive or obey his Apostolic bidding. He, 
therefore, implicitly warns Caius to be careful 
that the contents of this letter, at least, should 
be made known to the Church. Rothe sup- 
poses—and the supposition has internal pro- 
bability—that Diotrephes was a bishop. (See 
supra, Introd.) The temptation of young and 
haughty bishops to excommunicate hastily 
and unjustly is vividly illustrated by Augus- 
tine’s remonstrance with the youthful Aux- 
ilius and his sympathetic note to Classicianus, 
who had suffered this wrong. ‘ Epist.’ CCL. 

Diotrephes, who loveth to have pre-emi- 
nence over them] (06 qudomporevay av- 
trav). ‘The word might almost be rendered, 
‘“‘who affects primacy over them.” Eccle- 
siastical ambition would seem to St John in 
particular against the mind of Christ (Matt. 
xx. 28), especially the words és cav OeAy ev 
ead eivat mpGtos, Vv. 27, to which we may 


them] i.e. the individuals comprised in the 
collective word ‘‘the Church.” : 

receiveth us not] ‘‘Our apostleship, our 
authority, our brethren, our letters, our in- 
junctions,” (a Lap.) ‘Hence so many 
Charches are, in a sense, all first, all apostolic, 
while all cling to one unity. They have 
communion of peace, the mutual address of 
brotherhood, the common watchword of hos- 


III. JOHN. 


[v. 10, a8. 


neither doth he himself receive the 
brethren, and forbiddeth them that 
would, and casteth them out of the 
church. 

11 Beloved, follow not that which 
is evil, but that which is good. He 


pitality (‘‘contesseratio hospitalitatis”). (Tere 
tullian, ‘De Prescript.’ xx.) 


10. if I come] (éav €\Ow). This expresses 
uncertainty with some small amount of pro= 
bability—if I shall come, which is not quite 
impossible (Donaldson, ‘Gr. Gr.’ pt. v. ch. 
II. § ii. p. 501, ‘ Conditional Propositions’). 
In sentiment this verse is a softened echo of 
x Cor. iv. 23; 2 Cor. x. x1, Xill. &, 2, 3- 

I will remember] bring to remembrance 
—the same word as in Joh. xiv. 26. To 
“bring evil deeds to remembrance” is = 
tically to reproach, bring to shame. Hence 
droutpynoKw iS sometimes used in this sense. 
(See Demosth. quoted by Bretschn. in /oc.) 

prating against us with wicked rebil 

oyots ovnpois pAvapay juas). Diotrephes 
iS haley a doer = ins) whose cha- 
racter is defined by the character of his 
words; nay, those words are works. The 
words are light and reckless, bubbles, yet 
wicked. The sketch, short, and touched with 
an old man’s trembling pen, reminds us of the 
dramatic element so marked in the fourth 
Gospel. 

and not contented hereupon, neither 
doth he himself receive the brethren, and for- 
biddeth them that would] ‘The very unusual 
construction in this verse is quite Jobannic. 
Cf. St John’s Gospel, iv. 11. ‘The construce 
tion must be thus understood. St John men- 
tions the schismatic exclusion of Diotrephes 
—‘‘ He receiveth us not.” Then the Apostle 
interposes a brief indignant parenthesis (‘‘ For 
this cause, if I come, I will, &c.”). Then he 
resumes his account of Diotrephes—‘‘ and 
further, not contented,”"—Diotrephes was 
schismatical, not heretical. 

casteth them out] (éxBaddw). A Johannic 
word for excommunication (Gospel, ix. 34, 
35)- ; 

ll. Beloved, follow not that which is evil} 
Imitate not. The verb is applied in New 
Testament both (a) to persons (2 Thess 
iii. 7, 9), and (4) to things (Heb. xiii. 7). 
See Bretsch. ‘Lex. Man. N. T.’ s. v. and cf. 
Reiche, ‘Comment. Crit.’ on 1 Pet. iii, 13, 
where he argues in favour of “imitators” 
as the true reading (Tom. III. p. 263). The 
words imitate that which is good are the 
motto and principle of Saints’ Days in the 
Church’s calendar, and of religious biography. 
See a vivid instance of ‘‘imitation of that 
which is good” brought about by reading the 
life of Antonius. (St Augustine, ‘ Confess.® 


v. 12—14.] 


that doeth good is of God: but he 
that doeth evil hath not seen God. 

12 Demetrius hath good report of 
all men, and of the truth itself: yea, 
and we also bear record; and ye know 
that our record is true. 

13 1 had many things to write, 


vill. 6.) The relation of Caius to the Gos- 
pel of St John (p. 371) makes me refer the 
imitation of that which is good to the example 
of Jesus. We have here a treatise De Imita- 
tione Christi in three words. The link of con- 
hection is ‘‘ Do not imitate Diotrephes, rather 
make Demetrius your type of Christian life.” 

He that doeth good] The article with present 
participle. He whose general principle of life 
and conduct is doing good. ‘The word, and 
its kindred substantives, are favourites with 
St Peter, to whom active benevolence was so 
conspicuous an aspect of Christianity (cf. 
1 Pet. ii. 14, I5, 20, iil. 6, 17, iv. 19), and 
who summed up Christ’s character as mani- 
fested in His passage through life in one word 
(evepyerav, Acts x. 38). 

hath not seen God] A truly Johannic 
thought and expression (1 John iii. 6). 


12. To Demetrius witness is borne. 
The pft. is used in strict accordance with its 
proper import, viz. the past is expressed in 
relation to the present. ‘The witness bas been 
given and ow stands. (See Winer, pt. III. 
§ xi. p. 287.) 

and by the truth itself] ‘The testimony 
even of all men may be deceived; the testi- 
mony of ¢he Truth cannot be deceived. The 
testimony of the truth itself is the testimony 
of God, who is the highest Truth, of Christ 
who says, ‘I am the Truth’ (John xiv. 6). 
Blessed he who has this testimony!” (a 
Lap.). 

and we also are bearing witness] The 
Truth here may, however, not impossibly sig- 
nify Christ Himself. Can it be that St John 
is referring to the opening chapters of the 
Apocalypse, and that Demetrius may have 
been one of the angels of the Seven Churches 
to whom Jesus, the Truth, bore witness, in 
one of the Apocalyptic Epistles? The pas- 
sage is intensely Johannic. (1) The Jo- 
hannic correlatives, witness and the Truth, are 
found together. (2) The Johannic idea of 
threefold witness pervades the passage. It 
is another application of one thought in 
I John v. 6—1o on a lower range and more 
contracted scale. Demetrius has three wit- 
nesses (2) the world (uo ravrwyr), (4) Jesus 
(im avris tis aAnOeias), (c) the Church, 
specially including St John himself (kai jpeis 
8€ paprupovpev, «.7.A.; Cf. John xxi. 24). 

he comparatively modern conjecture that 

emetrius is “the silversmith” of Acts xix. 


III. JOHN. 


379 


but I will not with ink and pen write 
unto thee: 

14 But I trust I shall shortly see 
thee, and we shall speak ‘face to'Ge. 


face. Peace be to thee. 
salute thee. Greet the friends by 
name. 


24 May or may not be true. The name cer- 
tainly belongs to the Ephesian surroundings. 
See Additional Note.) 

and ye know| ‘There is high authority: 
for thou knowest (A, B, C, & and the Coptic 
version). But the reading seems suspiciously 
like a copyist’s gloss or correction, to whom 
the idea occurred that the Epistle was ad- 
dressed to Caius alone, and that, therefore, ye 
know was out of place. But the Epistle was. 
evidently not intended to be kept strictly 
private by Caius (vv. 10, 11). ‘‘ The plurah 
embraces Caius’ companions, faithful rulers. 
of the Church, and the whole assembly, for 
whose use the letter was intended” (Reiche, 
‘Comm. Crit.’ iz /oc.). 

that our witness is true] A sort of mark 
of St John (xix. 35). See Introd. to this. 
Epistle, p. 373, note 2. 


13. I had many things tohave written, 
but 1 am not willing to be writing] The 
Epistolary aorist in the first clause, and the 
present in the second clause, are alike ap- 
propriate. 

with ink and pen] The original signifies. 
black pigment and reed. “The prep. dia 
denotes through the medium of ; that through 
which the result passes; which lies detqeen 
the will to do the act and the completion of 
the act” (Winer, pt. 11. § xlvii. p. 396). 

ink] Three times mentioned in Scripture, 
2 Cor, iii. 3; 2 John v. 12, and in this verse. 


14. I am hoping straightway to 
see thee. 


15. The friends...Greet the friends| The 
word and idea are not common in the New 
Testament. The beautiful exceptions are Luke 
xii. 4; John xi. 11, xv. 14, above all xv. 15. 
Friendship is transfigured and elevated into. 
something better—fraternity. The friends. 
here (of @idor, tovs idovs) must not be 
taken out of the Johannic context. ‘The 
Jriends,” in St John’s mind, are not only 
mutual friends, but the friends of Jesus. That 
which was said of Abraham as the friend of 
God (2 Chro. xx. 7; Isai. xli. 8), or of 
Moses to whom the Lord spake ‘tas a man 
speaketh unto his friend” (Exod. xxvili. 11), 
is more deeply true of the friends of Jesus 
(John xv. 15). See the exquisitely beautiful 
sermon in which South draws out the privi- 
leges of friendship, and shews their consum- 
mation in the friendship of our Lord for His 


s er) 
Our friends south. 


380 


people: (1) freedom of access, (2) favour- 
able construction, (3) sympathy in sorrow, 
(4) communication of thought, (5) counsel 
in difficulty, (6) constancy and perpetuity. 
(‘Sermons,’ xIv. Vol. I. 291—308.) ‘‘ The 
friends,” then, are those who in the new rela- 
tion of Christian fraternity do not lose the 
fine natural humanity of friendship, but rather 
have it elevated and purified. But these are 
also within the circle of St John’s thought 
those whom Jesus calls friends. (Gospel, xv. 


15.) 

"by name] May we not see a beautiful allu- 
sion to the Good Shepherd ‘calling His own 
sheep by name?” (John x. 8.) These simple 


III. JOHN. 


words are the last which we can trace up to 
the heart and pen of St John. Their quiet 
tender individualism forms a fitting transition 
from the superhuman dignity of the Apostolate, 
to the more ordinary pastoral office. Some- 
thing of the Apostle’s mind may yet breathe in 
some of the Liturgies, but what and how 
much is absolutely uncertain. (‘ Liturgia 
Hispanica minimé a Romana, probabilius a 
Gallicana...et inde ab Ephesind Ecclesid-ori- 
ginem duxisse.” See Neale, ‘Tetral. Liturg.’ 
Prefat. xX vIIlI., and his reference to Lesl. ‘de 
Liturg. Goth.’ v. vi.) A hush as of evening 
rests upon the close of the note. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on wu. 3, 4, 7, 8, 12. 


1. *AdAnOys, dAnOeva (connected with A7Ao 
AaGeiv) in classical Greek signifies that which 
is unconcealed, and therefore true, real as op- 
posed to false or apparent. Looking back 
over the writings of St John from this point, 
we conclude that the various meanings of the 
word d\7Oe1a may be classed as follows. 


1. Truth objective. 

1. Living and embodied. 

(a) IN THE SON. 

"Eye cis 7 050s kal 7 adnGeta Kai 9 Con’, 
John xiv. 6. To this there may be special 
(but not exclusive) reference, when our Lord 
speaks of the Holy Ghost as The Spirit (not 
of truth, but of) The Truth. (To Ivedpa 
Tis dAnOeias, xiv. 17, XV. 26, xvi. 13), é.e. not 
merely the Spirit to whom specially belongs 
the revelation of absolute Truth, but the 
Spirit of Christ who is The Truth. 


(4) In THE HOLy SPIRIT. 
The Spirit of The Truth is also THE 


TRUTH. (70 paprupoty ore TO m. eoTW 7 
dAjdea, “that the Spirit is THE TRUTH.” 
I John v. 6.) 


2. Embodied in the sum-total of the re- 
velation of Jesus, as the reflection of the 
mind of God, and therefore the absolute truth 
(John i. 17, viii. 32, 40, 45, Xvi. 13, XVil. 17, 
XVili. 37; I Johnii, 21; 2 John xr), 

{In many passages the meanings (x a) and 
2) run into each other, in the same way as 
e Personal Word and the word spoken or 

written, e.g. John v. 33; 1 John ii. 19; 2 
John 2; 3 John 12.] 


Wl. The Truth received passes subjectively into 
The Truth in us (x Johni. 8, ii. 4; 2 John 
23 paprupoivtay gov TH aAnbeia, 3 John 
3). Hence: 


1 The root of this great utterance of the Son of 
God is in the words DN S¥"Nin Npy ox ‘mY 


** The Lord God is 7ruth; He, even God, is 
Life” (Jer. x. 10). 


(a) Truth in thought, consisting in the ac 
cord of thought with being, conformity of 
our conceptions to that Truth which is the 
ideal and unerring standard! (x John ii. 21; 
2 John r). 

(4) Truth in action. As The Truth covers 
the whole extent of human nature, right 
action is that Truth made visible and projected 
outwardly in conduct (6 d€ rowdy thy GAn- 
Gevav, John iii. 21; ov roodpev tv adnOeay, 
1 John i. 6). 

(c) Truth in speech—opposed not to the 
logical falsity which is a mistake, but to the 
ethical falsity which is a /ie (anarthrous in 
viii. 44—46). 

(4) Truth in actuality as opposed to ap- 
pearance—the fact as opposed to the sham 
(anarthrous in 1 John iii. 18. év aAneig, 
really, with true love, 2 John 1; 3 John r; 
cf. vv. 3, 4. 


4. greater] perCorépav (cf. for form éAa- 
xtororep@, Ephes. ili. 8), a poetical compara- 
tive formed from a comparative (cf. ‘‘ Now 
that I am more better than Prospero,” ‘ Tem- 
pest,’ Act 11, scene 1). Note in the pectorépuy 
«+(va akovw an almost peculiarly Jobannie use 
of iva; cf. 1 John iv. 17 (Winer, Pt. UL 
§ xliv. p. 255). 


7. of the Gentiles] amé rév é6vav. Text. 
Recept. ’E6vixeyv is read in A, B, C, 8, and 
received into the text by Tischend. But it 


1 “Non enim falsa dicit, qui se verum dicere 
dicit, sed falsas apprehensas veré enunciat illas 
apprehensiones. Cum igitur veritas sit orationis 
adzequatio cum ipsis speciebus, falsitas erit in 
notionibus que sunt in anima, propterea quod 
ez rebus adzquate non sunt, non autem in 
oratione. Sculptura in gemmé falsa erit, quippe 
que Cardanum minus expressé delineabit, non 
erit falsa cera, nempe sculpturam é chrysolitho 
praecisé referet...... Veritas est affectus orationis 
conveniens mentt, et affectus mentis conveniens 
rei.” Jul. C. Scalig. ‘De Subtil. ad Carda 
num,’ Exerc. II. p. 8. 


III. JOHN. 


has the air ot a gloss. For ¢yy is a very 
ambiguous word. (a) It stands for non- 
Judean races generally, with no religious 
allusion; (4) for persons geographically out- 
side Palestine, including Jews of the disper- 
sion ; (c) for the nations as idclatrous ; (d) for 
non-Judzan Christians (Rom. xi. 13, xv. 27, 
xvi. 4; Gal. ii. 12—14). But, as its more 
solemn use included idolatry (Matt. vi. 32, 
x. 18; Acts iii. 45; 1 Cor. v. 1), and as it 
is so used here, it seemed that ¢@xoi might 
express the thought with less ambiguity (Matt. 
v. 47, Vi. 7, Xvili. 17). See this point very 
fully in Reiche, ‘Comm. Crit. 

taking nothing of the Gentiles. ‘‘ After verbs 
of receiving, borrowing, &c., dro has merely 
the general meaning of whence. (Matt. xvii. 
25.) In the expression Aay8. mapa rivos the 
tts denotes the person actually tendering or 
delivering. In 3 John 7 the Apostle would 
have used rapa and not amo (rav é6vav) if 
the meaning had been that the Gentiles had 
actually tendered a present.” Winer, Part 
Ill. § xlvii. 388, note 1. 


8. therefore] Odv occurs with special fre- 
quency in the Gospel of St John. (About 
220 times, against 50 in St Matthew, 11 in St 
Mark, 45 in St Luke, 68 in Acts.) The word 
is probably a contraction from éov, quod 
quum ita sit (Kihner’s ‘Gr. Gr.’ by Jelf, 
§ 737), and thus in some measure illustrates 
the old English argumentative use of being 
(e.g. ‘‘being the object of faith is supposed 
infallibly true; deing it is the nature of truth 
not to hide itself.” ‘Exposition of Creed,’ 
Bp Pearson, Art. 1.) It is scarcely accurate 
to speak of it as the most properly syllogistic 
of the inferential particles with Winer (cf. 
‘Gr. of N. T. Diction,’ Part 111. § lxiii. 8 a. 
with what is said of the dpa conclusivum of 
logical inference and other particles of con- 
sequence. Donaldson, ‘Gr. Gr. 571, 31; 
Kiihner’s ‘Gr. Gr.’ by Jelf, §§ 787—791). 
In St John’s Gospel ody is seldom merely 
resumptive Or continuative. The instances 
given by Winer of the continuative ody ap- 
pear to be somewhat questionable. This 
frequent recurrence of ovy is the natural 
and spontaneous tribute of St John’s mind to 
the divine connection of all things in the 
Redeemer’s life to the reasonable, religious, 
necessary consequence of every part and inci- 
dent of that History which is not ‘‘a maze 


without a plan,” but the highest manifestation 


383 


of law in the region of human history. The _ 


narrative of the human development of the 
life of the Word made Flesh is interlinked 
throughout by causes more essentially cone 


nected with their effects than “the sound.of the © 


bell with going to chapel.” Hence ody is natu- 
rally frequent in St John’s Gospel to exprese 
not merely continuity of narrative, but inter- 
volution of events—not J/ogical but Aistorical 
inference. But the same habit of thought 
which views sacred history in this light is 
precisely that which in the region of theology 
is essentially dogmatic. And an inspired 
dogmatic theologian will write oracularly, 
not inferentially like a schoolman. The in- 
ferential ody of the regular treatise is, there- 


fore, naturally absent from St John’s Epistles, - 


until we come at last to an Jistorical state- 
ment in 3 John v. 7, where he draws a moral 
inference from it in v. 8 (speis otv édeido- 
pev). This is probably the sole instance of 
ovy in these Epistles. (In x John ii. 24 it has 
no authority—some however in iv. 19.) 


12. Demetrius was an LEphesian name 
(Acts xix. 24). An architect called Deme- 
trius is also mentioned by Vitruvius (see Introd. 
to 1 John). The idea that the silversmith, 
Demetrius, the agitator of his guild, may 
have been the very Demetrius, so honourably 
mentioned in this place, is of comparatively 
modern origin (Comm. a Lap. ‘ Comment. in 
Scrip. S.’ xx. p. 646). But the con- 
jecture has nothing in the least improbable. 
The accurate version of the addresses of the 
silversmith, Demetrius, to his fellow-crafts- 
men (Acts xix. 25-28), and of the ‘‘ town- 
clerk” to the people of Ephesus (zdid. 3541), 
would seem to imply the possession of docu- 
ments or of private information by St Luke, 
which had been afforded by one or other of 
the speakers in a spirit friendly to Christi- 
anity. The very vehemence of the language 
of Demetrius against St Paul (v. 26) betrays 
an uneasy sense of the fascinating power ct 
his teaching. And the record of these ex- 
pressions of Demetrius would be deeply in. 
teresting to those readers of the Acts who 
knew that the maker of the “ silver shrines of 
Diana” had resigned all hope of gaining wealth 
by his old occupation, and became convinced 
of St Paul’s great principle, ‘‘ that they be no 
gods which are made with hands.” 


382 


THE EPISYTLES OF JOHN: 


ADDITIONAL NOTE on 1 JOHN t. rr. 


Since this note was in type, the writer has 
_Met with the following sentences in a remark- 
able paper on the application of the laws of 
Degeneration and Reversion to Type in the 
Spiritual world, by Professor H. Drummond, 
F.R.S.E. 

“There are certain burrowing animals— 
‘like the mole for instance—which have taken 
‘to spend their lives beneath the surface of the 
‘‘sround. And nature has taken her revenge 
‘upon them in this thoroughly-natural way— 
“by closing up their eyes. If they mean to 
‘live in darkness, she argues, eyes are clearly 


‘Ca superfluous function. By neglecting them, 
‘“‘these animals make it clear they do not want 
“them. And as one of Nature’s fixed prin- 
‘‘ciples is that nothing shall exist in vain, the 
‘‘eyes are presently taken away or reduced to 
‘¢a rudimentary state. Similarly, there are 
‘‘ fishes which have had to pay the same forfeit 
‘by taking up their abode in dark caverns, 
‘‘where eyes are never required And in 
‘‘exactly the same way the spiritual eye must 
“die and lose its power by purely natural 
‘‘law if the soul choose to walk in darkness 
‘¢ rather than in light.” 


ADDITIONAL NOTE on 1 JOHN ut 2z. 
The wmter has been favoured by a correspondent with the following careful note. 


‘¢' The following may be given as arguments 
“tin favour of an amended rendering. ‘It 
‘¢never yet was manifested what we shall be, 
“but we know if it were manifested.’ 

“«j, The marked antithesis in the Greek 
‘ odrw ehavepwbn...cav pavepwO7. 

‘‘ij, The more evident sense in the English. 

‘iii. If “when He shall appear’ were in- 
‘tended, should we not expect drav dave- 
“‘ pwn, as in v. 28 of the preceding chapter ? 

“iv, éay is used about 15 times in St John’s 
“Epistles, and about 30 times in his Gospel, 
“and always i1 the conditional and not the 
‘future sense. Cf. 3 Epist. 10, cay Ada, not 
“6 When I shall come, but If I come, i.e. If I 


‘“‘am able to come. Cf. also John viii. 36, 
“av ovv 6 vids éXevOepoog, Vill. 52, 
“dv tis THpYNG7N, Xil. 32, Kayo eav do- 
“O65, xxi. 25, €av ypadnrat. 

“ Gospel, v. 43, Vi. 62, Vil. 17, 37, Vill. 14, 16, 
31, X. 9, Xi. 40, 48, Xil. 24, 26, 47, XIV. 
663, 14,15, 23, XV. 7, 10, 14, XIX. 12, XXi. 22. 
“Epistle 1, i. 6, 7, 8, 10, il. I, 3, 15, 24, 29, 
“iii, 20, 21, iv. 12, 20, V. 15.] 

‘‘y, On the other hand we find éray used 
‘exclusively in the future sense. Gospel, 
“viii. 28, drav UWaonre, Ville 44, Grav adj, 
“xiii. 19, Oray yevnrat, XV. 26, Grav €dOp. 
“Cf, also iv. 25, Vil. 27, 31, XiV. 29, XVi. 13, 
‘xxi, 18, &c., &c.™ 





PU DE. 


INTRODUCTION. 


PAGE 

The writer . 383 
The persons to cukom “the Epistle is ad~ 

dressed . > AiG Sa 

Its authenticity . - 384 


Date and place of writing - 385 
ion Epistle though brief has been 

the subject of much controversy. 
In treating of the points which have 
come under debate it will be convenient 
to adopt the following order : 


1. THE WRITER. 


The writer calls himself (v. 1) “Jude 
the brother of James.” Now in the 
primitive Christian times, and among 
the Judzo-Christians for whom this 
Epistle, from the character of its con- 
tents, must have been intended, there 
was only one person, after the martyrdom 
of James the brother of John by the 
order of Herod Agrippa I. (Acts xii. 2), 
who could have been spoken of simply 
as “James” without further description, 
and whom all men from such brief men- 
tion might be expected to recognize. 
This was the James who presided over 
the Church in Jerusalem (Acts xii. 17, 
xv. 13, xxi. 18; 1 Cor. xv. 7; Gal. ii. 9, 
12), who is usually spoken of as bishop 
there, and who in Gal. i. 19 is called 
“the Lord’s brother.” Thus the writer 
of the present Epistle claims to be the 
Judas named among the brethren of the 
Lord in Matt. xiii. 55; Mark vi. 3. He 
seems (v. 17) to state by implication that 
he was not an Apostle, “ Remember ye 
the words which have been spoken 
before by the Apostles of our Lord Jesus 
Christ, how that ¢hey said to you,” &c. 
But that we cannot base a positive con- 


Its relation to the Second sie of Sern 
Peter mi Pe cli te e 386 

Contents . - 387 

The Book of Enoch, the “Zobar aid Jalkut. - 387 


clusion on such language is evident from 
Acts v. 29, where it is said, “ Then Peter 
and the Apostles answered,” &c., an 
expression which no one would interpret 
as excluding Peter from the Apostolic 
band. 

But there are some further considera- 
tions which appear to confirm the con- 
struction which may be put on the 
writer’s own words. If St Jude was not 
an Apostle neither would St James be 
one. Now in St James’ Epistle (which 
is by all admitted to be the writing of 
the Bishop of Jerusalem) there is the 
same absence of any claim to be of the 
number of the Apostles as we find in 
St Jude. He calls himself merely ‘‘ James 
a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus 
Christ,” words which bear a marked 
resemblance to the form which St Jude 
employs. If they were both Apostles it 
is very remarkable that in neither Epistle 
do we discover anything that gives an 
intimation thereof, while in one we have 
words which may fairly be taken to imply 
that St Jude was not an Apostle. Again, 
the statement (John vii. 5) that, at a time 
not long before the Crucifixion, the bre- 
thren of Jesus did not believe on Him, 
points in the same direction. It is true 
that the “brethren of the Lord” are 
mentioned (Acts i. 14) as assembled at 
Jerusalem with the rest to wait for the 
outpouring of the Spirit on the day of 
Pentecost. But the way in which they 
are there spoken of severs them from the 


384 


Apostolic body rather than includes 
them in its number. After the mention 
of the eleven by name we are told, 
“These all continued with one accord 
in prayer and supplication with the 
wormen and Mary the mother of Jesus, 
and with his brethren.” A sentence could 
hare ly be framed which should emphasize 
more pointedly the distinction between 
“ Apostles” and “the Lord’s brethren.” 
The latter are also placed last in the 
enumeration, as if they had most recently 
been included among the believers. The 
change in their feeling towards Jesus 
since His death and resurrection has 
been thought to be sufficiently explained 
by the words of St Paul (1 Cor. xv. 7), 
that the Lord had been “seen of James” 
on one special occasion after he was 
risen from the dead. It has been argued 
from this verse, and from the language 
of Gal. i. 19, that St Paul includes this 
James among the Apostles. But the 
term Apostle was not restricted by St 
Paul to the twelve, but is applied in the 
New Testament to Paul himself, to 
Barnabas, and apparently (Rom. xvi. 7) 
to Andronicus and Junias. It seems 
therefore more in accordance with the 
evidence which we possess to conclude 
(1) that the writer of the Epistle of St 
Jude was a different person from the 
Apostle Jude, who appears also to have 
had the names Lebbzeus and Thaddeus 
(cf. Matt. x. 3; Mark iii. 18, with Luke 
vi. 15; Acts i. 13), and about whom 
St John (xiv. 22), when he wants to dis- 
tinguish him, uses the words “not 
Iscariot ;” (2) that he was the brother 
of James, known in the early Church 
as the Just, and who presided over the 
Church at Jerusalem during the period 
embraced in the latter portion of the 
Acts of the Apostles, and who was one 
of the “brethren of the Lord.” That 
neither James nor Jude allude to this 
close connexion with Jesus may be ex- 
plained from a natural desire not to seem 
to lay stress on a position in respect of 
the Founder of Christianity to which 
none of the other Disciples or Apostles 
could have a claim, and this feeling 
would be the stronger in them because 
they had so long rejected the teaching 
of Him to whom in humility they now 
both alike call themselves (SotAox) dond- 
servants. 


INTRODUCTION TO 


2. PERSONS FOR WHOM THE EPISTLE 
WAS WRITTEN. 


The Epistle is addressed to Chris- 
tians who had been Jews. This is the 
reason why the writer calls himself 
“brother of James.” For we learn from 
Eusebius (‘H. E.’ 11. 23) that all the 
Jewish people, not the Christians only, 
held James the Bishop of Jerusalem in 
high regard. Moreover all the illustra- 
tions that are used in the letter are those 
of a Jew writing for Jews. The deliver- 
ance from Egypt, the fallen angels, the 
cities of the plain, the legend of Michael’s 
contention with Satan, the references to 
Cain, Balaam, and Korah, as well as the 
prophecy ascribed to Enoch, are all 
found in a very brief space, and are 
touched upon in such a manner as could 
be edifying to none save those who were 
familiar not only with Old Testament 
Scripture, but also with Jewish traditions, 


3. Its AUTHENTICITY. 


When we consider the brevity of St 
Jude’s Epistle, and that it was, though 
now called Catholic, addressed in the 
first instance only to a small section of 
the Christian Church, we need not be 
surprised that it did not receive great 
recognition from the early Christian 
writers. It is mentioned in the Mura- 
torian Canon, which may be taken as ~ 
representing the opinion of the Western _ 
Church soon after the middle of the 
second century. Clement of Alexandria 
(A.D. 165—200) quotes from the Epistle 
(‘Strom,’ 11. 2. 11), and in a summary 
of the works of that Father, given by 
Eusebius (‘H. E.’ vi. 14), it is said that 
St Jude was included among the books 
on which Clement wrote short explana- 
tions. Origen (a.D. 186—253) speaks of 
the Epistle in one place (‘Comm. in 
Matth.’ T. x. 17) in terms of high praise, 
as being “short indeed, but filled with 
language powerful with heavenly grace,” 
though elsewhere (T. xvii. 30) he seems 
to have doubts as to its authority. Ter 
tullian (A.D. 200) speaks of the Epistle 
of St Jude (De cultu feminarum, 3) as 
a portion of accepted Scripture. For 
he is desirous to uphold the authority 
of the Book of Enoch, and after several 
arguments he closes the chapter, “‘ More- 
over Enoch is testified unto by Jude the 


4 THE EPISTLE OF JUDE. 


Apostle.” As he calls the Epistle the 
work of an Apostle, we may be sure that 
it was held as a portion of the New 
Testament in Northern Africa in his day. 
And that this was so is further shewn by 
a passage in a treatise’ generally included 
among the works of Cyprian, Bishop of 
Carthage (A.D. 200—258), where Jude 
14, 15 is directly quoted. 

Again in Eusebius (‘H. E.’ vii. 30) we 
have preserved a letter of Malchion, a 
presbyter at Antioch, written to the 
bishops of Alexandria and Rome con- 
cerning the heretical teaching of Paul of 
Samosata, and therefore of the date a.D. 
260—270, in which he uses the words of 
Jude 3, 4 in describing the errors against 
which his letter is directed. 

Nevertheless Eusebius (A.D. 325) him- 
self ((H E.’ m1. 24) classes the Epistle 
of St Jude among the avtiAeyopeva, by 
which he means those books about which, 
though well known and recognized by 
most, there has been some controversy, 
and it is not quoted or alluded to by 
Irenzus, nor included in the Syriac ver- 
sions of the New Testament, which last 
fact shews us that in one branch of the 
Christian Church it was either not known 
or not received for Canonical in the 
second century, to the middle of which 
the Peshito version may be most fairly 
assigned. But that we may estimate 
rightly the value of evidence concerning 
the omission of any quotation from St 
Jude in the writings of one of the 
Fathers, even though his works be 
voluminous, it should be observed that 
we have no notice of our Epistle in the 
whole of the writings of St Chrysostom, 
who died A.D. 407, but yet in a dialogue’ 
composed at Rome by Palladius a friend 
of Chrysostom concerning that Father’s 
life, we have a direct quotation from 
St Jude. So that in the case of such 
brief composition the argument from the 
silence of any of the Fathers ought not 
to be too closely pressed. The conclu- 
sion, which we can draw from such evi- 
dence as has come down to us, is that 
in the Western Church the Epistle won 
its way to acceptance at an earlier date 
than in the East. It was known in Italy 
and the Churches of Northern Africa, 


1 * Ady. Novat. Heret.’ p. xvii. ed. Baluz. 
2 Included among the works of Chrysostom, 
T. XIII. p. 68, c. 


New Test—Votr IV. 


385 


and in Alexandria, by the middle or 
latter part of the second century, while 
at the commencement of the fourth cen- 
tury its acceptance in the East was not 
general Whether any inference can be 
drawn from these data as to place where 
it was first circulated, or the Churches 
to which it was addressed, is not easy to 
decide. But Jerome writing in the fourth 
century gives a reason for the non-accept- 
ance of the Epistle which probably had 
weight with many of the early Christians. 
He says (‘ Catal. Scr. Eccl.’ 4), “Because 
in it Jude derives a testimony from the 
book of Enoch, which is apocryphal, it 
is rejected by most.” But at the Council 
of Laodicza (A.D. 363) when the canon 
of the New Testament was first settled 
authoritatively, and when there would be 
more evidence for and against the Epistle 
accessible than we now possess, it was 
received among the Canonical Books, as 
also at the Council of Carthage (a.D. 
397), and there seems no reason, in spite 
of the objections raised against it in early 
times, for questioning its authenticity. 


4. DATE AND PLACE OF WRITING. 


Concerning the time when the E- 
pistle was written there is not much to 
guide us, nor in reference to the place 
where it was composed. From the notice 
of the descendants of Jude the brother of 
the Lord preserved by Eusebius (‘ H. E.’ 
Ill. 19, 20) from Hegesippus, we should 
conclude that they were resident in 
Palestine and had always lived there. It 
seems natural therefore to suppose that 
the Epistle was written somewhere in 
that country for the Jewish converts to 
Christianity. If, as seems to be inti- 
mated by Hegesippus in the passage just 
alluded to, St Jude was dead in the time 
of Domitian, we shall perhaps not be far 
wrong in assigning the composition to 
about A.D. 80. The arguments which 
have been put forward for an earlier date, 
because it is assumed that in a letter of 
such a character the writer would not 
have failed to mention the destruction 
of Jerusalem as an illustration, had that 
event already taken place, must not be 
looked upon as conclusive. For the 
brevity of the letter is such as to deprive 
them of their force, and the very recent- 
ness of the overthrow of the Holy City 


586 


would prevet:t its destruction from enter- 
img as yet into such history as might be 
used for pointing a moral. 

Yet there are words in the Epistle 
which bear somewhat on the question of 
date. The writer exhorts his readers to 
remember the words which have been 
spoken by the Apostles. Now fjya is 
specially used of that which is pronounced 
and heard. We should conclude there- 
fore from its use here, that the writer is 
addressing those who had listened to the 
oral teaching of the Apostles. He must 
therefore have been a contemporary of 
the Apostles himself. And for it to be 
possible for him to assume the earnest 
tone of admonition which he here em- 
ploys, he must have been a person to 
whom mature age had given weight of 
character. It may be also, as the words 
were spoken, that he himself had been 
present at such preaching as that to 
which he alludes. Indeed that the writer 
had heard such lessons given to those to 
whom he writes is made very probable 
by his language in the following verse, 
“ Remember... how that_thevwigifacion. 
There is hardly any n¢ reminder except 
to be put on such ad himself listened 
that he who gives it.aemory of which he 
to the teaching, thehis readers. All this 
desires to revive int Jude being a fellow- 
is consistent with Apostles in the cities 
labourer with thchis living on even past 
of Palestineun of Jerusalem, and taking 
~be dm interest in all the Churches 
which were established in that country. 
It cannot lead us to any precise date, 
Dut it suits only those early days when a 
generation was alive to whom the 
Apostles had given oral teaching on the 
life of Christ and its lessons. As we 
place the Epistle from grammatical and 
other considerations after 2nd Peter, its 
composition must be assigned to the 
period between a. D. 65—8o. 


5. RELATION To SECOND PETER. 


The relation of St Jude’s Epistle to 
the second Epistle of St Peter has been 
already discussed at length in the In- 
troduction to the latter Epistle. But it 
may be added here that if St Peter’s 
Epistle be the later composition and the 
work of some very clever imitator of that 


INTRODUCTION TO 


Apostle’s style, it is very strange that he 
drew his material so largely from St Jude, 
an Epistle which, as we have’ seen, was 
among the controverted portion of the 
early Christian writings There are beside 
some portions of St Jude’s Epistle which 
seem © put St Peter's language into an 
objec ive form, and so demonstrate that 
St Jude was the later writer. For ex- 
ample St Peter (ii. 1) speaks of those 
who deny the Lord that bought them, 
and bring upon themselves swift destruc- 
tion. St Jude having this, as we believe, 
before him gives an instance of the de- 
struction at which St Peter had only 
hinted. For immediately after the men- 
tion of those “who deny our Lord God 
and Jesus Christ” he does not continue 
as St Peter did, but adds “I will put you 
in remembrance how that the Lord having 
saved the people out of the land of Egypt, 
afterwards destroyed them that believed 
not,” thus emphasizing by an illustration 
the destruction of the ungodly. 

It should be noted (oo, Oe ioe oti 

; 3m An Eeen Ss us 
xe; St Jude was the more likel, 7 
adapt materials which lay ready to his 
hand. He had purposed (verse 3) to 
write a general Epistle concerning “the 
common salvation,” but learning that there 
was need for a special and immediate 
letter of warning, he writes that at once. 
What more natural than, if he knew St 
Peter’s predictive letter written in antici- 
pation of what was now become an actual 
fact, that he should take that and use all 
in it which suited his purpose, only giving 
to the language such modifications as to 
fit it to the graver character of the times? 

It should also be noticed that there 
are some passages in St Jude which look 
like an elaboration of what St Peter had 
previously written, but can scarcely be 
understood if the contrary order of com- 
position be maintained. Thus St Peter 
(ii. 4) speaks merely of the angels when 
they sinned, as cast down and eft (rern- 
pnpevous, A. V. reserved) unto judgment 
St Jude elaborates this and by employ 
ing the same verb twice over in his sen- 
tence, plays upon the sense in a way 
which, with a knowledge of the Jewish 
fondness for such antithesis, we cannot 
believe that a copyist (as some suppose 
St Peter to have been) would have failed 
to reproduce. The words of St Jude (6) 





THE? EPISTLE) ‘OF JUDE. 


are “The angels which eff not (49) ryp7- 
gayres) their first estate, but left their 
proper habitation, he hath eft (rerjpyxev) 
in everlasting bonds under darkness unto 
the judgment of the great day.” 

And in like manner in another passage 
(2 Pet. ii. 12) St Peter’s words seem the 
simple statement in extension of which 
St Jude has afterwards made a most 
pointed distinction. What seems to be 
naturally the earlier sentence speaks of 
the false teachers as “‘creatures without 
reason, mere animal natures, things to be 
taken and destroyed, railing in matters 
whereof they are ignorant.” On this 
St Jude dwells and brings into strong 
contrast the sense which as animals 
they have by nature, and their want of 
knowledge in those things about which 
they speak evil. He writes (as St Peter 
had written), “These rail at whatsoever 
things they £zow not,” but St Jude alone 
continues “and what they understand na- 
turally like the creatures without reason 
in these things are they corrupted.” It 
appears in the highest degree improbable 
that if St Peter had been the later writer 
he would, in his imitation, have failed to 
reproduce a passage which is far more 
pointed than the sentence which we have 
in his own Epistle. 

These are points which are specially 
noticeable in St Jude’s Epistle, and which 
combined with what has been said in the 
Introduction to 2 Peter, make it far more 
likely that St Jude knew and used St 
Peter’s work, than that the opposite was 
the order in which the Epistles were 
written. 

Examples are not wanting in the Old 
Testament where writers have copied 
either from one another or from some 
common source. Cf. Is. ii. 2—4 with 
Mic. iv. 1—3, also Joel iii. 16—21 with 
Amos i. 2 and ix. 11—15, &c. 


6. CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE. 


The Epistle opens with the salutation 
and an invocation of a blessing on those 
to whom it is addressed (1, 2). 

The writer was minded to have sent a 
letter dealing with the general doctrines 
of Christ’s religion, but he is constrained 
to write at once a special Epistle, for 
false teachers are risen up against whom 
they must be warned (3, 4). 


387 


He would put his readers in mind that 
among the people brought up from Egypt 
faithless men were found whom God de- 
stroyed; even angels that sinned God has 
kept in bonds for judgment; and has 
left the overthrow of the cities of the 
plain as a warning for after times lest 
they should sin in like manner. But the 
false teachers of whom he speaks do 
commit like gross sins, and despise all 
authorities, giving free rein to their mere 
animal nature (5, 10). 

Continuing his description he classes 
these offenders with sinners like Cain and 
Balaam and Korah. They are the blem- 
ishes on the Christian community, self- 
seeking, making large promises but with 
no prospect of performance, disappoint- 
ing all hope, and shamelessly publishing 
their own disgrace. Of these and of their 
judgment Enoch hasprophesied (11—16). 
He turns now to exhortation, and bids 
his readers remember that such mockers 
had been foretold by the Apostles, and 
nowthey have appeared. But let the faith- 
ful hold firm to the end, praying and 
watching for the mercy of Christ, 17—21. 

He then teaches how to act towards 
the offenders (22, 23), and with a solemn 
ascription concludes his brief letter (24, 


25). 
4. Tue Book or Enocu, &c. 


We know the Book of Enoch now only 
from the AXthiopic versions, copies of 
which were brought from Abyssinia to- 
wards the end of last century by the 
traveller, Bruce. An edition of this 
translation, which had been made from a 
Greek version, was published by Arch- 
bishop Lawrence in 1838, and the same 
editor had previously published three 
editions of a translation of the Book into 
English. A most complete edition of 
the Ethiopic text and also a German 
translation thereof have been since pub- 
lished at Leipzig (1851 and 1853) by Dr 
A. Dillmann, and this leaves little to be 
desired so far as the Aithiopic version is 
concerned. 

But the book was known in the early 
centuries of Christianity, and passages 
are quoted from it in the Chronography 
of Georgius Syncellus, a monkish his- 
torian who lived at Constantinople at the 
end of the eighth and beginning of the 


BB2 


388 


ninth century. His extracts were no 
doubt made from a copy of the work in 
Greek, as were those which appear to 
indicate a knowledge of the book in 
Justin Martyr and Anatolius, and the 
quotations in Clemens Alexandrinus and 
Origen, and in the Testaments of the 
twelve Patriarchs. It may also with most 
probability be assumed that it was from 
a Greek version that Tertullian and Au- 
gustine drew their knowledge. It is, 
however, most likely that the original was 
in some dialect of Hebrew, judging from 
the names given to the angels and the 
winds, and we have evidence that a work 
known as the Book of Enoch was in use 
among the Jews duwn w a late dace in the 
Christian era, though it is not now to be 
found. The Book of Enoch is fre- 
quently alluded to in the Zohar, and if 
what Tertullian says (De cultu fem. 3), 
concerning its rejection by the Jews 
because it spake of Christ, be admitted, 
the absence of all notice of it in c-rlier 
Jewish literature seems to be accounted 
for. The style of the whole book how- 
ever is that of the Jewish writings of a 
date about the time of the Christian 
era. 

From whatever quarters the writer 
gathered his materials they are all hung 
on one string, and this stamps the book, 
even as we have it, with unity in its 
~ composition, and the opinion of students 
now most generally inclines to place its 
date some short time previous to the 
Christian era. So that St Jude’s words 
may very well have been a quotation 
proper. 

For a full account of the book the 
reader must consult Dillmann’s ‘Liber 
Henoch,’ 1850, and ‘das Buch Henoch,’ 
1853. Much further information may 
be gathered concerning the whole con- 
tents of the book from Dr Westcott’s 
article in the ‘ Dictionary of the Bible.’ 

In the notes on this Epistle and 2nd 
Peter mention has also been made of 
the Zohar and Jalkut as authorities in 
Jewish literature, it seems therefore de- 
sirable to add a few words about the 
character and date of these works’. 


1 I should have felt unable to speak of these 
important books as they deserve, had I not been 
aided in my enquiries by the learning and kind- 
ness of my friend the Rev. Dr Schiller-Szinessy, 
Reader in Rabbinic and Talmudic in the Uni- 


INTRODUCTION TO 


Although ‘the Zohar became first 
known in Europe through the Jews in 
Spain in the 13th century, yet with the 
exceptions of (2) some portions by which 
the main work is surrounded, and which 
can without difficulty be distinguished 
and severed from the original composi- 
tion, and (4) some interpolations by 
which it is here and there disfigured and 
damaged, it is a work, at the latest, of 
the sixth or seventh century of our era. 
This is proved (1) by the character of 
the language of the older portion, and 
(2) by the contents which were current 
in Palestine and Babylonia before and . 
at the date just mentioned. The lan- 
guage shews that the work was composed 
in Palestine, and such being the case we 
can understand why it was not brought 
to Europe at an earlier date, from the 
statement (T. J. ‘Synhedrin,’ m1. 9 [ed. 
princeps III. 10]) where it is forbidden to 
carry books belonging to Palestine unto 
places “without the land.” The Zohar 
was no doubt sent by Nachmanides (flor. 
1267) to his son and to his disciples in 
Spain on the principle (oft mentioned in 
Jewish literature in explanation of Ps. 
cxix. 126), that one may on certain oc- 
casions break the Law, when the non- 
observance thereof is its best support. 
(Cf. T. B. ‘Menachoth,’ 99 a, last line, and 
‘Berachoth,’ 63 a.) Rabbi Shimeon ben 
Jochai was the author of the Zohar, in 
the same sense that Rabbi Jochanan 
was the author of the Talmud Jerushal- 
mi, z.¢. he gave the first impulse to the 
composition of the book, though it was 
no doubt not finished for some hundreds 
of years after his time. Except by some 
Jews the Zohar has not been much studied 
or circulated because to translate it merely 
(however correctly that may be done) is to 
succeed in grasping only a very dry mor- 
sel ; but to read the book with the com- 
ments of a teacher who has possession of 
the traditional explanations is a study 
which opens up questions of philosophy, 
and poetical thoughts of the grandest 
character. 

The Jalkut (which as its name implies 
is a collection made from previously ex- 
isting materials, and which is not the only 


versity of Cambridge, my obligations to whom 
in this and many other matters it gives me much 
pleasure here to acknowledge. 


THE EPISTLE OF JUDE. 


collection which bears this name) was for 
a long time looked upon as the work of 
a German Rabbi of the 14th or 15th cen- 
tury. It is now known to have been 
completed in the north of France in the 
11th century, and the greater portion of 
its contents (as separate parts of earlier 
literature) has been traced back to the 


389 


sixth century A.D. at the very latest, 
while some pieces reach back to a date 
before the Christian era. 

With regard to the question whether 
the Epistle was written originally in 
Hebrew, what has been said in the In- 
troduction to 2nd Peter applies equally 
to the present Epistle. 


THE GENERAL EPISTLE 


OF 


oP: 


He exhorteth them to be constant in the profes- 
ston of the faith. 4 False teachers are crept 
tn to seduce them: for whose damnable doc- 
trine and manners horrible punishment is 
prepared: 20 whereas the godly, by the assist- 
ance of the Holy Spirit, and prayers to God, 
may persevere, and grow in grace, and keep 
themselves, and recover others out of the snares 
of those deceivers. 


1. Judas. This is the Greek form of the 
name which anciently belonged to Judah the 
son of Jacob. It was written in Hebrew 
17177’, in which form are found all the four 
letters of the sacred name of God nn’. 
Jewish commentators state that this was a 
prophetic intimation of the future glory of 
the tribe of Judah. In later times the Jewish 
reverence for the Tetragrammaton caused 
them to modify the original orthography of 
the name Judah, and they wrote it (1) N71’, 
(2) they dropped the first 1, writing 81)’, of 
which the Greek *Iov8as is the representative. 
It was naturally very common, and is borne 
by six other persons in the N. T. beside the 
writer of this Epistle. 

a servant of Jesus Christ. The word ser- 
vant (more exactly bondservant) has some- 
times a restricted, sometimes a wider sense, 
in the New Testament. In the wider sense 
all the faithful may be called servants of 
Christ (cf. 1 Cor. vil. 22; Eph. vi. 6, &c.), 
but on the other hand those are specially so 
called who devoted their lives to the preach- 
ing of the Gospel and the spread of Christ’s 
Church. The latter is the meaning of the 
word here (cf. Rom. i. 1; Phil. i. 1; James 
i. 1). 
to them that are called, beloved in God 
the Father, and kept for Jesus Christ. ‘The 
Christians for whom the Epistle was written 
were no doubt those to whom the descrip- 
tion of the writer as ‘brother of James” 
was sufficient for his identification. They 
were therefore, in all likelihood, the Chris- 
tians in Palestine among whom the bishop 
of Jerusalem would be well known, and 
whose name would be the weightiest intro- 
duction with which an Epistle could com- 
mence. ‘These converts are called in the same 
manner as St Paul speaks of the Roman 
Christians (Rom. i. 7) as “called to be saints,” 
and also to the Corinthians (x Cor. i. 2) in 


ee the servant of Jesus Christ, 
and brother of James, to them 
that are sanctified by God the Father, 
and preserved in Jesus Christ, and 
called : 

2 Mercy unto you, and peace, and 
love, be multiplied. 


like terms, though in the latter case he imme- 
diately proceeds to rebuke them for their un- 
holy division. ‘They are members of the visible 
Church of Christ, in that they have accepted 
the calling of God, and so are added unto 
those that are in the way of salvation (Acts ii. 
47). As an expansion of the meaning of 
‘* called” the writer adds the defining clause 
which follows: beloved in God, &c. 

The reading beloved is to be pi 

having most support from MSS., while sanc- 
tified (as A.V.) seems to have been adopted 
because less difficult to connect with the pre- 
position in. Beloved in God when in connec- 
tion with called implies most naturally those 
to whom God’s love has been shewn in their 
call unto the kingdgm of His Son. So, but 
with a different preposition (2 Thess. ii. 13), 
‘“‘Brethren beloved of the Lord.” Here love 
towards His called ones is spoken of as a 
feeling which dwells in God the Father, and 
so the preposition has the force of ‘in respect 
of.” In their relation to God they are be- 
loved, and by God also are they kept for 
Jesus Christ. This keeping the Lord Him- 
self performed for His disciples while or 
earth, and when the time of His departure 
drew nigh he committed them by His praye: 
to be kept by the Father (John xvii. rr, 72). 
and their keeping is to be from evil. 
such St Paul prays (1 Thess. v. 23), “ May 
your whole spirit and soul and body be 
preserved blameless unto the coming of ow 
Lord Jesus Christ.” Whence we conclude 
that the dative of our text is not used of 
Christ as the agent in the preservation, but is 
best rendered for Jesus Christ. ‘The A.V. 
has carried on the preposition iz from the 
previous clause. 


2. The prayer with which the salutation 
closes is much like those in the two Epi 
of St Peter. The use of the verb be multiplied 


v. 3, 4] 


3 Beloved, when I gave all dili- 
gence to write unto you of the com- 
mon salvation, it was needful for me 
to write unto you, and exhort you 
that ye should earnestly contend for 





is rather Aramaic than Greek (cf. Dan. iv. 1; 
and the note on 1 Pet. i. 2). As in the some- 
what similar forms (1 Tim. i. 2; 2 Tim. i. 2; 
Tit. i. 4), the prayer is not that mercy and 
peace and love may be more abundant among 
themselves toward one another, but that God 
may abundantly bestow upon them these gifts 
from Himself. In the Pastoral Epistles the 
words ‘‘from God the Father” are added in 
each prayer. 


8. Beloved, while I was giving ail 
diligence to write unto you of our common sal- 
vation, 1 was constrained to write unto 
you, and exhort you to contend earnestly for the 
faith which was once for all delivered to the 
saints. From these words we gather that St 
/ Jude had in mind some larger and more gene- 
| ral address on the salvation wrought for all 
men by Christ’s death, but circumstances 
forced him to lay aside that first purpose and 
to send a brief letter relative to those matters 
on which warning seemed at the moment to 
be most needed. What circumstances com- 
pelled him to this course we can gather from 
the contents of his letter. He sees that the 
prophetic words spoken by St Peter about 
false teachers and their heretical lessons (2 Pet. 
ii. 1) have received their fulfilment, and not 
only so, but heretical teachings have resulted 
in corrupt practice, and this calls forth his 
impassioned letter. His language is all di- 
rected against the sinful doimgs of those 
against whom he gives his warnings. They 
are licentious, insubordinate, rebellious, sin- 
ners like Cain and Balaam and Korah, they 
follow their own lusts and have not the Spirit. 
It may well have been under such circum- 
stances that the more general work of an 
Epistle which dealt with the great truths and 
principles of the Christian religion should 
have been laid aside, and perhaps never again 
resumed, when the writer saw an immediate 
need presented to him, and one which called 
for present advice and exhortation. The 
words giving all diligence do not of necessity 
imply that the work of writing such a letter 
was already commenced, but only that this 
had been the writer’s chief care, until his mind 
was diverted from it by a more pressing oc- 
casion for writing. 

our common salvation. ‘The insertion of 
the pronoun is on the authority of the earliest 
MSS. Salvation is called common in the same 
way as St Paul (Tit. i. 4) calls Titus his son 
‘after the common faith ;” that which has been 
offered to us all, and which we have all em- 


JUDE. 


the faith which was once delivered 
unto the saints. 

4 For there are certain men crept 
in unawares, who were before of old 
ordained to this condemnation, un- 


braced. ‘The constraint laid upon the writer 
was that which resulted from the sight and 
knowledge of the corruptions which had 
flowed forth from false teaching. So it is for 
pure teaching that he is urgent on_his_ readers 


‘to contend. Faith (aicris) here, as always in’ 


the New Testament, has no sense of any objec- 
tive confession of faith already in existence, but 
means the lessons of Christ as published by 
His Apostles. But this teaching having once 
been given by the Apostles, there was to be no 
addition made thereto, no innovations intro- 
duced, as had been done by the teachers of 
whom St Peter wrote. The pernicious re- 
sults of such perversions of the faith were 
now making themselves felt, and so it is not 
without reason that the writer of this Epistle 
places in the forefront of his letter that the 
faith has once for all been delivered to the 
Saints, the belief in Christ which the new 
teachers had cast off. 

Nothing could be more natural under the 
circumstances than that the writer of such a 
letter as this is intended to be, a letter of hor- 
tatory warning against existing and rampant 
evils of practice, should turn to a composition 
already set forth to the Christian world, and 
which spake with a prophetic insight concern- 
ing such evils before they were so glaringly 
apparent, and that he should ground his exhor- 
tations on the words of so eminent a fore- 
runner as St Peter. Accordingly we find that 
in many parts of the remainder of the Epistle 
there is much resemblance to that part of the 
second Epistle of St Peter, in which the rise 
of false teachers had been foretold. Such 
repetition of another’s words is not without 
numerous parallels in the writings of the Old 
Testament (see Introduction, § 5, ad _fi.), and 
few things could be more impressive than te 
point out, as St Jude’s Epistle does, the fulfil- 
ment of all that had been previously foreseen 
by a brother Apostle. 


4. For there are certain men crept in un- 
awares,even they who were of old set forth 
in Scripture unto this sentence, ungodly 
men, turning the grace of our God into lascie 
viousness, and denying our only Master and 
Lord, Jesus Christ. 

The language of St Peter (ii. 1) is, ‘‘ They 
shall bring in privily destructive heresies, de= 
nying even the Master, that bought them.” 
And the whole character of that Apostle’s 
exhortation points to a time before the evil 
teaching, against which he writes, had culmi- 
nated in the evil living which ultimately ene 


39! 


392 


godly men, turning the grace of our 
od into lasciviousness, and denying 





sued from it. Besides this he deals almost 
entirely with teaching: “the way of truth shall 
be evil spoken of :” ‘with feigned words shall 
they make merchandise of you:” while St 
Jude’s language is all directed against the 
corrupt deeds from which he would protect 
his readers. His fear is of those who turn the 
grace of God into lasciviousnesss, defile the 
flesh, feed themselves without fear, who walk 
after their own lusts and are sensual. Of the 
stealthy introduction of adversaries into the 
ranks of Christians, who feigning a partial 
accord, should use their fellowship as means 
of working overthrow to the Church, St Paul 
speaks in similar language (Gal. ii. 4). The 
liberty which those traitors intended to spy 
out and abuse is that grace which in the pre- 
sent Epistle the writer declares to have been 
perverted unto sin. ‘The action is very like 
that of the heretic Simon Magus (Acts viii. 
9 seqq.), whose profession of faith can hardly 
have been sincere at first or his after conduct 
would have been different. 

In the verb ‘“‘set forth in Scripture” (zpo- 
y£ypaupevor) We are shewn that the previous 
publication of the judgment upon such men 
had been made in the Scriptures (ypadai) of 
the Old Testament. Their turning Pace from 
their first profession was like the faithless 
conduct of Israel in the wilderness: their fall 
into sinful lusts like the ways of the fallen 
angels and the people of Sodom: their self- 
seeking, greed, and insubordinate lives, like 
those of Cain and Balaam and Korah. St 
Paul (Gal. iii. 1) uses the same word of the 
prophetic declarations which had been made 
concerning the crucifixion of Jesus. 

The words this sentence refer to all the 
various forms of condemnation or punish- 
ment set forth in the examples which are 
afterwards noticed. The want of reverence 
implied in the word rendered ungodly is exactly 
the characteristic of the Gnostic teachers, who 
having begun, as it were, to weigh and mea- 
sure the Divinity, allowed nothing to check 
their irreverent speculations, but proceeded 
till they had formed a system which was a 
caricature of the Christian revelation. But 
by the time when St Jude's Epistle was 
written the seeds of irreverence were bringing 
forth a crop of corruption. These men had 
turned the grace of God into lasciviousness. 
The first steps in this perversion arose from a 
misuse of the freedom of which so much is 
said in the Apostolic writings, ‘the glorious 
liberty of the children of God” (Rom. viil. 
21). St Paul had found it needful to speak 
to the Galatian converts (Gal. v. 13) in warn- 
ing against the Antinomian tendencies which 
a false conception of Christian liberty was in 
danger of engendering. ‘‘Use not your liberty 


JUDE. 


the onl 
Jesus 


Lord God, and our Lord 
hrist. 


for an occasion to the flesh.” And St Peter 
(1 Pet. ii. 16) had given like caution: ‘ Free, 
and not using your liberty for a cloke of 
wickedness.” And that an unbridled license 
was the proffer of these heretical teachers we 
learn from 2 Pet. ii. 19. What they offered 
was what they themselves practised, and while 
promising their followers liberty, ‘‘they them- 
selves were the bondservants of corruption.” 
In the writings of the earliest Fathers ( Justin 
Martyr, ‘ Dial. with Trypho,’ chap, Xxxv.; 
Irenzus, ‘ Against Heresies,’ I. 6. 3) we find to 
what corrupt manners the lessons of these early 
heretics led the way. Some taught that they 
were superior to the world at large and could 


not perish owing to the very property of their — 


being. They might therefore indulge in all 
impurities without restraint, being like gold 
which is none the worse though it be plunged 


into the mire (Iren. I. 6. 2). Then some, 
maintained that the soul passed from body to © 


body till its knowledge of all things should be ~ 


completed. ‘To reduce the number of such 
migrations as much as possible they taught 
that the soul must be familiarized during 
this life with every act of which man is 
capable, including the basest and most degrad- 
ing. ‘The consequence of such a teaching was 
that those who put it to the proof became 
entangled in the attractions of grovelling vices 
(Iren. I. 25. 4, II. 32). Another tenet was 
that good and bad were merely matters of 
opinion (Just. Martyr, ‘Apol.’ I. 28), and we 
can see what the result of acting on such a 
doctrine must be. Again, matter was evil in 
its nature and not fit to be propagated, there- 
fore marriage was to be repudiated, and such 
repudiation brought in its train the grossest 
corruption in life and conversation. The 
Christian writers who lived nearest to the 
Apostolic age refer these words of the Epistle 
to such teachers as these. Thus Clemens 
Alexandrinus says they were true of the fol- 
lowers of Carpocrates (‘Stromata,’ III. 2, 
P- 575), whose teachings cast aside all soci 
traditions and convention, and pointed to a 
life according to nature as the way to attain 
true knowledge. 

We cannot wonder at the words which 
follow next in this description of these teachers 
of error, and followers of unbridled excess, 
that they denied our only Master and Lord, 
Jesus Christ. Holding such opinions on the 
corruption of the flesh, none of these sects 
could accept the teaching that the ‘* Word 
was made flesh,” and so they were led in one 
way or another to deny, some the Divinity, 
some the Humanity, and all consequently the 
Atonement of Christ. The first in the list of 
these teachers of error were the followers of 
Simon Magus, who, holding their founder to be 


—~— 





v. 5) 


5 I will therefore put you in re- 
membrance, though ye once knew 
this, how that the Lord, having saved 


as he taught ‘‘the power of God, that is called 
great ” (Acts viii. 10), denied Christ as Lord 
and Master. From them sprung the Docetz, 
whose teachings subverted the true humanity 
of Jesus, and opposed to them were the 
Ebionites, whose doctrines went to destroy 
His divinity. Of the former, Jerome says 
‘that even whilst the Apostles were living, and 
the blood of Christ had been recently shed in 
Judza, his body was asserted to have been a 
phantom ;” and of the latter, he says ‘‘that John 
the Apostle, the last of the Evangelists, was 
requested by the Bishops of Asia to write his 
Gospel against Cerinthus and other heretics 
(of whom Carpocrates already mentioned was 
an adherent) and the dogmas of the Ebionites, 
who maintain that Christ did not exist before 
Mary.” ‘Thes false teachings of the first 
century are exactly such as would be de- 
scribed by the language of St Jude in this 
verse, ‘“‘denying our only Master and Lord, 
Jesus Christ.” 


5. The Apostle now begins his enumera- 
tion of those characters in Holy Scripture to 
whom in the last verse he had alluded as pro- 
totypes of these later heretics. And in his 
descriptions he imputes to them seven forms 
of offence. First they are ungrateful and re- 
negades, like the Israelites when they were 
brought out from Egypt; they are rebellious 
and proud like the angels who fell from their 
glory; they corrupt themselves with fleshly 
excesses like the sinful inhabitants of the cities 
of the Plain; they respect no authority but 
rail against dignities, conduct which is even 
worse than Satanic; by their teachings they 
destroy their brethren, and so are murderers 
in a darker sense than Cain, for they conspire 
against men’s souls; they are slaves of covet- 
ousness, the sin of Balaam; and by their 
self-seeking they are fosterers of division where 
all should be unity, and in this Korah and his 
companions are their fitting representations in 
the older Scriptures. These examples are 
cited exactly in the way in which comparisons 
are made in the Jewish writings, and are of 
themselves a very strong evidence of the Apo- 
stolic date of the Epistle. They also help us 
to understand in what a very free sense the 
writers in the Gospels employ such expressions 
as ‘* Thus was fulfilled what was spoken by 
the prophet.” For to a Jewish writer it 
would have been quite in harmony with what 
he was constantly hearing, had the Apostle 
written, instead of the words “they perished 
in the gainsaying of Korah,” ‘thus was ful- 
filled what was spoken by the prophet, Ye 
shall understand that these men have provoked 
the Lord.” One example from Jewish writ- 


JUDE. 


the. people out of the land of Egypt, 
afterward destroyed them that be- 
lieved not. 





ings will suffice, though they might be multi- 
plied to a very great extent. Two children of 
Zadok the priest, one a boy and the other 
a girl, were put as prisoners in the charge of 
two officers. One of these gave his prisoner 
to a harlot, the other his to a merchant for 
wine and so was fulfilled what is said, Joel 
iii. 3 (Midrash on ‘ Echa,’ 986). In this sense 
does St Jude say that these heretical teachers 
and their corrupt lives were “ prefigured” 
(mpoyeypappevor). The first prefiguration of 
them is taken from the history of the journey 
from Egypt. Now I desire to put you 
in remembrance, Knowing as ye do all 
things once for all, that the Lord, hav- 
ing saved the people out of the land of Egypt, 
afterwards destroyed them that believed not. 
The first clause of this sentence is no mere 
expression of a coming action as the A.V. 
“T will, &c.” represents it. The verb sig- 
nifies an anxious wish on the part of the 
writer, generated by the sight of those evils 
against which his admonitions are to be di- 
rected. ‘The authoritative readings of the 
original in the second clause are in some re- 
spects different from the received text. (For 
Touro We must read rarra, and the best MSS. 
omit vas.) The sense conveyed is not that 
former lessons had been in any way forgotten 
(as A.V., ‘“‘though ye once knew them”), 
but merely a reminding that no new lessons 
are to be bestowed, only the old recalled 
vividly to mind, for those who are addressed 
had been fully instructed before in the faith 
which was once for all delivered to the saints. 

Some copies read Jesus instead of the Lord 
in this verse, and the statement is thus brought 
into parallelism with the language of St Paul 
(@ Cor. x. 4), where he speaks of the rock 
which followed the Israelites in the wilder- 
ness, saying, ‘that Rock was Christ.” And 
so St Peter (1 Pet.i. 11) calls the spirit which 
dwelt in the old prophets “the Spirit of 
Christ.” 

The people seems the best rendering here, 
though the original has no article. There 
could however be no doubt of the definite 
meaning of the word, as referring only to 
Israel. It is however possible to take the words 
‘a people” as closely connected with saved, 
with the sense, the Lord saved a people, i.e. 
Israel as a whole people, but though he first 
did so, yet his second act (ro Sevrepov) was 
to destroy the unbelieving part of them. That 
it was unbelief which led to the more gross 
sins of Israel is the teaching of the Psalmist 
(cvi. r2—21). 

Instead of this example of the Israelites, we 
have in 2 Pet. ii. 5 the destruction of the 
antediluvian world by the Flood. 


393 


394 


6 And the angels which kept not 


&, gm their ' first estate, but left their own 


habitation, he hath reserved in ever- 
lasting chains under darkness unto 
the judgment of the great day. 

7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, 


6. And angels which kept not their own 
dignity, 4ut forsook their proper habi- 
tation, he hath kept in everlasting bonds under 
darkness unto the judgment of the great day. 
Another instance of like unfaithfulness ending 
in licentiousness. The conjunction gives the 
force of ‘‘ Yea and angels too did God punish.” 
The reference is to the explanation current 
among the Jews of Genesis vi. 2. There ‘‘ the 
sons of God” is interpreted to mean angels. 
That fallen angels were held to be capable of 
entertaining amatory desire we can see from 
the story of Asmodeus (Tobit vi-14). Their 
own dignity, the position of authority or rule 
which God had assigned to them. It is clear 
from such passages as Eph. i. 21 that the 
celestial world was conceived and spoken of 
by the Apostles as ranged according to the 
dignity of its various inhabitants. Of such 
half-Gnostic speculations of later Judaism 
concerning the nature and order of the an- 
gelic world we have another specimen Col. 
ii. 18, and it is the knowledge that such 
speculations were in men’s minds that leads 
the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews to 
insist on Christ’s superiority to all the angels. 

The proper habitation which the angels 
forsook was the position assigned to them in 
heaven. Of the latter portion of the tradition 
‘to which the writer of the Epistle here alludes 
we have but little trace in the Scriptures. 
We read in Matt. xxv. 41 and the parallel 
passages of ‘‘everlasting fire prepared for the 
devil and his angels,” but we cannot conclude 
from such passages that these are the angels 
to whom reference is here made. ‘The rebel- 
lion of Satan is not connected with the history 
in Gen. vi. 2, but is implied as having oc- 
curred before by the history of the Tempta- 
tion and Fall of our first parents. Also by 
St John we are told (1 John iii. 8) “the devil 
sinneth from the beginning.” In Josephus 
(‘ Ant.’ I. 3. 1), where the history of Gen. vi. 
2 is described as a sin committed by angels 
cohabiting with mortal women, there is no- 
thing stated concerning the punishment of the 
angels. But in the Book of Enoch (and in 
that portion of it which bears traces of greater 
antiquity than the rest, cc. 1—36) allusions 
to their doom are numerous. The offenders 
are called at first angels, sons of heaven (vii. 
2), and after their transgression Azazel one 
of their leaders is described as bound hand and 
foot and cast into darkness (x. 6): there shall 
he remain for ever; cover his face that he 
may not see the light, and im the great day 


JUDE. 


[v. 6. 7. 


and the cities about them in like 
manner, giving themselves over to 
fornication, and going after * stran 
flesh, are set forth for an example, 
ss the vengeance of eternal 
re. 


t Ge 
other. 


of judgment let him be cast into the fire, 
And of the others who were with him it is 
afterwards said (x. 15), ‘‘ Bind them for 
seventy generations underneath the earth even 
to the day of judgement.” And similar men- 
tion is made (xxi. 6) of “the prison of the 
angels.” And the same story is referred to, 
no doubt, by St Peter (x Pet. iii. 19), where 
he mentions the spirits in prison. In the 
Midrasch Ruth (quoted as a marginal note in 
Zohar, ed. Cremona, 1559, col. 184) it is said, 
‘“ After the sons of God had begotten children, 
God took them and led them to a mountain of 
darkness, and bound them in iron chains which 
stretch to the middle of the great abyss.” 

[In all these notices and also here in the 
Epistle there seems to be a contrast between 
the former position of¢he angels, beings of 
authority and dwelling in the light which is 
before God’s throne, and now enslaved and 
cast into the deepest darkness. And though 
the punishment for which they are reserved is 
yet to come, the vast difference between their 
present state and their former exaltation makes 
their lot a fitting ilhustration of what shall 
come upon those who seduce the peoples 
into sin. 


7. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the 
cities about thm having in like manner 
with these given themselves over to fornica- 
tion, and gone after strange flesh, are set forth 
as an example of eternal fire, suffering 
punishment. In this verse ¢4ese must, from 
the position of the Greek pronoun in the 
sentence, refer to the fallen angels mentioned 
in the previous verse. The offence of the 
Sodomites was of the same character as that 
of the angels to whom the human wives were 
as gap& €érépa, and the same idea is kept up 
in the participle amedGotca, which indicates 
a wandering from the natural laws. In the 
latter part of the verse it seems necessary to 
translate an example of eternal fire. The 
rendering of A.V. “suffering the vengeance 
of eternal fire” cannot be correctly said of 
Sodom and Gomorrah, though the order of 
the Greek words may favour such a construc- 
tion. But the fate of these cities of the plain 
may with truth be called ‘an example of 
eternal fire.” A destruction so utter, and so 
permanent as theirs has been, is the nearest 
approach that can be found in this world to 
the destruction which awaits those who are 
kept under darkness to the judgment of the 
great day. 


v. 8, 9.] 


8 Likewise also these fi/thy dreamers 
defile the flesh, despise dominion, and 
speak evil of dignities. 


JUDE. 


9 Yet Michael the archangel, when 
contending with the devil he dis- 
puted about the body of Moses, durst 





In the Old Testament no figure is more 
common than the use of words indicative of 
unchastity of life to indicate the unfaithful- 
ness of men toward God. When this Epistle 
was written the opposite order of expression 
was required. Unbelief had led to bodily 
impurities, and the writer seems to have set 
before his readers three degrees or kinds of 
such sins, and the punishments inflicted on 
them. First, an offence exactly like their own, 
a disbelief among the Israelites which led to 
their union with the worshippers of Baal-peor 
and to other foul excesses of like nature, and 
the offenders wherein were punished by death 
before the land of promise was reached. The 
second example speaks of those who are 
already in enjoyment of a blessed home ap- 
pointed for them by God, but who by yield- 
ing to unlawful desires were expelled, and are 
still awaiting in darkness their final punish- 
ment, The last illustration is of a fouler 
nature still, and its punishment in consequence 
is more prompt and more terrible and is still 
an example to the eyes of all the world. This 
is expressed by ‘‘ they lie forth” (apoxeivrat), 
for all to behold and to be warned by. The 
cities destroyed with Sodem and Gomorrah 
were Admah and Zeboim (Deut. xxix. 23; 
Hos. xi. 8). 


8. Yet in like manner these dreamers also 
defile the flesh, and set at naught dominion, 
and rail at dignities. The A.V. gives no 
rendering of the conjunction pévto., which 
expresses that in spite of all these examples 
and the last-named close at hand, yet they too 
were guilty of like offences, Such men are 
fitly called dreamers, who by their sinful ex- 
cess have been cast into a stupor, and so are 
most completely enslaved. The Scriptures 
constantly speak of such men as sunk in sleep 
and so helpless, cf. Rom. xiii. 11, 12; Eph. 
v. 14, in both which passages this state of 
sleep is spoken of in close connexion with 
“the unfruitful works of darkness.” In a 
like condition are these men, but dream that 
they are free and independent. So with false 
thoughts concerning freedom they give rein 
to their carnal appetites, and thus defile the 
flesh, which we are taught by Christ’s assump- 
tion thereof is to be elevated and purified, and 
not degraded. We have already intimated 
that the excesses to which the Apostle is here 
alluding arose from a perversion of those prin- 
ciples of Christianity which were represented 
by the community of goods, but which these 
men perverted into a doctrine of other kinds 
of community which resulted in carnal de- 
bauchery The other offences here mentioned, 
the setting at naught of dominion, and railing 


at dignities, might have had their origin from 
the same source. Where all was to be freely 
shared with one another, the reprobate mind 
would soon see its way to disregard all rule 
and all government in the new society, and 
when this was done, there would soon follow 
a rejection of Him in whose name those set 
over the new-formed society spake. For we 
can hardly doubt that the writer is in this 
verse looking back to wv. 4, in which he 
describes by other words these ungodly men 
who had worked their way into the new 
community. And as there in the first class. 
are placed those ‘‘ who turn the grace of our 
God into lasciviousness,” a description which 
in the present verse is represented by those 
‘‘who defile the flesh,” so the setting at 
nought of dominion, and the railing at dig- 
nities, though its first exhibition might be 
made against the Apostles and those set in 
authority in the Church, yet went further 
and resulted in the denial of our only Master, 
God himself, whose dominion these sinners. 
were disregarding, and our Lord Jesus Christ, 
whose glory these men speak evil of or rail at, 
in the words which they employ concerning 
the corrupt nature of the flesh which He has 
glorified and taken into heaven. We can dis- 
cern that this was in the writer’s mind if we 
look on to the use which he makes in verse 15 
of the prophecy of Enoch. The original says 
nothing about hard speeches, yet St Jude not 
only explains or enlarges and applies the pas- 
sage which he is quoting to these railers, but 
specially says that the harsh utterances were 
against Him. 


9. The conduct of Michael the archangel 
himself is brought forward as rebuke to these 
sinners who rail at dignities. The devil was 
only a fallen dignity, but yet the prince of the 
angels did not rail at him in his accusation. 
The only passage in which this connection of 
the Archangel with the burial of Moses is 
mentioned is Targum Jonathan on Deut, 
xxxiv. 6, where Michael is said to have been 
made guardian of the grave of Moses. What 
the circumstances of the dispute were we 
cannot gather from ancient sources. It has 
been suggested that Satan wished to secure 
the body of Moses, that he might make its 
existence known to the Israelites and tempt 
them to pay idolatrous worship to it, as 
they did to the brazen serpent which had 
been made by him. It is also said (Ccu- 
menius h. 1.) that the devil, in his character 
of the adversary, was charging Moses with 
the murder of the Egyptian, and desiring 
to deprive him of the honoured burial which 
was conferred on him by God. Of neither 


395 


396 


not bring against him a railing accu- 


¢ Bock. 3 sation, but said, The Lord rebuke 


thee. 
10 But these speak evil of those 


JUDE. 


[v. 10, 


things which they know not: but 
what they know naturally, as brute 
beasts, in those things they corrupt 
themselves. 





of these statements have we any ancient Jew- 
ish record. But it is quite manifest that to 
the writer of the Epistle the story was a 
part of some accepted history. ‘This is plain 
from the historic character of his language. 
But we can see from other parts of the New 
Testament how traditional explanations of 
earlier history had grown round the Old 
Testament narrative. It will suffice to men- 
tion the tradition alluded to by St Paul 
of the names of Egyptian magicians mentioned 
2 Tim. iii. 8, but not specified in the earlier 
history of the deliverance from Egypt. The 
speech of St Stephen (Acts vii.) also affords 
several instances of variation from, or expan- 
sion of, the Mosaic records. Of some of 
these, explanations are to be found in extant 
Jewish literature of ancient date, but for 
others we have no such solutions. We ought 
however to bear in mind that of the Jerusa- 
lem Talmud two entire Sedarim are lost and 
also various tracts of the fourth Seder, and we 
cannot know what literature was contained 
in them. It is not unreasonable to suppose, 
in the case of St Jude’s Epistle, that we have 
an instance where the traditional expansion 
of the Mosaic narrative has not come down 
to us. The statement of Holy Writ is that 
Moses was mysteriously buried. The Tar- 
gum adds to this that the place of sepulture 
was put into the charge of Michael. Here 
we have the basis on which a development 
was no doubt erected, and of which per- 
haps we have a trace in the expositions pre- 
served to us by the Fathers. The manner 
in which the example is cited by the Apostle 
leaves no doubt that the contest to which 
allusion is made, was a matter of general 
knowledge among the Jews and Christians for 
whom the Epistle was intended, and though 
time has destroyed all trace of the links 
which intervened between the statement of 
Jonathan and the allusion of St Jude, yet 
such links undoubtedly existed in the Apo- 
stolic age, and were accepted as a part 
of the traditional exposition of Holy Writ, 
and therefore suitable to be quoted in such 
a solemn exhortation as St Jude is here 
giving. 

The passage in Zechariah (ili. r—s5) where 
Satan is described by the prophet as resisting 
Joshua the high-priest when God was com- 
manding that the filthy garments should be 
taken away from him, and a change of fair 
raiment be given unto him, may have furnished 
the basis on which a similar contest was 

ic as having taken place concerning 
Moses. He had left the robe of the flesh, 


which might be likened to the filthy garments 
of Joshua, and the Devil might well be repre- 
sented as an opponent, striving to hinder his 
admission to that glorious condition in which 
he appeared at the Transfiguration. Some 
accepted development of this kind there was, 
as on many other Scriptures, and though such 
writings were excluded very properly from 
the volume of Holy Writ, yet for purposes 
of ‘“‘example of life and instruction of man- 
ners” they were employed by the Apostles 
with as much freedom as we now use the 
books of the Apocrypha, 


10. But these men rail at whatsoever 
things they know not, and what they un- 
derstand zaturally, like the brute beasts, in 
these things they are corrupted. The 
A.V. has omitted to make any distinction in 
this verse between the two verbs which it 
renders now. ‘The first of these is applied 
in its earliest sense to the knowledge which 
is gained by seeing; and as the sight is that 
one among the senses which most readily 
and most correctly communicates impressions 
to the mind, the derived senses of the verb 
are applied to mental comprehension and 
knowledge. This word is therefore fitly 
used for such knowledge as can be gained 
concerning the dominion and dignities at 
which these men rail. The other verb is first 
used in reference to skill in handicraft, and 
the knowledge expressed thereby is such as 
would have regard to things palpable, and 
matters of outward sense. The distinction is 
observed by the writer in his application of 
this word to that knowledge wherein these 
men are corrupted. Milton has put words 
into the mouth of Satan when describing him- 
self (¢ P. L.’ 1x. 571), which distinguish the 
two varieties of knowledge here spoken of, 
“nor aught but food discerned or sex, and 
apprehended nothing high.” ‘The reference in 
both cases is to the description of these 
offenders given in v. 8, and their degradation 
sinks them to the level of the animal creation 
from which the Serpent assures Eve that he 
has risen to higher apprehensions. By the 
expression ‘‘in these things” the writer appears 
to intend more than ‘‘by means of these 
things,” and to intimate that they have sunk 
deep in the slough of their excesses. It seems 
better to translate the final verb as a passive 
rather than middle, ‘‘they corrupt themselves.” 
For it is not themselves alone to whom their 
corruption extends, but they corrupt others, 
The same word is used of a like corruption 
(Rev. xix. 2). 


v. 11, 12.] 


11 Woe unto them! for they 
have gone in the way of Cain, and 
ran greedily after the error of Balaam 


ll. Woe unto them! for they have gone in 
the way of Cain, and run riotously in the 
error of Balaam for hire, and have perished 
in the gainsaying of Korah. The denunciation 
of woe with which this verse begins, so 
common in our Lord’s addresses, and occur- 
ring several times in the Revelation, is found 
only here in the Apostolic writings, the use of 
the word by St Paul (1 Cor. ix. 16) being of 
a different character. For an example of the 
word ways, used for works, cf. 1 Cor. iv. 17, 
‘“ my ways which be in Christ.” The Apostle 
seems to have intended the words way, error, 
and gainsaying to form an ascending scale 
descriptive of the increasing perverseness of 
these offenders. The verbs employed are also 
marked by an increasing degree of intensity. 
At first their conduct is walking in a way, 
then a riotous running on in error, then a 
destriction in their determined opposition to 
truth and holiness. There is a like climax of 
nouns and verbs in Ps,i. 1. Of the charac- 
ters chosen by the writer in this verse as 
examples of the sins against which he gives 
warning, two were according to Jewish 
writers closely connected with the Spirits of 
Evil. Of Cain it is said by them that he was 
not a son of Adam, but born by Eve to the 
serpent, and so the representative or incarna- 
tion of evil, and Balaam is represented as gain- 
ing the knowledge of future events which he 
possessed from his interviews with the fallen 
angels. For this reason, they say, it is always 
related of him that he heard the words of 
God (Numb. xxiv. 4, 16) and not the voice, 
because his knowledge was only derived from 
the reports of the doomed angels. The gain- 
saying of Korah is a fitting picture of the 
position of the teachers against whom this 
Epistle is directed, for they were setting up 
an authority of their own as equal if not 
superior to that of the Apostles, and know- 
ledge was their boast. 

In adducing individual examples the writer 
becomes more precise in the character of his 
accusations. These new teachers were envious 
of men and perverse towards God, like Cain; 
they were teachers of error, and willing to 
work evil and lead others into it, for gain’s 
sake, as was Balaam; and their ambitious 
self-seeking led them to resist all authority, 
after the manner of Korah. We can observe 
through the whole of these charges, how we 
have nothing more than the natural fruits of 
such conduct as we see, in the germ, in the 
accounts of Ananias and Sapphira, and Simon 
Magus in the Acts. 

The verbs here deserve notice; the tense 
implies that the conduct described has become 


JUDE. 


for reward, and perished in the gain- 
saying of Core. 


12 These are spots in your feasts 


habitual with these sinners, and in the last ot 
them is implied not that they are destroyed 
absolutely, and without hope, but that their 
destruction is the sure result of persistence in 
their evil life. The same word with the same 
shade of meaning is used where Christ speaks 
of the /ost sheep of the house of Israel, to 
preach and recover whom he was just sending 
forth his messengers (Matt. x. 6). 

To walk in the way of is a translation of a 
common Hebrew expression (1 K. xvi. 26), 
and very frequently, as here, used in a bad 
sense. The word rendered run riotously im- 
plies a complete spending of the energies on 
any object, and is an apt expression for the 
licence which marked the conduct of these 
heretics. 


12. These are they who are hidden 
rocks in your love-feasts, feasting with 
you without fear, feeding themselves; 
clouds without water borne along by winds, 
trees of late autumn, without fruit, twice 
dead, plucked up by the roots. The reading 
which inserts a relative in the first clause is 
supported by most authority. In the A.V. 
hidden rocks (arinades) is, on the strength of 
a gloss in Hesychius and some patristic autho- 
rities, taken to be a cognate of oxiAor=spots, 
which occurs in St Peter’s description (2 Pet. 
ii. 13) of these offenders. But the former word 
is nowhere found in any sense except that of 
a shoal or reef. And the stronger word is 
very fitly employed by St Jude, if he wrote, 
as we believe, after St Peter, for now these 
erring professors were no longer mere blots and 
blemishes, but were become a source of dan- 
ger and threatened the overthrow of the infant 
Church, very fitly therefore are they likened 
to rocks on which there is danger of making 
shipwreck. Feasting with you without fear is 
the better connection of the adverb, and not 
to join it with the succeeding clause. The 
dread which had prevailed when the first sin- 
ners in this matter, Ananias and his wife, were 
struck dead had passed away; and now it 
was no longer the case that ‘‘ of the rest durst 
no man join himself” to the Apostles, but 
greedy men feasted themselves at the common 
board without dread. The love-feasts (agape) 
were the outward sign of that principle of 
brotherly love and that holding of all things 
as common which united the early Christians 
so closely, but which at the same time offered 
such a temptation to the covetous to profess a 
faith in which they were not sincere. The 
love-feasts were in early times joined on to the 
Lord’s Supper, and we can see from 1 Cor, 
xi, 20 how the eagerness with which those 


397 


398 


of charity, when they feast with 
you, feeding themselves without fear: 
clouds they are without water, carried 
about of winds; trees whose fruit 


whom St Paul there rebukes for seizing on the 
provisions made ready for the agape, robbed 
the commemorative and sacramental service, 
which preceded it, of all its solemnity. Every 
one took before another his own supper, and 
while one, who reverenced the breaking of 
bread, was hungry, another, who had no scru- 
ples about beginning the more substantial 
meal at once, was drunken. When we read, 
as here, dydmats, in 2 Pet. ii. 13, which we 
ought to do, the text affords us another indi- 
cation that St Jude’s Epistle was written after 
St Peter’s. For the latter writer calls the love- 
feasts theirs, as though this profanation of a 
sacred meal by gluttony had not when he 
wrote become so common. He speaks of 
them as “revelling in their love-feasts.” But 
when St Jude wrote they had succeeded in 
throwing the stain and defilement of their 
greedy desires over the Christian love-feasts in 
general, and the writer now has to say, ‘‘ they 
are hidden rocks in your love-feasts.” They 
have introduced themselves and their evil 
practices so thoroughly that they are like to 
work ruin to the whole society. 

Feasting with you without fear. This 
tmplies a very changed condition from that in 
which it was said (Acts iv. 34), ‘‘ there was 
none among them that lacked,” the care was 
not now for this, but these men were become 
shepherds, not to the flock, but to themselves, 
and made the love-feast for themselves a scene 
of revelry, and were so hardened as to do this 
without fear. How deceptive was the pro- 
mise given by such members in their lives is 
seen by the similes which the writer now em- 
ploys to describe them. No doubt they had 
been counted as acquisitions to the Church, 
but now they are found to be men of promise 
but no performance. This the Apostle first 
illustrates by calling them clouds without 
water, which shew as though they were 
charged with showers of blessing, but dis- 
appoint the expectation of the thirsty land 
and are borne past by winds. Then he 
changes his figure and calls them trees of late 
autumn, those which do not shew signs of 
becoming productive until the season is well- 
nigh ended, and when there is no hope that 
fruit can be brought to perfection. They 
come into leaf, but bring no fruit, and so may 
well be called doubly dead, for not only have 
they nothing to shew as fruit this year, but 
their habit is such that there is no hope of 
better things another year, ‘They have no 
crop now, and no chance of a crop hereafter, 
and so their doom is pronounced. It may not 
come at once, but it is sure to come, and they 


JUDE. 


[v. 13 


withereth, without fruit, twice dead, 
plucked up by the roots ; 

13 Raging waves of the sea, foam- 
ing out their own shame; wandering 


will be, and so in prophetic tone may be even 
now said to be, plucked up by the roots. 

It is likely that in the word without fear 
i tae there is contained a degree of re- 
buke to the Christian congregations for having 
allowed the evil practices to creep so far and 
get so bold a front. It is as though the writer 
said, ‘‘Such impunity ought not to have 
been permitted, the mischief should have been 
checked at its earlier stages.” No doubt also 
in the comparisons which he employs he has 
an eye to the original intention of the love- 
feast. It was to be a token of universal love, 
and was to have the blessing of the rain from 
heaven; it was meant to be a cause of much 
fruit in the whole Christian community, that 
so they might be known as Christ’s disciples. 
But self-seeking and greed had dried up the 
refreshment and cut off all hope of growth. 
We shall presently see (v. 16) that these men 
were of no true Christian spirit, but ‘loved 
only those who loved them.” 


13. Here the writer turns from the disape 
pointment and consequent weakening which 
the Church experienced by reason of these 
insincere members, and looks at them in their 
own character and coming doom. He has in 
his thought the words of Isaiah (Ivii. 20), 
where the wicked are compared to the troubled 
sea, and he says of these men that they cast 
forth te public view the mire and dirt of their 
excesses, just as the churning waters of a rest- 
less surge never allow the sand to sink down 
to the bottom. So these men foam out their 
own acts of shame, and cast them forth for all 
men to see, and so to blame the Church for 
the ill-deeds of these professors. And this is 
the thought which seems to have suggested 
the next comparison. These men have some 
share of light, they have some degree of know- 
ledge, but they have cast off all regard for the 
regulation of the Christian brotherhood, and 
so, though they may be called stars, yet they 
belong not to the system, they stray at random 
and without law, and must at last be severed 
from the lights which rule while they are 
ruled. Then follows their fate, separated 
from the source of illumination they shall 
share the darkness (and at this point the 
thought of the writer seems to have escaped 
from the simile and to be fixed on the men) 
which is spoken of before (v. 6) as the abode 
of the fallen angels. Our Lord’s mention of 
this darkness as prepared for them, and that 
sinners were only condemned thereto for their 
persistence in evil, suggest the close connection 
in the writer’s mind between the one doom 





v. 14—16.] 


¢tars, to whom 1s reserved the black- 
ness of darkness for ever. 

14 And Enoch also, the seventh 
from Adam, prophesied of these, say- 
ing, Behold, the Lord cometh with 
ten thousands of his saints, 

15 To execute judgment upon all, 


and the other. God reserves the angels under 
darkness, and for the wandering stars the 
darkness has been reserved. 


14. From the Book of Enoch, as we have 
seen, is taken the substance of what is said 
(w. 6) concerning the angels that fell. And 
now there is another quotation from the same 
authority. The mysterious mention of Enoch 
(Gen. v. 24) and his translation, coupled with 
the double notice of his walk with God, make 
him a fitting centre round which prophetic 
utterances should cluster. To the Jew there 
was a sacredness in the number seven, and 
therefore Enoch is noticed as seventh from 
Adam. In the book of Enoch he is repre- 
sented as saying of himself (xcii. 4), ‘‘I have 
been born the seventh in the first week,” from 
which we can see that his name was connected 
with the blessing of the Sabbath. The pas- 
sage from the book of Enoch here quoted as 
translated by Dr Laurence runs thus (ch. ii.): 
** Behold he comes with ten thousands of his 
saints, to execute judgment upon them and to 
destroy the wicked, and reprove all the carnal 
for everything which the sinful and ungodly 
have done and committed against him.” The 
form of this prophecy is that of the Old Tes- 
tament Scriptures, and parallels may be found 
for the language in Mal. iii. 1, iv. 1; Deut. 
BEKKIT. 2s 

The expressions used in this verse leave it 
uncertain whether St Jude derived his quota- 
tion from a tradition or from writing existing 
in his time. But the wide extent to which 
“the book of Enoch” was known in the 
second century seems to be conclusive in 
favour of its existence in St Jude’s day. As 
we have it, there can be no question that it 
exhibits interpolations of a later time, but cc. 
I—36 as well as some other portions may be 
taken as closely representing the earliest form 
and that of a date at least a century before 
the birth of Christ. 

Of these also implies that not only did the 
words of Enoch refer to the sinners among 
whom he lived, but were applicable a/so to 
the generation in which St Jude was. 


15. To execute judgment upon all and to 
convict all the ungodly of all their 
works of ungodliness which they have 
ungodly wrought, and of all the hard words 
which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. 
The phrases in this passage are quite Hebrew 


JUDE. 


and to convince all that are ungodly 
among them of all their ungodly 
deeds which they have ungodly com- 
mitted, and of all their hard speeches 
which ungodly sinners have spoken 
against him. 

16 These are murmurers, com- 





in their form and justify a belief that the 
source from which they are quoted was 
known to St Jude in that language. The 
writer of the Epistle seems to have rather 
paraphrased than translated the latter part of 
the prophecy, and to have been guided in the 
language he employs by the circumstances 
under which he was writing. In the form 
in which the original has come down to us 
we have no mention of the ard words which 
were spoken against God. ‘This ought to be 
noticed in deciding upon the value of this 
reference to ‘‘the Book” of Enoch. If the 
passage which we find there had been, as 
some hold, an insertion made in the present 
text of the Book to give credit to a late post- 
Christian fiction, the words quoted from St 
Jude would almost certainly have been given 
in the full form in which they stand in the 
Epistle. 

To the mind of St Jude there is evidently 
present, while he employs the passage from the 
Book of Enoch, the offences of which he had 
spoken in vv. 8, 10, 11. So he fashions his 
paraphrase here to apply not only to the defilers 
of the flesh, but also to those who set at naught 
dominion and rail at dignities, and who are 
perishing in the gainsaying of Korah, and so 
the passage is made to refer both to the deeds 
and words before spoken of. And how the 
irreverent godless spirit of these men’s actions 
was conspicuous we may see from the em- 
phatic manner in which he four times over 
employs the same word in this verse. It was 
the outcome of that profane and vain babbling 
of which St Paul had spoken (2 Tim. ii. 16) 
to Timothy, and the word is of constant use 
in the Epistles of St Peter and St Jude (x Pet. 
iv. 18; 2 Pet. ii. 5, 6, iii. 7; Jude 4, 15). 

The A.V. translates, ‘‘ All that are ungodly 
among them,” but the best MSS. omit the 
pronoun. 

The last two words in the original are those 
rendered ungodly sinners, and they seem to be 
placed out of their proper order so much that 
it has been suggested that they belong to the 
next verse. Jt appears however more likely 
that they were placed where they are in order 
to lay that marked emphasis upon the irreve= 
rence which the writer is evidently desirous 
to express. He has mentioned their offence 
thrice already, but with his mind full of it, 
he closes the quotation—sinners, ungodly. 
The contrast is brought out in this way 


400 


plainers, walking after their own 
justs; and their mouth speaketh 
great swelling words, having men’s 
persons in admiration because of ad- 
vantage. 


between Him against whom they speak and 
the ungodly irreverent character of what they 
say. 

16. The next words seem to be an expan- 
sion of the last thought in wv. 15 and a descrip- 
tion of the hard words there alluded to. 
These, he continues, are murmurers, as were 
those who (John vi. 43) were displeased at 
Christ when he spake of His heavenly origin, 
and who saw in Him only the Son of Joseph. 
They are complainers too, ever blaming their 
own lot, and grasping after what they fancy 
to be better; for it is according to their own 
lusts they guide their life, and they are dis- 
satisfied with all things but themselves. Nei- 
ther God’s revelation nor Christ’s teaching, 
nor their condition among their brethren con- 
tents them, but they seek to be a law unto 
themselves. Their self-confidence furnishes 
pride in their speech, and the great swelling 
words are the outward sign of their inward 
character. And when they do depart from 
their rule and defer to others, such conduct is 
only dictated by hope of advantage. The 
expression ‘‘having men’s persons in admira- 
tion” is of the same kind as the more com- 
mon ‘‘respecters of persons,” but of a rather 
stronger character. ‘There is a degree of open 
admiration of all the external surroundings of 
those to whom these self-seekers pay their 
court. The two expressions are found to- 
gether in the LXX. (Lev. xix. 15), and the 
shade of difference in sense is fairly given in 
the A.V., ‘‘ Thou shalt not respect the person 
of the poor, nor 4onour the person of the 
mighty.” 

17. “In the Greek the pronoun stands em- 
phatically at the opening of the sentence, and 
shews by its position that the writer designed 
to contrast those to whom he wrote, with the 
offenders against whom they had been warned. 
And he enforces his own warning by a re- 
minder of the teaching which they had received 
from others. These previous teachers he calls 
“the Apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ,” 
and the question arises out of these words 
whether the writer of the Epistle thereby in- 
tends to intimate that he himself was not an 
Apostle. On this point see Introduction, 
§1. 

18. How that they said unto you that at 
the end of the time there shall de 
mockers walking after their own ungodly lusts. 
The use of the imperfect tense in the original 

ints to such lessons as having formed a 

went portion of the Apostolic preaching. 


JUDE. 


[v. 17, 28 


17 But, beloved, remember ye the 
words which were spoken before of 
the apostles of our Lord Jesus 
Christ ; 

18 How that they told you there 





And the similarity of the phrase “‘ at the end 
of the time” (for which we have the most 
authority in MSS.) to the words of St Peter 
(2 Pet. iii. 3), which are literally ‘‘ at the end 
of the days,” points to a form of exhortation 
which had become common in the mouths of 
the early Christian teachers, as does also the 
substantial agreement of much in the other 
language of that verse with this. The Apostles 
expounded the warnings of Jesus by the events 
in which they were living. 

By the words ‘‘at the end of the time,” 
and many similar phrases found in the New 
Testament, there is not a doubt that the early 
Christians generally understood that some 
mighty visitation of God, the end of the age, 
and the coming of Jesus to judge the world was 
not far distant. And the words of Christ in 
that discourse (Matt. xxiv.—xxy.) on which 
most of these phrases are founded lend them- 
selves easily to such an interpretation. But it 
is evident from St Paul’s language to Timothy 
(2 Tim. iii. 1), ‘In the last days perilous 
times shall come,” followed as those words 
are by a list of offences not unlike those 
described as rife in the days of St Peter and 
St Jude; but concluding with the assertion 
that ‘‘ they shall proceed no further, but their 
folly shall be manifest unto all men;” that 
St Paul, while anticipating the rise of heretics 
and wicked men in the Church, yet expected 
that the cause of Christ would prosper in the 
end, and did not therefore view the coming 
troubles, as many did, in the light of signs that 
the end of all things was near. St John, who 
had lived till the evil days were come, says 
(1 John ii. 18), ‘‘It is the last time......now 
are there many antichrists; whereby we know 
that it is the last time.” With the advance 
of the first century the mixed character of 
Christ’s sermon which foretold these evil days 
was becoming unravelled. St Paul lived at 
the beginning, St Peter and St Jude in the 
development, and St John at the completion 
of the period which Jesus had spoken of as 
typical of the times when the end of all things 
should come. And the last of them, though 
he might depart with an impression that the 
antitype was soon about to follow the type, 
yet lets that impression supply no word of a 
paralyzing sort, such as had startled the Thes- 
salonians in the language of St Paul, but closes 
his exhortation, ‘‘ Abide in him, that when he 
shall appear we may have confidence.” And 
so with St Jude. The last times may be near, 
but their approach is not to lessen Christian 
activity, but his exhortation is “build up 


¥. I9—21.] 


should be mockers in the last time, 
who should walk after their own 
“eel lusts. 

1g These be they who separate 
themselves, sensual, having not the 
Spirit. 


yourselves on your most holy faith,” and on 
the erring have compassion and labour for 
their recovery. ‘The literal translation of the 
last clause is ‘‘ walking after their own lusts 
of ungodlinesses;” and the addition of this 
word *‘ ungodlinesses,” which is not found in 
the parallel passage of St Peter, as well as its 
emphatic position at the end of the verse, 
where but for the stress which we believe the 
writer intended this marked position to con- 
vey it stands very awkwardly, shew how this 
characteristic of irreverent godlessness was 
stamped upon the deeds of these false teachers. 
The occurrence of this addition to the words 
of St Peter’s Epistle bespeaks a later stage of 
the evil, when this characteristic feature had 
made itself most prominently visible, and con- 
tributes another indication that St Jude’s com- 
position was the later in date. 


19. These be they whe make separa- 
tions, sensual, having not the Spirit. In some 
MSS. the pronoun is expressed after the first 
verb, and this would justify the rendering of 
A.V., but the best authorities omit it, and 
the sense thus obtained accords excellently 
with the tenor of the whole Epistle, which 
rather relates to those who, while unworthy, 
have crept into the Church, than to men who 
separate themselves. It is true, we might 
understand it of those who by their corrupt 
ways sever themselves from the congregation 
of Christ; but it is far more likely that the 
reference is to men who cause divisions with- 
in the Church, The verb occurs nowhere 
else in the New Testament. 

Sensual (puxixos) iS here as everywhere 
else in the New Testament opposed to sfi- 
ritual (mvevparikos). Its first sense is ‘that 
which pertains to the life,” and so it might 
be rendered “natural.” But the nature which 
is dealt with in the New Testament is human 
nature, and this we are taught is ever ‘“‘in- 
clined to evil,” ready to yield to animal appe- 
tite, and so hostile to that which is spiritual. 
Hence comes the opposition between two 
words which at the outset were as closely 
related in meaning as are Uife and breath. 
The word is used James iii. 15 of ‘a wis- 
dom that cometh not down from above, but 
which is earthly, sensual, devilish.” And the 
context in that passage supports the expla- 
nation of the first clause in this verse as re- 
ferring to those who cause divisions within 
the Church. For the men to whom such 
wisdom belongs are called by St James those 


New Test.—Vot. IV. 


JUDE. 


20 But ye, beloved, building up 
yourselves on your most holy faith, 
praying in the Holy Ghost, 

21 Keep yourselves in the love ot 
God, looking for the mercy of our 
Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life. 





who ‘‘ have bitter jealousy and faction in their 
hearts.” 

If we would see how the true possession ot 
the Spirit promotes unity, we have but to 
consider the narrative (Acts iv. 31—32) of 
the primitive Church, where ‘‘all were filled 
with the Spirit,” and as a natural consequence 
it is added, ‘‘and the multitude of them that 
believed were of one heart and of one soul.” 

The word Spirit (avedpa) is without the 
article, but we need not on that account take 
it as referring to what is spiritual in man 
rather than to the Holy Spirit. Cf. Gal. v. 
16, and the New Testament usage of the 
word, when opposed as here to Wuy7. But 
there is no doubt a reference to the language 
of the Gnostic taunts against the early Chris- 
tians. They called themselves spiritual (mvev- 
parixoi) and asserted that because of their 
superior degree of knowledge, they had no 
need to care for the observance of a virtuous 
life, while the Christians they named mere 
natural men (yvxikoi), without the exaltation 
which knowledge (yvdo1s) imparted, and 
therefore bound to live strict lives, or forfeit 
their hopes of the world to come. St Jude 
uses their phraseology, but with a slight dif- 
ference of sense, and says these are the really 
natural men, men who follow the dictates of 
nature only, and have no share of the Spirit 
of God. 


20. But ye, beloved, &c. They of whom 
the Apostle has just spoken by their spirit of 
division break down the Church of Christ, 
therefore he urges on h® readers a contrary 
course, that they should build up instead of 
destroying. And just as St Peter (2 Pet. i. 
5—7) urged that on the foundation of faith 
should be raised a superstructure of the Chris- 
tian virtues, till they reached the very highest, 
so here St Jude exhorts to lay the same foun- 
dation, ‘‘ Building up yourselves on your 
most holy faith.” And he gives to faith this 
preeminent title, because its fruits were so dif- 
ferent from those which were exhibited in the 
lives of the men who boasted of their superior 
knowledge, and lived in consequence in uzbholy 

om. 

The building up the edifice of a life of 
virtue is one of a course of means whereby 
Christians are to keep themselves in the love 
of Goud, but they cannot build without hep, 
and so St Jude adds to his exhortation, pray- 
ing in the Holy Ghost. ‘The expression is 
parallel to that of St Paul (Eph. vi. 18), 


.cc 


401 


402 


22, And of some have compassion, 
making a difference: 
23 And others save with fear, 


‘“‘ praying always with all prayer and suppli- 
cation in the Spirit,” and its meaning is seen 
from what the same Apostle says (Rom. viii. 
26) of the help which the Spirit gives to our 
prayers, ‘‘ for we know not what we should 
pray for as we ought.” So ‘to pray in the 
Holy Ghost” is to pray with His aid in our 
intercessions, that they may be effectual. 


21. And the end of this working and prayer 
1s given in the next words, ‘‘ Keep yourselves 
thereby in the love of God.” ‘These words do 
not mean ‘‘continue in your love towards 
God, and cease not from it,” but as we may 
see from the next clause, ‘‘ Take heed that by 
your life and prayers you continue to be of 
those whom God loves.” For the end of this 
watchful keeping in the love of God is to be 
that they may receive “the mercy of our 
Lord Jesus Christ.” But this is given to 
men not because they have loved God, but 
because He has loved them. 

And this mercy (mot so often spoken of as 
the mercy of Christ but as the mercy of God) 
is constantly to be looked for as something yet 
to come. It may be shewn from time to time 
as men live here, but God keeps the good 
wine to the end, and the full fruition of 
Christ’s mercy will not be known till through 
it we attain at length unto eternal life. 

These last words are therefore closely con- 
nected both with mercy (€Xeos) and looking for 
_ (mpoodexopevor). Men are to look ever for 
more and more proof of mercy till eternal 
life is given, and the mercy itself never fails, 
but lasts on till that life is gained. 

So by his lesson that men should pray in the 
Spirit, continue in God’s love, and look for 
Christ’s mercy, the Apostle gives a view of 
that faith on which he was moved (vz. 3) to 
write, the faith in the Trinity in Unity “which 
was once delivered to the saints.” 


22. And on some have mercy, who are 
in doubt. In this verse and the next there is 
great uncertainty about the correct text. 

But here all the MSS. of greatest authority 
read S:axpwopevovs as the object, and not 
Svaxpivopevor agreeing with the subject of the 
sentence. Moreover if the nominative were 
read the rendering of the A.V. could not stand, 
for diaxpiveoOar does not mean ‘“‘to make a 
difference.” But ‘‘to hesitate” or “to be in 
doubt” is its meaning, Matt. xxi. 21; Mark 
xi. 23; Rom. iv. 20, xiv. 23; James i. 6, and 
in every instance with reference to weakness 
in faith. For such, then, as are weak in 
the faith St Jude claims mercy from their 
brethren, and thus is in harmony with the 
language of St Paul in Rom. xiv. r—4, where 


JUDE 


[v. 22, 23. 


pulling them out of the fire; hating 
even the garment spotted by the 
flesh. 





he asks, ‘‘ who art thou that judgest another 
man’s servant ?” 

Another reading, ovs pev eAeyxere Staxpi= 
vonevovs has good MS, support, and has 
been adopted by some editors. This would 
signify ‘*some who are contentious reprove 
ye,” and for this meaning of dcaxpivopévous 
may be quoted v. 9 of this Epistle, and 
also Acts xi. 2, But this exhortation does 
not seem to join on with the verse which fol- . 
lows so well as the exhortation to have mercy. 
The Apostle is not urging on his readers to 
play the part of rebukers or reproyers, so 
much as that by love and labour they should 
endeavour to rescue from erroneous teaching 
and its sinful consequences all whom they 
may be able. 


23. And some save. snatching them 
out of the fire; and onsome have mercy 
with fear, hating even the garment spotted by 
the flesh. This is the translation of the text 
which is best supported, and which is adopted 
by Lachmann, Tischendorf and ‘Tregelles. 
But the variations in the MSS. are so numer= 
ous that there must ever be some doubt about 
what were the exact words of St Jnde. 

By the readings adopted in these two 

verses, those who are to engage the love and 
labours of the Christians for their salvation are 
divided into three classes, each in worse plight 
than the one mentioned before them. First 
come those who are waverers, second those who 
are all but in the fire of sin, and lastly, those 
who are so far gone in their evil course that 
there is some danger in the attempt to save 
them, and it is only the great love for souls 
that will prompt men to the labour, for all 
that surrounds and envelops such sinners must 
be hateful. 
_ Bishop Wordsworth has pointed out that, as 
in v. 9; so here the Apostle has in his mind 
the account of Joshua the High-priest, spoken 
of in Zech. iii. 2. There, in opposition to the 
buffetings of Satan, Joshua is called ‘a brand 
plucked out of the fire,” and afterwards (v. 
4) it is added, “‘ Take away the filthy gar- 
ments from him. And unto Joshua. he said, 
Behold, I have caused thine iniquity to pass 
from thee, and I will clothe thee with festival 
robes.” 

The two classes of sinners referred to in 
this verse are in more desperate condition than 
the doubters of the former clause, These are 
being consumed by the evil of their ways, 
and there is peril in the attempt to rescue 
them. But the Christian is not to shrink 
from the endeavour, though he will need to be 
watchful lest he fall into harm by what he does, 
The first danger is compared to that of a close 


¥. 24, 25,] 


24 Now unto him that is able to 
keep you from falling, and to present 
you faultless before the presence of 
“his glory with exceeding joy, 


approach to fire. They who strive to save 
these men will be likely to come off with some 
burning for themselves, but this is not so 
serious as the next danger, which is, lest in at- 
tempting to save others, men should become 
entangled in their evil ways, and stained with 
their defilements. ‘The rescue of such sinners 
can only be secured, if the whole of their sur- 
roundings, even down as it were to their inner- 
most robe, be cast away as hateful, and only 
the men sought after, while their errors are 
unrelentingly attacked and cast away as things 
abominable. 


24. ‘The Epistle concludes with a solemn 
doxology. 

Now unto him that is able to guard you 
from stumbling. ‘The commencement of 
this ascription of praise is like that in Rom. 
xvi. 25. But the ‘Text. Rec.’ reads for vuas 
avrovs as though the persons meant were the 
sinners spoken of in the previous verse. But 
of them free from stumbling (4nraioros) could 
not be used, for they had stumbled already 
and some of them grievously. So that dpas 
is the preferable reading, and having good au- 
thority has been universally adopted. And it 
is a very fitting commendation of his hearers 
after he has been urging on them a course in 
which there was danger, unless they were 
safely protected, that they too might fall, to 
commit them to the guardianship of Him who 
alone can save. 

The A.V. renders ‘‘to keep you,” The 
avrovs of the ‘Text. Rec.’ is taken, therefore, 
as though the Apostle had before his mind 
those whom he was addressing at a distance, 
and so could say of them, avrovs, though 
Meaning vuas. But this is harsh, and the 
great preponderance of MS. authority is in 
favour of vas in the text. 

a@mraoros is found nowhere else in New 
Testament. 

and to set you before the presence of his 
&lory, i.e. at the last day when Christ shall 
appear in His glory to judge the world. ‘The 
thought is the same as that of St Paul (Col. i. 
21, 22), ‘And you hath He [Christ] recon- 
ciled...to present you holy and without blem- 
ish...before Him.” 

without blemish in exceeding joy. With- 
out blemish (Guopos). This Greek word is 


JUDE. 


25 To the only wise God our 
Saviour, be glory and majesty, do- 
minion and power, both now and 
ever. Amen. 





constantly used by the LXX. for the victim 
without blemish of the Levitical offerings, and 
Christ is consequently called (1 Pet. i. 19) 
a lamb without blemish (duvos Guopos). And 
being such Himself, He is able to bring His 
people to the same purity. As such He pre- 
sents the Church unto Himself (Eph. v. 27) 
‘Cas a glorious Church,..holy and without 
blemish,” ‘having given Himself for it that He 
might sanctify it.” 

in exceeding joy. Not the joy of Christ, but 
the joy of the ransomed and purified believer. 
So iz is better than with of the A.V. 


25. Tothe only God our Saviour. All 
the best MSS. and editors omit the word wise, 
which is found in A. V. ‘The word is due to 
some marginal annotation which has crept into 
the text of later MS. from Rom. xvi. 27, to 
which doxology, as has already been re- 
marked, this of St Jude’s Epistle bears a 
strong resemblance in form. It is to be noticed 
that here, as in 1 Tim. i. 1, the word Saviour 
is applied to God the Father. All such inter- 
changes of epithet have their doctrinal lesson. 
Compare the way in which Paraclete (mapa- 
kAntos), SO constantly employed in reference 
to the Holy Ghost, is applied to Christ in 
x John ii, 1. 

Here the MSS. 8, A, B add after “our 
Saviour” the words ‘‘through Jesus Christ 
our Lord,” which brings this verse into still 
closer likeness to the concluding verse of the 
Epistle to the Romans. ‘There is so strong 
authority for the words that they are adopted 
by all the latest editors. 

be glory, majesty, dominion and power| ‘The 
conjunction between the two first nouns (ex- 
pressed in A. V.) is not well supported, and 
has probably been added, in such MSS. as 
have it, that the words might go in pairs. 

both now and for ever. Amen.| Here a 
great consensus of authority reads before 
all time, and now, and for evermore. 
Amen. 

Instead of the imperative de in this ascrip- 
tion of praise, it is perhaps better, from a com- 
parison with 1 Pet. iv. 11, to supply the 
indicative is. It is somewhat harsh to say, 
“Jet all glory be to God before all time.” It 
these last three words were omitted the impera- 
tive might stand correctly enough. 


Ceé2 


403 










ur 2) Saver Wine SKY W } ea i OF Birt aP rth 
(eicn bid »  1wolvne = Sere dha 
1 ON | bose sit =% > romviqn welt ; 
JID v9 t@t- Ra 


ee oem tel 





| ~ ea 


1 


ts 


a df it ie 


? trea rod « 





i , = : sor) eet PF ha 


ON et te — eee items —_ 


THE REVELATION 


OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE 


INTRODUCTION. 


PAGE 


§ 1. THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE RE- 
VELATION . : » 405 
§ 3. EXTERNAL EVIDENCE 
(a) The Eastern Church 406 
(b) The Western Church 420 
§ 3. THE CANON OF THE NEW Tes- 
TAMENT 424 
§ 4. WHEN AND WHERE WAS THE 
REVELATION WRITTEN? 426 
§ 5. Dousts As TO THE APOSTOLIC 
AUTHORSHIP 
External Evidence 438 
§ 6. THE PRESENT STAGE oF SUB- 
JECTIVE CRITICISM 442 
§ 7. DOUBTS AS TO THE APOSTOLIC 
AUTHORSHIP 
Internal Evidence 447 
I. Internal Characteristics . 448 
II. The Spirit, Temper, and Tone 
of the Revelation 449 
UI. The Doctrine of the Revelation 
(a) Christology . 450 
(4) The Doctrine of the Holy 
Spirit . 452 
The Ministry of Angels ‘ ib. 
) The Christian Life . ° tb. 
(e) Eschatology . GG 
(f) Demonology ib 


§1. Zhe Authorship of the Revelation. 


Two questions are involved in the in- 
quiry as to the authorship of the Apoca- 
lypse :—(1) Was the writer of this Book 
the Apostle St. John? (2) Were the 
Apocalypse and the Fourth Gospel, 
together with the three Epistles which 
bear St. John’s name, written by one 
and the same author ? 

The second of these questions, with 
which the authenticity of the Apocalypse 
itself is but indirectly concerned, will be 
touched upon hereafter, and answered 


PAGE 
IV. The Language and cb . 454 
(a) Hebraisms Se GG 
(4) The use of the LXX, - 456 
(c) Language : 457 
(d) Irregular Constructions 458 
(e) Solecisms 459 
(f) Sty le wb, 

§ 8. THE TEXT OF THE APOCA- 
LYPSE 461 

§ 9. THE MODERN CONCEPTION oF 
“ APOKALYPTIK ” 7 cy 

§ 10. IDEAL SYMBOLS 

(a) The intimations of the Reve- 
lation itself. 468 

(b) The interpretations supplied 
by other Books of Scripture 469 
§ 11. SYMBOLICAL NUMBERS . 474 
(a) Numbers taken simply 474 
(b) Numbers applied to time 480 

§ 12. THE INTERPRETATION OF THE 
REVELATION . : . 486 
(1) The Preterist System . . 488 

(2) The Historical or Continuous 
System . » 489 
(3) The Futurist System 490 
(4) The Spiritual System . 491 
The principal Works consulted 493 
Analysis of the Contents . 495 


in the affirmative. The discussion of the 
first question—following the course which 
the controversy respecting it has taken in 
recent times—turns, in a great measure, 
upon the personal history of the Apostle ; 
especially as regards the date of the great 
prophetic 11 Book of the New Testament 

When entering upon this inquiry it is 
natural, in the first instance, to ask what 
does the Book itself tell us of its author? 

The author of the Apocalypse de- 
scribes himself as ‘‘the servant” of 
Jesus Christ (ch, i. 1),—as one “who 
bare witness of the Word of God, and of 


406 


the testimony of Jesus Christ” (ch. i. 
2),—expressions which seem designed to 
identify him with the writer of Johni. 
14; xix. 35; 1 Johni. 2. He is the 
“brother” of those whom he addresses, 
“and partaker with them in the tribula- 
tion and kingdom and patience which 
are in Jesus” (ch. i. 9). An Angel tells 
him, “I am a fellow servant with thee, 
and with thy brethren the prophets ” (ch. 
xxii. 9) ;—or “ with thy brethren that hold 
the testimony of Jesus” (ch. xix. 10). The 
writer also names himself John ! (ch. i. 1, 
4,9 xxii. 8),—a name which often occurs 
in the Old Testament and in the Apo- 
crypha. In the New Testament it is 
found twice in our Lord’s Genealogy 
(Luke iii. 27, 30) ; itis borne by the Bap- 
tist ; it was the name of St. Peter’s father 
(see the true reading in John i. 43 ; xxi. 
15-17); it was the name of aruler of the 
Jews (Acts iv. 6) ; and “ John, whose sur- 
name was Mark” (Acts xii. 12), has been 
forced into the present controversy. In 
the index to Bekker’s edition of Josephus, 
thirteen persons are enumerated who 
bore the name of John. Among the 
bearers of a name so common, there 
could have been as little doubt in the 
Church ?as to who was the “John” of Rev. 
- 9, as there was respecting the “ John” of 
Acts xii. 2, where “ James the brother 
of John” is specified. When we ask, 
therefore, Who is this John ?—with one 
voice the earliest ecclesiastical tradition 
answers, ‘‘ The Apostle, the son of Zebe- 
dee.” The same answer is given by 


1 The English form John represents the Greek 
Nwdyns or ‘Iwavyns. The Hebrew form is 
M7 (or j3M1, 1 Chron. xii. 4, 12), 42, ‘*quem 
ehovah donavit” (Gesen.), or ‘‘the grace of 
ehovah,” — which the LXX renders ’Iwvd 
(2 Kings xxv. 23); ’Iwvdy (Neh. vi. 18; cf. 
"Iwvdu, Luke iii. 30) [and thus the vids “Iwdvov 
of St. John (i. 42) is equivalent to the Bapiwva 
of St. Matthew (xvi. 17)]; "Iwdavay (Jer. xl. 8, 
13) ; most frequently "Iwavay (2 Chron. xvii. 15 ; 
of Luke iii. 27) ; once in the genttive, Iwavod 
(2 Chron. xxviii. 12) ; ’"Iwavvdy (1 Macc. ii. 2), or 
Iwdvyns (1 Macc. xvi. 9; 2 Macc. xi. 17), of 
which the genitive "Iwdvvov is found in 1 Macc, 
fi. 1; 2 Macc. iv. 11. See Bishop Lightfoot, 
On a New Revision of the N. T,, p. 159; 
Krenkel, Der Ap. Johannes, ss. 7, 116. 

2 See, below, on Melito of Sardis, p. 6. 

3 Even Keim (Gesch. Jesu v. Nazara, i. 162) 
admits that ‘‘die Offenbarung, von Justin dem 
M. bis auf Irenaeus und die grossen Vater, als 
Buch des Apostels anerkannt worden sei.” 


INTRODUCTION. 


the orthodoxy of Joseph Mede (a.p. 
1632), and by the extreme rationalism, 
in our own day, of the school of 
Tiibingen. It is the verdict of Mede that 
“the Apocalypse hath more Humane 
(not to speak of Divine) authority 
than any other Book of the New Test. 
besides, even from the time it was first 
delivered” (Works, ed. 1672, p. 602); 
while Zeller decides that the Apocalypse 
is “ the proper, normal, writing of primi- 
tive Christianity; and, among all the 
parts of the N. T., the only one which 
can, with any right, claim to have been 
composed by an Apostle who was an 
immediate Disciple of Christ.”! It is 
important to state in full the evi- 
dence which has led to an agreement so 
remarkable. 


§ 2—a. External Evidence. 


THE EASTERN CHURCH: 
* The earliest connected commentary 
on the Apocalypse which we possess, 
was the work of Andreas, Bishop of 
Ceesarea towards the close of the fifth 
century. In proof of the inspiration of 
the Book, Andreas appeals to ‘Gregory 
the divine io Nazianzus], and Cyril [of 
Alexandria|, as well as to the more an- 
cient writers Papias, Irenzeus, Methodius, 
and Hippolytus.” ? 

Arethas, the successor of Andreas in 
the see of Czesarea (circ. A.D. 470-500),8 


1 It is ‘die eigentliche Normalschrift des Ur- 
christenthums, und unter sammtlichen neutesta- 
mentlichen Schriften die einzige sey, welche mit 
einigem Rechte darauf Anspruch machen kénne, 
von einem Apostel, der unmittelbarer Schiiler 
Christi geworden war, verfasst zu _seyn.”— 
Theolog. Fahrb., 1842, s. 654 ff. The Apo- 
calypse, says Baur, has evidence so ancient and 
undoubted for its Apostolic origin as few 
writings of the N. T. can claim :—see his X7##, 
Ontersuch. tb. die kan, Evang., 8. 345. 

2 (1) wept wév Ta Tov OeorvedaTou THS PiBAoY, 
mepitTov unkvve Tov Adyov 7jyoUmeba, TOY For 
ploy Tpnyopiov, pnul, rod GeorAdyou, kal KuplAAcw, 
mpooert 5& s are sey aa Tlawrlov, Elpy 
valov, Me@odlou, kal ‘ImroAbrou, Tabtn mpocuapree 
potyrwy 7d atidmorov.—Prolog., ap. Routh, 
Reliquia Sacre, vol. i. p. 15; and ap. Op. S, 
Chrysost., t. viii, ad calc, ed. Fr. Duceus, 
Paris, 1609, p. 3. . 

® So Liicke, s. 647. Rettig (Stud. u. Kritike 
1831, s. 735) makes the date not later than AD 
500; Cave and others, ; Bishop Words- 
worth quotes Fabricius Bish Gra Vili. 6963 
xi, 62), for Cent. x. 


INTRODUCTION. 


—in the preface to his commentary on 
the Apocalypse which, as he implies, was 
based upon that of Andreas,—repeats 
the names in the preceding list, and adds 
to them the name of St. Basil.? 

We are here introduced to the name 
of Papias? which fills so important a 
place in the present controversy. It is 
not stated what work of his is referred 
to; but Arethas (/ ¢., p. 360) quotes 
Andreas on Rev. xii. 7 [4 ¢, p. 67] with 
the remark, that Papias was ‘“‘a suc- 
cessor of the Evangelist John, whose 
Revelation lay before him.” These 
words assert distinctly* that Papias 
was acquainted with the Apocalypse ; 
but the only work of his of which we 
have any knowledge, is the treatise, 
in five books, entitled, ‘‘ Narratives of 
the Lord’s Oracles” (Aoyiwy kvpiaxdv 
éényjoeis),—see below, p. 408, note ”, No. 
(6). Eusebius has preserved fragments 
of this work, and tells us (& Z., iii. 39) 
that Papias there adds other things as 
“ received by him from unwritten tradi- 
tion; certain strange parables, too, of 
the Saviour ; and some other things of 
a rather fabulous character, among which 
he also mentions a corporeal reign of 


1 (2) wep) 5& Tod Ocomvedorou Tis BiBAouv, 6 év 
Gylois BactAeios, kad Tpnydpios 5 Geios toy Adyoy, 
nad KupiAdos, kad Mazias, xa) Eipnvaivs kal Mc06- 
dios, Kod ‘ImmdéAutos, of exkAnoiactixol marépes, 
exéyyvo mordcacba.—Comm. in Afoc., ap. 
Cramer, Catena, Oxon. 1840, p. 176. 

It may be noted here that Arethas on Rey. 
i. 9 (1¢., p. 192) repeats the account of Euse- 
bius (Chroz., sub an. 96; /Z. Z. iii. 18) that 
St. John was exiled to Patmos by Domitian, 
—dy Mdtyy tH viow ind Aomeriavod. 

3 Routh (i. 15) quotes a reference of Ana- 
stasius Sinaita (Cent. vi.) to Papias, as ‘‘ the 
disciple of that Apostle who lay on the Lord’s 
bosom ” (rod év T@ emia nViy poithoaytos). For 
the title 6 émo7/10s Xpicr0d,—frequently given 
to St. John, and even as early as Cent. ii., see 
Routh, Z.¢., p. 42; and cf., below, p. 412, to- 
gether with the words of Polycrates, No. (14), 
p- 414, note '. 

3 (3) rodTo Kal matépwy mapddocis xa) Tlamtou 
Siaddxov Tod EvayyeAtorod “Iwdvvov, ov Kal 7 
Bpoxemevn GmoxdAviis, SiaBeBaiot’ Tamlas 6é 
wal em aitis Ackews olTws gyal wep) Tod moAé- 
pov itt “cis obdty cuveBn TeAcuTHoM Thy Tak 
abray” olovel thy moAcuuchy eyxelpnow* “ EBANEN 
yap 6 Bpdwy, 6 péyas, 6 Sqis, 6 &pxatos,” i. 7. As. 

4 The author of Sxgernatural Religion 
(vol. ii. p. 392) admits: ‘‘ It is generally asserted 
both by apologists and others that this testi- 
mony is valid in favour of the recognition by 
Papias of the authenticity of the Apocalypse.” 


407 


Christ on this earth, which is to last for 
a thousand years after the Resurrection 
from the dead.”.1 The doctrine of the 
Millennium is plainly referred to here; 
but whether Rev. xx. is to be regarded 
as the source of what Papias has trans- 
mitted, may be considered more than 
doubtful :—see Ceriani’s account of the 
‘* Apocalypse of Baruch” quoted below, 
§ 9; and the Excursus on Rey. xx. 

Eusebius was an ardent anti-chiliast ; 
and he writes strongly against the Millen- 
narianism of Papias: he was, therefore, 
not indisposed to undervalue the Apoca- 
lypse, on which Papias might have 
founded his teaching. Having described 
him as of mean understanding, and yet, 
on account of his great antiquity, as 
being followed by Irenzeus and others in 
his opinions as to the Millennium, Eu- 
sebius proceeds (/ ¢.):—‘‘ He [Papias] 
has also handed down in his Books 
other accounts which Aristion has given 
of the Lord’s words; and also tradi- 
tions of the Presbyter John.” ? 

This mention of “John the Presby- 
ter”—whose name is so often quoted 
in the controversy as to the authenticity 
of the Apocalypse—renders it necessary 
to give in full the /ocus classicus on this 
subject, in the words of Papias himself :— 

“T shall not hesitate to set in order for 
thee whatsoever things I learned at any 
time from the Elders, and which I have 
faithfully retained in my memory... . 
But if I chanced also to meet with any 
one who had been a followerof the Elders, 
I was always wont to inquire respecting 
the sayings of the Elders,—what Andrew 
or what Peter had spoken ; or what 
Philip; or what Thomas or James; or 
what John or Matthew or any other of 
the Disciples of the Lord; what things, 
too, Aristion and the Presbyter John, 
the Lord’s disciples, say. For I did not 
think that I could profit so much from 


1 (4) @s ex mapaddcews aypdpov cis avrdp 
Hkovra mapareberrat, tévas Té Twas TapaBoAds 
Tov GwTipos Kal didackoAlas avrod, kal Twa HAAG 
pudixdrepa’ ev ols nal xeAridda Tid dnow era 
éoecOa peta Thy ex vexpov avdoracw, TwpaTiKas 
Ts TOU Xpiotov BactAelas emt tavtyol ris ys 
Smoot nooMerns. 

2 kal HAAas Bt tH EavTod ypadp mapadldwouw 
ald © eee TOV TOU Kupiou Adyuv Sinyhoes 
kat Tov mpecBuTéoov "Iwdyyov maoaddcess, ed ds 
Ke T. Ae 


408 


books as from the living voice which 
still survived.” } 

On the former of the two “ Johns” in 
this passage, Hilgenfeld (Zin/. in das 
NV. 7., Leipzig, 1875) notes: “ Evi- 
dently the Apostle John” (s. 57); and 
on the latter: “Not the ‘ older’ John, 
that is, the Apostle, as Krenkel would 
have it” (s, 58) :—see below, p. 441. 

On this quotation it is sufficient, for 
the moment, to observe, that it is warmly 
discussed whether Papias had, or had 
not, himself seen and heard the Apostles, 
as well as collected and preserved their 
sayings. Dr. Routh (/ «4, p. 23) seems 
to give the plain and natural meaning of 
the passage: “In which words [viz. 
‘But if I chanced also’ &c. (ei dé zov 
xai)| Papias seems to indicate that it 
was his custom to inquire of the disciples 
of the Apostles, just as it had been his 
custom to inquire of the Apostles them- 
selves.” St. Irenzeus—who as the disciple 
of Polycarp (Z. ad Florin., ap. Euseb., 
v. 20) must have known the fact—ex- 
pressly states that Papias was “a hearer 
of John, and a companion of Polycarp.”? 


1 (5) ob dxvhow 5é cor Kal 80a wort mapa TOY 
mpeaButépwy KadGs euaboy kal Karas euvnudvevoa, 
ouvrdtat.... Ei 5€ mov nal mapnkodovdnkds Tis 
Tos mpecBurépos Aor, Tovs Tay mpecBuTépwy 
dvéxpivov Adyous, th *Avdpéas, } rl TMérpos elev 
4 rl Sfrurmos" } tl Qwuas, 2 “IdnwBos* } rh Iwdv- 
wns, 4 MarOaios* } rls érepos tay Tov Kuplov 
pobnrav & re’ Apiorlwy kal 6 mpeoButepos *lwdy- 
yns, Tod Kuplou padntal, Aéyouow: 1.7.A.—ap. 
Euseb., Zc. ; see also Routh, /c., p. 7. 

2 (6) radra 5é xa) Mantas "Iwdvvov nev axovorhs, 
MoAukdpwov d3& Eératpos yeyovms, apxaios avhp, 
éyypdows exiaptupel ev tH TeTdpTn Tv airrov 
BiBrwy zor: yap alte wévre BiBAla cuvteraypeva. 
—Adv. Her., Vv. 33, 34. This is the passage 
which, as Ceriani states, Papias borrowed from 
the ‘‘ Apocalypse of Baruch,”—see below, § 9, 

62. 

" Polycarp, whose life unites the age of the 
Apostles with that of Irenzeus, was Bishop of 
Smyrna, the second of the Seven Churches (Rev. 
ii, 8),—placed too over that church, as man 

writers mention, by the Apostles, and by St. John 
himself (e.g. Tertullian: ‘‘ Sicut Smyrnzorum 
ecclesia Polycarpum ab Joanne conlocatum 
refert.”"—De Prescr. c. 32 ; Iren. iii. 3, 4; Euseb. 
iv. 14, v.20; Hieron., De Vir. Ji. 17). He 
was, as Archbishop Ussher argues, no other than 
“‘the Angel of the church of Smyrna” (Rev. 
ii, 8):—‘* Who,” writes Ussher, ‘‘can better 
inform us than Irenzeus ? who did not only know 
those who succeeded Polycarpus in his See” (of 
péxpt viv diadedeypévor Thy MoAvKaprov,—Her. 
fii. 4, p. 177), ‘but also was present when he 


INTRODUCTION. 


Irenzeus is here quoting from Papias an 
“unwritten saying” of our Lord respect- 
ing the Millennium ; and in what he thus 
says the absence of any title indicates 
the well-known “John.” Eusebius (iii 
39) also speaks of Papias as “‘a man of 
old time” (apxatos avnp). 

In the second part of his Chronicle 
Eusebius, mentioning facts which marked 
the 220th Olympiad (A.D. ror), writes: 
—‘‘It is recorded by Irenzeus that the 
Apostle John survived down to the times 
of Trajan. After whom Papias of Hiera- 
polis and Polycarp bishop of Smyrna 
were acknowledged to be the Apostle’s 
hearers.” 1 Here the words which follow 
“ After whom” (“ Post quem”) express 
the belief of Eusebius himself;? and 
Eusebius, in the version of this passage 
given in his Chronicle as printed among 
the works of St. Jerome (ed. Vallars., t 
viii.), adds to that of Polycarp the name 
of Ignatius as a “hearer” of St. John. 
Thus we see that both Irenzeus and Euse- 
bius,? having mentioned that St. John 
lived under Trajan (A.D. 96-117), also 
state that Papias was his contemporary, 
—‘“a hearer of John,” “a companion of 
Polycarp.” The Paschal Chronicle, too, 


himself did discourse of his conversation with 
St. John.”—TZhe Original of Bishops, Works, 
Elrington’s ed., vol. vii. p. 50. See below, p. 412. 

1 (7) ‘Joannem Apostolum usque ad Trajani 
tempora permansisse Irenzus tradit. Post quem 
ejusdem auditores agnoscebantur Papias lera- 
politanus et Polycarpus Smyrnzorum regionis 
episcopus.” — Chron. Bipartit. Graeco-Armeno- 
Latinum, ed. Aucher, ii. p. 281. 

To this passage may be added: ‘* Se 
cundus post Neronem Domitianus Christianos 
persequitur; et sub eo Apostolus Joannes ad 
Patmum insulam relegatus Apocalypsin vidit, 
quam Irenzeus interpretatur.”—Eusebius, Chron, 
ad an. 14 Domitiani, It will be found use- 
ful to keep in view the duration of Domi- 
tian’s reign,—viz., from the year 81 to the 
year 96. 

* See, in proof of this statement, Zahn, 
‘*Papias von Hierapolis,” Studien u. Krity 
1866, s. 649. 

* Eusebius, however, elsewhere (iii. 39) ate 
tempts to set aside the statement of Irenzeus that 
Papias was ‘‘a hearer of John,” on the grounds 
that Papias tells us, No. (5), that he is recording 
what he had heard from others about the 
sayings of the Apostles, among whom he names 
St. John. But may not Papias have both heard 
that Apostle, and also collected what others re- 
ported concerning him? It is impossible to 
suppose that Irenzeus could have been mistaken 
as to this. 


INTRODUCTION. 


records the martyrdom of Polycarp (ed. 
Dindorf., i. 480, &c.), and adds that 
Papias suffered in the same persecution 
(xai &v Iepydpw 82 erepor & ois fv Kai 
Tlarias, x.r.\.) ;—showing that in death 
as in life Papias was Polycarp’s com- 
panion. 

At what time Papias lived, may be 
approximately determined by the date 
of Polycarp’s death:—In the Epistle 
of the Church of Smyrna (Euseb. iv. 
15), which contains the narrative of 
Polycarp’s sufferings, Polycarp’s death is 
placed (Patr. Apost., ed. Hefele, p. 294) 
in the proconsulship of Statius Quad- 
ratus, and on a day which is specified ; 
while Polycarp’s well-known words, 
“ Fourscore and six years have I served 
Christ,” &c.—a statement which at all 
events is to be counted from his baptism 
—make him to have been, at least, 
eighty-six years old. M. Waddington? 
has proved from the language of this 
narrative that Polycarp was put to death 
on Feb. 23, A.D. 155, under Antoninus 
Pius ; and he points out how Eusebius 
and others have been mistaken in 
placing this event some ten years later, 
under M. Aurelius, when Ummidius 
Quadratus was consul. Polycarp’s birth, 
or more probably his baptism, would, 
accordingly, fall in the year 69; and 
thus the chronological difficulty, as to 
the fact of his companion Papias having 
been a contemporary of St. John, who 
lived till the end of the century, alto- 
gether disappears. Bishop Lightfoot 
(Contemp. Review, August 1875, p. 383) 
considers “that Papias was probably 
born about A.D. 60-70, and that his 


1 See his Mémoire on the life of #lius Aris- 
tides, in the M/ém. de P Institut, t. xxvi., 1867, 
p- 235, &c.; and also Renan’s summary of the 
argument, ZL’ Antechrist, p. 566. Scholten 
(Der Ap. Fohannes in Kleinasien, s. 65) re- 
jects the account of Polycarp’s journey to Rome 
during the Paschal controversy,—when (A.D. 
154) he met Anicetus (Iren. iii. 3, 4; cf 
Ep. ad Victor., ap. Eus., H. £. v. 243 iv. 163 
Chron. ad ann. 155),—on the ground that he 
must have then been too old to have under- 
taken such a journey: to which Renan justly 
freplies that the voyage from Smyrna to Rome 
was one of the easiest in that age; and he quotes 
the case of a merchant whose epitaph states 
that he pea made in his lifetime seventy-two 
voyazes from Hierapolis to Rome :—see Boeckh, 

. Inser. Gr. t. iii, No. 3920. Cf. also 
m, ch. ii. 


409 


work was published about a.D. 130-140.” 
Accordingly, the first direct evidence 
which we possess for the authenticity of 
the Apocalypse is given by one who 
was a contemporary of the Apostle 
John; who had seen and heard him; 
and who was bishop of Hierapolis, a 
city but a few miles distant from Lao- 
dicea (Rev. ili. 14) which was one of 
the Seven Churches. 

Other evidence for the authenticity of 
the Apocalypse which is sometimes ad- 
duced from the age of the Apostolic 
Fathers, may not, perhaps, be deemed 
equally conclusive. Thus Hengstenberg 
(The Rev. of St. John, vol. ii. p. 393, Eng. 
transl.) thinks that the Divine title 
‘Almighty ” (zavroxpdtwp) used by Poly- 
carp in his Epistle to the Philippians (c. 
1) was taken by him from the Apoca- 
lypse, where it is found nine times, but 
elsewhere only in 2 Cor. vi. 18: and he 
also sees in the words “ Let us be imi- 
tators of His patience” (pinta yeo- 
peGa ths wropovys aitod, 10, c. 8), a 
reference to Rev. i. 9; iii. 10. In the 
‘‘ Shepherd of Hermas,” which is “ of the 
same date as Montanism” (circ. A.D. 
140), the symbolism of the Apocalypse 
reappears :—“ The Church is represented 
under the figure of a woman (Apoc. xii. 
1; Vis. i. 4); a bride (Apoc. xxi, 2; 
Vis. iv. 2); her enemy is a great beast 
(Apoc. xi. 4; Vis. iv. 2).”—Westcott, 
The Canon of the N. T., p. 181. 

The age of the Apostolic Fathers is 
followed, according to Liicke’s division 
(s. 516), by the age of apologetic litera- 
ture ;—an age which is closed by Euse- 
bius of Czsarea, and which begins 
with St. Justin Martyr! of whose testi- 
mony Liicke (s. 550) pronounces: “ No- 
thing is clearer than what Eusebius (iv. 
18) long ago remarked, that Justin in 
this passage [see below] employs the 
Apocalypse of the New Test. asa sacred, 
authentic, Christian writing, and ex- 
pressly declares it to be the work of the 
Apostle John” ;—and he adds (s. 561): 
“On this point there can be no doubt.” 


1 Dr. Hort (Fourn. Class. and Sacr. Philology, 
iii. 139), concludes that ‘‘we may set down 
Justin’s first Apology to 145, or better still to 
146, and his death to 148. The second Apology 
will then fall in 146 or 147, and the Dial with 
Tryphon about the same time.” 


410 


In his famous Dia/ogue Justin M., having 
explained the words of Isaiah, ch. Ixv. 
17-25, as applicable to the Millennium, 
proceeds :—“ Among us also a certain 
man named John, one of the Apostles of 
Christ, prophesied, in a Revelation given 
to him, that they who believe in our 
Christ shall spend a thousand years in 
Jerusalem ; and after this that there shall 
be, with one accord, at the same time, 
the universal and (to speak concisely) 
eternal Resurrection of all men, and the 
Judgment.” ? 

When we recollect that these words 
form part of a dialogue with she Jew 
Tryphon, the qualification, “a certain 
man named John,” with which it begins, 
need cause no surprise. 

In the passage from Eusebius which 
Liicke refers to, the historian further 
states that the dialogue with Tryphon was 
held at Ephesus,—the chief of the Seven 
Churches (Rev. ii. 1),—the city where 
St. John resided until his death [duaAoyov 
e+. em THS Edeciwy roX\ews pos Tpv- 
gwva tov Tore “EBpaiwy éxionpdratov 
meTointar.... pweuvytat d€ kal THS Iwavvov 
aroxadtiews, capa@s Tod “ArooroXov adriy 
eivas Xéywv]. It may be added that in 
the expression “Among us” (zap jypiv, 
note '), Justin M. clearly implies the resi- 
dence of St. John at Ephesus, and in 
Asia Minor.? 

_ §t. Jerome expressly states (De Vir. 
Zi,, c. 9) that Justin M., as well as Ire- 
neus, had interpreted the Apocalypse, 
see p. 20, No. (26) and it is to be noted 
that this is the only Book of the New 
Testament to which Justin M. refers by 
name, and St. John the only writer.? 

1 (8) kal wap’ july avhp tis S bvoua "Iwavyns, 
els tay amootéAwy Tod Xpicrov, ev amoxaddtywper 
yevouern adT@, xiAia ern morhoew ev ‘lepovcaAtm 
tods TO juctépp XpiotrgG motevoavtas mpoe- 
phrevoe, kal peta Tadta Thy KaboAKhy kal, 
cuveAdyt: ddvat, aiwviay duodupaddy Gua mdvTwy 
aera yerhorerba Kal kplow.— Dial. c. Tryph. 
c. ol. 

3 In his first Apology (i. 28), Justin refers to 

Rev. xx. 2 (6 apxnyétns Tav Kaxay Saiudvor 

Bois kadeira: kal caravas Kal didBodos). Otto (in 

his notes) compares c. 45 of the Dial. c. Tryph. 

(6 @dvaros katappovnOp kK. T.A.) with Rev. xxi. 4. 

We may also compare c. 113 and its references 

to ‘‘the new Heaven and the new Earth,” as 

well as its allusion to Christ being the Lamp of 
the New Jerusalem, with Rev. xxi. 1, 23 :—see 

Hengstenberg, 4 ¢., p. 409. 

* Tatian, a contemporary of Justin M., in his 


INTRODUCTION. 


Melito (civz. A.D. 169) was Bishop of 
Sardis, one of the Seven Churches (Rev. 
iii. 1). Melito, as we know, was most 
zealous in the investigation of the Canon 
of the Old Test.; and he is stated by 
Eusebius (iv. 26) and by St. Jerome (De 
Vir. [il., c. 24) to have written “ concern- 
ing the Apocalypse of John, and con- 
cerning the Devil,” who is so often named 
in the Book of the Revelation—xai ra 
mept Tod S:aBdAov, Kal THs aroKxoAtpews 
"Iwdvvov :—“ de diabolo librum unum, 
de Apocalypsi Joannis librum unum ”], 
This mention of “John” without any 
distinguishing title clearly points (see 
below) to a pre-eminent person of that 
name; and had Eusebius known that 
Melito entertained any doubt as to the 
apostolical origin of the Book, he would 
not have failed to notice it. This work 
of Melito is not extant. The authen- 
ticity of a treatise ascribed to him, which 
is styled by Eusebius Zhe Key (i KAéis), 
by St. Jerome C/avis, and which has been 
given to the world in a Latin version by 
Dom Pitra (Spicileg. Solesmense, vol. ii.), 
—is perhaps doubtful. In this transla- 
tion the Apocalypse is constantly quoted.? 

Apollonius was Bishop (or Presbyter) 


‘*Qration to the Greeks” (c, 20), may also be 
taken to allude to Rev. xxi, Dionysius, who 
suffered as a martyr, A.D. 176 (Routh, i. p. 177), 
appears to have been bishop of Corinth at the 
time of Justin’s death (Westcott, p. 173)—see 
Euseb. iv. 23: of the ¢hree allusions to the 
New Test. to be found in the fragment of his 
works preserved by Eusebius, one is an allusion 
to Rev. xxii. 18,—‘‘ When brethren urged me 
to write letters, I wrote them; and these the 
apostles of the Devil have filled with tares, 
taking away some things, and adding others, 
for whom the Woe is appointed—& piv éfase 
podytes, & 5& mpooriBevtes, ols Td oval Keiras:” 
see Westcott, /. ¢., p. 166. 

! Labbe (De Scripior. Eccl, ii. 87) had men- 
tioned a MS. of this work as extant in the 
College of Clermont at Paris, and of this Dom 
Pitra has discovered eight copies. Of the copyin 
the Bodleian Library, the writer in Smith’s 
Biogr. Dict., art. Melito, says, ‘‘it appears to 
be much interpolated, if indeed any part of it is 
genuine. .... It is possible that the fourth ex- 
tract given by Routh (/. ¢., t. i. p. 124) from the 
Catena is from the original C/avis of Melito.” 

pe a tn Apocalypsi ‘Pedes ejus sicut 
aurichalci’ (Rev. i. 15),”—p. 290; in the sece 
tion, De supernis creaturis: ‘* Angelus,—Pree- 
lati vel sacerdotes, ‘Et angelo Ephesi scribe, 
(Rev. ii. 1)’,”—p. 55; ‘‘Folium,—sermo doc 
trine : Et in Apocalypsi, ‘ Et folia ejus ad sani- 
tatem gentium’” (Rev. xxii. 2),—p. 393. 


INTRODUCTION. 


of Ephesus (see Routh, 4 ¢., i. 465). 
It was here, where St. John lived and 
taught, that opposition must have at once 
arisen to any work ascribed to the Apostle 
which had not proceeded from his pen. 
Apollonius wrote crc. A.D. 170-180 ; and 
this date, as bearing upon recent objec- 
tions, is of importance. Apollonius (see 
Euseb., v. 18) composed a treatise against 
Montanism about forty years after Mon- 
tanus appeared ; and his reference in this 
work to the public archives of Asia Minor 
which were preserved at Ephesus, illus- 
trates his familiarity with the affairs of 
the Ephesian Church [ovx quads det A€yew, 
GAG 6 éricGddomos exer,—see the note 
of Valesius iz /oc.]. He wrote, there- 
fore, not only before Irenzus (A.D. 190), 
and independently of him, but also at 
a time when no one questioned the 
identity of the author of the Apocalypse 
with the Apostle John.? 

Apollonius mentions, “as if from 
tradition” [ds é« zapaddécews] that the 
Saviour had commanded the Apostles 
not to leave Jerusalem for twelve years ; 
and he also testifies that St. John wrote 
the Apocalypse,— that he resided at 
Ephesus,—and that he there restored 
a dead man to life.? 

This testimony, as Liicke (2 ¢., s. 567) 
notes, is also important as proving that 
the acceptance of the Apocalypse, at this 
date, was not restricted (as some argue) 
to Montanists* and Millennarians. 


‘ Even Keim (4 ¢., i. s. 154; Anm. 2, s. 164) 
admits the date A.D. 170-180, merely object- 
ing that Apollonius does not style John ‘‘an 
Apostle,” but simply ‘‘ the writer of the Apo- 
calypse.” In order to get rid of this early date, 
Scholten (/.¢. s. 38) adopts the theory of 
Schwegler (Der Montanismus, s. 255), who 
identifies Apollonius with the martyr of that 
name who suffered under Commodus (A.D. 180- 
194, see Euseb., v. 21). This attempt to make 
the evidence of Apollonius dependent on that of 
Trenzus, is refuted by Steitz, Stud. u. Krit., 1868, 


87 
? (9) Eusebius tells us that Apollonius wrote: 
tov Swtipa wpooretaxévat ToIs avtod amoordAois, 
éx) Sddexa Erect ph XwpicOjva: Tis ‘lepovecAhy. 
wéxpnta: 5¢ kal uaotvolas ard Tis *Iwavvov aro- 
xaAtwews- kal wexpdy St Suvduer Gelg xpds avtod 
Iwdyvou ev TH Epéow eynyépla: ivtope?.— ZH. E., 
vy. 18; see Routh, 4¢, p. 472; and note }, 
p- 426. ’ 
* Thus, not to speak of Tertullian (see 
below, p. 17), a Montanist prophetess, referred to 
Epi ius (Her. 49,1), says: Xpiords are- 
pos Tovtovl toy Téroy elva: Gyiov Kal Gde 


415 


Theophilus of Antioch (f A.D. 168), 
the sixth in descent from the Apostles 
(Euseb., iv. 24), was engaged in contro- 
versy with one Hermogenes. His work 
is lost; but Eusebius, who had read it, 
assures us that Theophilus there adduced 
* proofs” (uaprvpiac) from ‘‘the Apoca- 
lypse of John,”—evidently as a New Tes- 
tament authority, and one recognized in 
the church of Antioch. In his extant 
treatise 4d Aufolycum (ii. c. 28), we meet 
an allusion to Rev. xii. 3, to the effect 
that Satan is called “a demon and a 
dragon” [daipwv cat dpaxwy xadcirar]. 

The most valuable testimony, however, 
from the second century which we possess 
is that of St. Irenzeus, Bishop of Lyons, 
whose activity extends from A.D. 130 to 
A.D. 202; and who wrote his great work 
against the Gnostics, at Rome, during the 
episcopate of Eleutherus (4.D. 177-199). 
Trenzus was a Greek of Asia Minor, and 
subsequently a presbyter of the Gallican 
Church. He there succeeded, as bishop, 
Pothinus who was already ninety years 
of age, and who had associated, like Poly- 
carp, with the generation of St. John. 
Trenzus tells us of himself, in his treatise 
on the Ogdoad (as we read in Euseb., v. 
20), that “he had reached to the first 
succession of the Apostles.” In his well- 
known “Epistle to Florinus” (ag. Euseb. 


thy ‘lepoveaAy ex Tod ovpavod Katiévar (Rev. 
xxi. 2). And on the opposite side :— 

Agreeing with Apollonius, among other anti- 
Montanists, the author of the fragment Adz, 
Cataphrygas (Eus., v.16 ; Routh, ii., p. 183) says 
that he was not inclined to accept certain opi- 
nions, ‘‘ fearing lest he should seem to add a 
new article to the word of the New Covenant 
of the Gospel,—@ unre mpoc@civa: phir adeAciy 
duvatéy (Rev. xxii. 18, 19).” Clemens Alex, 
and Origen (see below, p. 415) were decided 
anti-Millennarians. 

1 In the Epistle of the Church of Smyrna 
which recounts the martyrdom of Polycarp 
(c. xxii., ed. Hefele, p. 294), we read at the close: 
—rtadta peteypavato uev dios, éx Tay Eipnvatoy, 
pabntod tot TloAvkdprov, ds nal ouveroAitebe 
oato Té Eipnvalw. Irenzus became bishop of 
Lyons, A.D. 177. Polycarp died A.D. 155 or 
156 (see above); accordingly Irenzeus would 
have been a pupil of Polycarp, cre. A.D. 135- 
150:—so Bishop Lightfoot in the Contemp, 
Review, May 1875, p. 833. Neander writes: 
‘*From the school of John in Asia Minor there 
went forth an impulse, in opposition to the 
speculations of the Gnostics, .... which carried 
into the West Irenzeus, who had been trained 
in the school of the disciples of the Apostle 
Tohn.”—Xireh.- Gesch., i. 8. B76 


412 


ib. ; compare note !, p. 431), Irenzeus re- 
lates that he had met Polycarp (see above, 
p. 408), whom he had come to know at 
Smyrna; and that he was wont, when 
a boy, to hear from his lips concerning 
“his converse with John and the rest 
who had seen the Lord.” He had not 
merely, he tells us, seen Polycarp occa- 
sionally, but had lived in his society and 
profited by his instruction ; and of this he 
now writes to another pupil of Polycarp, 
Florinus, who must have known the 
fact, and whom he was opposing on 
a grave matter of doctrine :—see note ?, 
p- 431. In the passage from which 
No. (11)—see below—is taken, im- 
portant details are given respecting St. 
John and his relation to the succeeding 
generation. We are told in that passage 
how Polycarp had been appointed by the 
Apostles Bishop of Smyrna; and that 
certain persons had heard from him 
how St. John on one occasion rushed 
with horror from the baths at Ephesus, 
because he had chanced to meet there 
the heretic Cerinthus. In the Epistle of 
Irenzeus to Victor Bishop of Rome (af. 
Euseb., v. 24), we also read that Polycarp, 
when he visited Rome, was not persuaded 
by Anicetus to give up his practice of 
keeping Easter on the fourteenth day 
of the month, as he had been wont to 
keep it after the manner of “John the 
Disciple of the Lord,” and the other 
Apostles with whom he (Polycarp) had 
associated. Indeed the intimate con- 
nexion with Polycarp which is mani- 
fested throughout his writings, renders 
the testimony of Irenzus as to St 
John virtually that of a contemporary. 
Perhaps the most important passage 
out of many in the writings of this 
Father is the following (Her., v. 30, 31 ; 
for the Greek text see Euseb., v. 8) :— 
In opposition to the erroneous reading 
616, in Rev. xiii. 18, Irenzus supports 
the true reading 666: this, he ob- 
serves, is found “in all the correct and 
ancient copies;” and it has also in 
its favour “the testimony of those who 
had seen John face to face”? [trav war 


1 The author of Supernatural Religion (vol. 
ii. p. 393) offers the following characteristic 
criticism : ‘‘ We do not attribute any value to 
his [Irenseus’] testimony. . . . Although he 
appeals tc those ‘who saw John face to face’ 


INTRODUCTION. 


oyw tov “Iwdvyyv éwpaxdrov]. Havi 
given his own conjectures as to the 
meaning ot the mystic number (“for 
were it right that it should be yro- 
claimed openly at the present time, this 
name of Antichrist would have been 
uttered by him who beheld the Apoca- 
lypse”), Irenzeus concludes with the 
statement, that St. John beheld the 
Vision “almost in our own generation, 
towards the end of the reign of Domi- 
tian.” } 

This statement as to the late period 
down to which St. John lived, is incident- 
ally referred to again and again:—e.g. 
(Her, ii. 22, 5 ; Euseb., iii. 23) appealing 
to “all the presbyters who had associated 
in Asia with John the Disciple of the 
Lord” [7 tod Kupiov pabyrp], and who 
testify of what he had handed down to 
them, Irenzus adds that John “ remained 
among them until the time of Trajan; 
. . . . and some among them have seen 
not John only, but also other Apostles.” 
And once more (Z@r., iii. 3, 4; Euseb., 
ibid.) he writes :— 

“Moreover, the Church of Ephesus, 
which Paul had founded, and where 
John abode until the times of Trajan, is 
a true witness of the tradition of the 
Apostles.” ? 

In none of his writings does Irenzeus 
betray the least consciousness that any 
doubts had ever been entertained as 
to the authorship of the Apocalypse. 
He does not, indeed, expressly call 
the author “an Apostle,”—continually 
speaking of him as “the Disciple of the 
Lord” (see above) ; as “he that leaned 
on His bosom” (see John xiii. 23 ; and 
cf, Euseb. v. 24, as well as p. 407, note %) ; 
or simply as “John” (No. (6), note %, 


with regard to the number of the Beast, his own 
utter ignorance of the interpretation shows how 
little information he can have derived from 
Polycarp.” 

1"(10) jets odv obK aroxwduvebouev wep) TOU 
évduaros Tov *AvtixpicTod amropaivduevor BeBas- 
wTmas ci ‘yap ede avapavdly THe viv wales 
knptrrecba Tobvoua avTou, d:’ éxelvov by epieby 
Tov kal thy &woxdAupw éwpaxdros* ovd% yap xpd 
moAod xpévou éwpdOn, GAAA oxEddy em) THs Hwee 
répas yeveds, mpds TH TéAGL THS Aoueriavod dpxis 
(ct. Euseb. iii. 18). 

2 (11) @AAa Kal 4 ev "Eger exndnota im 
TlavAov pty redeneduwpevn “lwdyvov 8% wapapele 
vayros avrois méxpt TeV Tpalavod xpdvwry, udpree 
aAndhs dors THS TAY "AwooTéAwy wapaddcews, 


INTRODUCTION. 


p. 408) : but that “ John” is the Apostle 
and Evangelist is clear from the words 
in which he states that “John the Lord’s 
Disciple h2 that leaned on His bosom, 
published the Gospel at Ephesus during 
his abode in Asia.” 

The references to the Apocalypse are 
in the following forms : “Sed et Johannes 
Domini discipulus, in Apocalypsi” (4dz. 
Her. iv. 20, 11); “ significavit Johannes 
Domini discipulus in Apocalypsi” (2d. 
vy. 26,1); “in Apocalypsi vidit Joannes,” 

ib. v. 35, 2); “‘ Joamnes in Apoc. ait” 
tb. iv. 21, 3). 

Akin to the testimony of Irenzus is 
that which is supplied by the Epistle 
in which the churches of Lyons, and 
Vienne inform the churches in Asia and 
Phrygia of the persecution which they 
had endured under Antoninus Verus, 
A.D. 177 (ap. Euseb., v. 1, 2). We there 
learn how deeply the imagery and the 
language of the Apocalypse had pene- 
trated the thoughts of Christians at that 
early period :—The martyr Vettius “isa 
genuine disciple of Christ, ‘following the 
Lamb whithersoever He gocth’” (7 
yryows Xpwtod pabyris axodovbay 74 
Gpviy Sov av tardyy [Rev. xiv. 4] );— 
Christ is described as “the faithful and 
true Witness and First Born of the 
dead” (Rev. i 53 ili. 14) ;—and the 
fury of the persecutors as compared 
with the patience of the Martyrs, is 
represented in the words of Rev. xxii. 
11, freely quoted with the preface, “ that 
the Scripture might be fulfilled.” ? 

Polycrates, a later bishop of Ephesus 
(t+ a.D. 196), writing, during the second 
Paschal controversy, to Victor Bishop of 
Rome (ap. Euseb. iii. 31 ; v. 24), appeals 
to the great lights of the Church in Asia, 
—to Polycarp of Smyrna, and Thraseus 
of Eumenia; to Sagaris, Papirius, Melito 
of Sardis ; and to seven other bishops of 
his own family. Of the Twelve Apostles, 
he appeals to “ Philip who with two of 
his daughters (who had remained virgins) 
was buried at Hierapolis,;—a third 


* (12) "Iedvyns 5 pabnrhs tov Kuplov, 6 rab 
ér) 7) or7Gos Avrod avarccdéy, wal abtds etédwxe 
9d Ebayyduuor ey "Edéce tis ‘Actas d:aTplBov.— 
= ie bees npoOp dvoun- 

1 q A: 3, 6 &vopos 
odte P wal 3 Sleaos SixawOhre er. 
* In the passage No. (5), Papias, who was 


413 


daughter, who was inspired by the Holy 
Spirit, being buried at Ephesus;” and 
to St. John. Polycrates thus describes 
the latter Apostle :-— 

“ And moreover John, he who leaned 
on the Lord’s bosom, who came to be a 
Priest that wore the Golden Plate [or 


Mitre, or Frontlet,—LXX. zéradov, see 


himself bishop of Hierapolis, refers to Philip 
as one of “‘the disciples of the Lord,” whose 
sayings he had collected. This Philip can be 
no other than ¢he Afostle, residing with his 
daughters at Hierapolis, as Eusebius (iii. 39) 
understood Papias who, the historian tells us, 
had heard from Philip’s daughters a certain 
wonderful narration. Philip is mentioned by 
Papias next to Andrew and Peter; and one 
who turns to St. John’s Gospel will see that 
what related to these three Apostles had a special 
interest not only for St. John, but also for his 
hearers (John i. 40, 43-46; vi. 5-83 xii. 
20-22 ; xiv.8,9). Papias does not refer at all 
to Philip she Evangelist. Polycrates, as quoted 
in the text, mentions—$iA:mmoy [7dv] Tay dd- 
dexa aroctdéAwy, bs Kexolunrat év ‘lepardAc: wad 
dbo Ovyatépes abtod yeynpaxvia: rapGévor’ Kal 7 
érépa avtov buydrnp év ayly xvebuars wodrtev- 
capevn, h ev "Edécw avaraterat (af. Euseb., 
iii. 31 ; v. 24) ;—this third daughter, who had 
the gift of prophecy, being evidently married. 
This statement is confirmed by Clemens AL 
(Strom. iii. 6, 25; Euseb., iii. 30) as to the 
third daughter, although he loosely uses the 
plural number when he says that Philip gave 
his ‘‘ daughters” in marriage. On the other 
hand, the ‘‘ Dialogue of Caius and Proclus” 
(Euseb., iii. 31) represents Philip the Zvangelsst 
as residing at Hierapolis, and with him four 
daughters who had the gift of logy tomes (uera 
tovtou de mpoohtides Téegoapes ai diAlawou yeyer- 
nvtat) ; all five being buried in that city. Here the 
mention of four daughters prophesying recalls 
the person spoken of in Acts xxi. 8,9. Now 
although the statement of Polycrates as to the 
Apostle Philip is confirmed by Papias, as we 
have seen, and by Clemens Al.,—yet, because 
another later writer, the author of this Dialogue, 
refers to Philip te Evangelist as having also 
resided at Hierapolis, we are told that the 
evidence of Polycrates is discredited by the con- 
fusion into which he has here fallen; and ther 
Sore that his testimony as to St. Fohn is of litte 
worth. It is clear, however, that St. Luke cara- 
fully distinguishes between the two Philips :— 
cf. Acts vi. 2-5 ; viii. 5-17; xxi. 8, where the 
‘*Deacon,” or ‘* Evangelist,” is evidently 
contrasted with the members of the Twelve. 
Can any one, then,—on the sole evidence of a 
writer (A.D. 212) so much later in time than Papias 
(born A.D. 60-70, see p. 5), and so much inferior 
in authority to Polycrates and Clemens Al.,— 
admit the existence of such a blunder on the part. 
of Polycrates? When Papias, as Eusebius 
tells us, received information from ‘“ the 
daughters of Philip,” are we not to understand. 
that the“‘ Philip” intended was the Apostle whom. 


414 


below], and a witness, and a teacher, 
he too has fallen asleep at Ephesus.”? 
And thus, at the end of the second 
century, we have evidence from Ephesus 
itself as to the fact of the residence and 
death of the Evangelist John in that 


ty. 

Dean Alford rejects without sufficient 
cause this testimony to the Apocalypse 
(Prolegg., p. 207). Hengstenberg justly 
insists upon this proof. Even Keim (44, 
i 165), although he pronounces the state- 
ment of Polycrates to be “a fantastic 
picture,” nevertheless admits that the lan- 
guage of the passage just quoted is gleaned 
from the Gospel, and the Apocalypse.? 
Scholten also (s. 75) allows that St. 
John is here described in words bor- 
rowed from the Gospel (John xiii. 23; 
xxi. 20), and that he is called “a wit- 
ness” in accordance with Rev. i. 9. 

The terms “Priest” and “ Plate” of 
gold, which occur in the passage cited 
from Polycrates, have been much dis- 
cussed. The “ Plate” of gold [zéraAoy, 
the equivalent of yy, (Ex. xxviii, 32 
(36); Lev. viii. 9, LXX.), and of 71 
(Ex. xxix. 6), “the Frontlet” inscribed 
* Holiness to the Lord,’—see the note on 
Ex. xxviii. 36] was the token by which 


Eusebius had just mentioned ?—although Euse- 
bius himself seems to have confounded the 
Apostle with the Evangelist. It may be added 
_ that Zhe Acts of Philip in like manner place the 
Apostle at Hierapolis,—see Tischendorf, Acé. 
Apost, Apocr., p. 75. Those critics who, like 
Keim (4. ¢.), insist upon charging Polycrates with 
error, attribute his describing Philip as ‘‘an 
Apostle” to the desire of the Asiatic churches 
to trace their spiritual descent directly from 
the Twelve ;—on which Bishop Lightfoot well 
observes: ‘‘This solution of the phenomenon 
might have been accepted if the authorities in 
favour of Philip the Evangelist had been prior 
in time and superior in quality.”—Comm. on 
Coloss., p. 46. It is hard to see why two per- 
sons named Philip could not have been married 
and had daughters; even though the daughters 
of both had the gift of prophecy which, we 
know, was not then unusual,—see Eusebius 
(iii. 37 ; v. 17) on Quadratus, and Ammias ; as 
also the notes of Routh, /. ¢., vol. ii. pp. 24-26. 
On this whole subject cf. the note of Bishop 
ightfoot, /.¢., p. 45. 

(14) &re 3& Kad “Iwdvyns, 6 ert rd or7Oos Tod 
Kuolov dvarecmy, ds eyevhOn iepebs 7d wétadov 
mepooekas, kal pdptus Kal diddcKaAos, ovTos ev 
*Epéow xexolunrat—(ap. Routh, 4 ¢, t. ii, p. 14.) 

2 Keim, however, rejects the credibility of 
Polycrates because he describes Philip as an 
Apostle,—see the last note. 


INTRODUCTION. 


the High Priest was distinguished from 
the other priests. Neander (Pfanzung, 
il. 32) sees in these two terms a re 
ference to the rank which St. John held 
in the Church. We know how continually 
St. John, throughout the Apocalypse, uses 
the symbolism of the Old Covenant: 
may we not then, see in the wéraAov an 
emblem of the dignity, whether moral or 
ecclesiastical, ascribed in the Church to 
the Apostles? May not Polycrates have 
thus referred to the Apostles as “ High 
Priests,” distinguished from the ordi- 
nary members of the Church who re- 
ceive in the Apocalypse itself the title 
of “ priests” (Rev. i. 6; v. 10; xx. 6)? 
May we not see here, on the part of 
the primitive Church, a belief in the 
connexion of the Old and the New Dis- 
pensations, and in the maintenance of 
the Apostolic office in the second, con- 
tinuing the High Priestly office in the 
first? ? MHulgenfeld observes: “ Poly- 
crates of Ephesus represents him [John 
as a Christian High Priest, or as one o 
exalted Episcopal dignity. ... A 
similar statement respecting James, the 
Lord’s brother, is to be found in Epi- 
phanius.”—Zin/., s. 392.8 Godet, to the 
same effect, concludes from this state- 
ment of Polycrates that “John, the 
last survivor of the Apostolate, had left 
ou the Church of Asia the impression 
of a Pontiff from whose forehead shone 
the spiritual splendour of the holiness 


1 This symbolical use of the term may be 
illustrated by the phrase, réraAov ris mloTews, in 
the ‘‘ Testament of Levi,” Zest. XZ/. Patriarchy 
iii. 8, ed. Sinker, p. 142. 

? To this effect Vallarsius notes on St 
Jerome (De Vir. Jil. c. 45, vol. ii. p. 872) 
—‘‘Figurate hoc dici eo sensu quo Horatius 
de virtute predicat, ‘Mec sumit aut ponit 
secures, Arbitrio popularis aura. Ut perinde 
sit auream laminam inter Christianos gestare, 
ac pontificis dignitatem, cujus illud insigne est, 
obtinere.” 

2 See Epiphanius (Her. 29, 4; 78, 14) and 
also Hegesippus (af. Euseb., ii. 23), who refer 
to the fact of James ‘‘the Just” wearing the 
méradov, The Martyrium Marci Evangelista 
(see Valesius on Eus. v. 24) states that St. Mark 
wore ‘‘ pontificalis apicis petalum inter Judzeos,” 
Ewald argues from the use of the word yra- 
orés, in John xviii. 15, that the beloved Apostle 
was ‘‘a kinsman” of the High Priest, and there- 
fore of sacerdotal race (Die Joh. Sthr., i. 8. 400) 5 
and he seeks support for this theory in these 
words of Polycrates (see, on the other hand, 
Bleck, Hinlcit. in das N. T., § 60). 


INTRODUCTION. 


of Christ."—Comm. on St. John’s Gospel 
(Engl. transl., vol. i. p. 60). 

And thus, already, from the region of 
the Seven Churches, we have Apollonius 
and Polycrates in Ephesus, Papias in 
Hierapolis, Polycarp in Smyrna, and 
Melito in Sardis, all bearing witness to 
the Apocalypse as the authentic work of 
the Apostle John. We are now at the 
threshold of the third century. 

Clemens Alexandrinus flourished a.p. 
165-220, He was trained in the school 
of Pantenus whom Photius (Cod. 118) 
represents as “a hearer of fie Apostles” 
(see Routh, 24, 1% p. 377). Clemens, 
who had for one of his earliest instruc- 
tors an Ionian Greek, thus describes 
his teachers before he met with Pan- 
teenus: “ Moreover they who preserve 
the true tradition of the blessed doctrine 
directly from Peter and James, from 
John and Paul, the holy Apostles,—son 
receiving ‘from father,—came with God’s 
help to us also, to deposit that ancestral 
and Apostolic seed.” ? 

Clemens had thus every opportunity 
of learning the facts bearing upon the 
life of St. John; and what he narrates is 
full of interest. He expressly states that, 
“after the death of the tyrant,’—who 
could be no other than Domitian,2—St. 
John changed his abode from Patmos to 
Ephesus.* Eusebius (see note *) quotes 


1 GAN’ of wey Tip ~ANOA Tis waraplas cdCovTes 
BidackaArlas mapadoow evOds amd Ilérpov te Kal 
*IaxéBov, “Iwdvvov re kal TMavAov, Tay ayiwy aro- 
ordéAwy, mais mapa matpbs exdexducvos .... HKov 
dn ody Ged kal cis Nuas TR mpoyouka exeiva Kal 
GmocroAika Katabnoduevot oméepuata.— Strom. 
i. 1, 11, ed. Potter, p. 322. 

2 Eusebius (iii. 23) clearly applies these words 
of Cleméns to Domitian (see #., c. 2I, 22). 
How well the title “‘ tyrant” suits that Emperor, 
appears from his character as given by Pliny 
(Panegyr., c. 48) who calls him ‘‘immanissima 
bellua :”—cf. also Tacitus, Agricola, 45. In- 
deed, Eusebius himself appeals to a heathen 
writer, Bruttius, in proof of Domitian’s cruel 
persecution of the Christians :—iotope? 6 Bpour- 
Tlos woAAovs xpictiavovs KaTa Td 1 eros Aope- 
Tiavod pepaptupnKévat.—Chron. Pasch., i. p. 468, 
ed. Dindorf. Scaliger in his notes (p. 205) 
conjectures that this Bruttius was Bruttius 
Presens, father of the wife of the Emperor 
Commodus. 

® (15) kxovooy udOoy, ob piOov GAA’ dvTa Aédyor, 
wep) *Iwdvvov tod amootéAov mapadedoucvov .-. + 
ereid) yap Tod tTupdyvov TeAevThoayTos amd TIS 
HMétpov ris vicov merqAGey eri Thy “Epetov.— 
Quis dives salu. C. 42,0, Cy P. 959+ 


415 


this passage (in which Clemens tells the 
story of the aged St. John and the young 
robber), introducing it by saying that “‘the 
Apostle and Evangelist John organized 
the churches that were in Asia when he 
returned from his exile in the island 
after the death of Domitian ;”! and it is in 
proof of this fact, namely, that the 
banishment to Patmos was under 
Domitian,—that he cites Clemens and 
Trenzus. 

As to the Apocalypse itself, Clemens 
refers to the description of “ Jerusalem 
which is above,” with its foundations of 
precious stones; and he quotes ch. xxi 
18, as “the utterance of the Apostolic 
voice” [kai ras dddexa THs oipavoTdAews 
mvAas, Tysios areckacpevas AiPors, TO Tepe 
omTov THS amrocToduKHs pwvyns aivitrerGas 
xdpitos exdexdueOa.—Pedag, i. 12,16, 
p. 242]. Identifying “the Apostolic 
voice” with that of St. John, he writes of 
“the faithful Elder” that “he is seated 
among the four and twenty thrones, 
judging the people, as John says in the 
Apocalypse” [év tots eikoou kat téocapot 
kabedeirar Opovois, Tov Aadv Kpivwr, ds 
dnow &v 7TH aroxadtwWer Iwdvvys (Rev. iv. 
43 xi. 16). Strom. vi. 13, p. 793].” 

Origen (A.D. 186-253), the pupil of 
Ciemens Al., made the Canon of the New 
Testament a subject of special inquiry : 
and when the authority of any of its Books 
was assailed, he never fails to state the 
fact. It is noteworthy, therefore, that 
Origen is ignorant of any doubts enter- 
tained as to the Apocalypse, which he 
quotes as the recognized composition of 
the Apostle and Evangelist John :* e. g.— 
with the usual formula of quotation—‘ the 
Apostle and Evangelist in the Revelation” 


l ras xara thy ’Aclay dietrev éxxAnotas, amd 
THs KaTa& Thy vigov peta Thy Aowetiavod TEAEUTHY 
éraveA Oa pvyiis. 

® To give an example of the objections raised 
against such testimony,—Liicke (s. 590) hints 
that in his lost work ep) rpodnrefas Clemens 
may have thought differently of the value of the 
Apocalypse; and that here he only follows 
“*the tradition of his church” in ascribing the 
Book to the Apostle John. 

* Liicke writes (s. 591): ‘‘ Origen appears to 
have known nothing of any important op 
sition to the Apocalypse”; nor ‘‘did he find 
any valid reason for doubting the apostolical, 
Joannean authenticity of it, either in the Alexe 
andrian tradition or in the course of his own 
numerous rheological journeys.” 


416 


TH aroxadwpe. 5 dardorodos Kal ebayye- 
9s—Comm. in Ev. Joann., i. 1, af 
In his Series in Matth. (t. iii. p. 867), 
quoting Rev. xii. 3, Origen promises that 
he will write an exposition of the Book at 
some future time [“exponetur autem 
tempore suo in Revelatione Joannis” *}. 
In his Comm. in Matth. (preserved by 
Eusebius, vi. 25), speaking of “John, 
who leaned on Jesus’ bosom,” “who 
wrote a Gospel, and said that the world 
itself could not contain the books which 
tell of the Lord’s acts” (John xxi. 25), 
he adds : “‘ And he wrote the Apocalypse 
also, commanded to keep silence and 
not to write the voices of the Seven 
Thunders” (ch. x. 3, 4) [éypawpe 82 xai 
Tv aroxdAu, KeAcvobels cwwrjoa Kat 
By ypdiyu tas Tay Eta Bpovtdy puwvas.]. 
(Note that in this place Origen refers to 
the doubts as to the 2nd and 3rd Epistles 
of St. John). Again, Comm. in Joann. 
i 16 (t. iv. p. 16): “John the son of 
Zebedee, therefore, says in the Apoca- 
lypse ‘and I saw an Angel flying,’” 
&c. [dyoiv ov & TH aroxadiwe 6 Tod 
ZeBedaiov "Iwavvys + “Kai doy ayyedov 
weropevov,” x.t.d.] (Rev. xiv. 6,7). In fine, 
—chief passage of all,—‘ And the sons 
of Zebedee were baptized with that bap- 
tism ; for Herod slew James the brother 
of John with the sword ; and the king of 
the Romans—as tradition teaches—con- 
-demned John, bearing witness for the 
word of truth, to the island of Patmos. 
And John informs us of the things con- 
cerning this witness of his, not telling 
who condemned him, but saying in the 
Apocalypse ‘ I John was in the isle that 
is called Patmos’ (ch. i 9)... And 
he appears to have seen the Revelation 
in the island.” ? 


1 So also, referring to Rev. xix. 11 (Comm. in 
Soann. i. 42, t. iv. p. 45): he refers to a future 
work, ot Tov wapdévtos dé Ka:pov Seika Sri, KT. A, 

2 (16) nal 7d Bdrricua eBartloOnoay of Tov 
ZeBedalov viol, ewelrep ‘Hpwdns piv awexrewev 
"IdewBov ty “Iwdvvov uaxalpg, 6 dt “Pwyalwy 
Bacireds, ds 7 mapddoos diddoKer, naredlkace Tov 

¥ paptupovvTa bid Toy THs GAnBeras Ad-yov 
els Tldtpov thy vijcov diddone 5t Ta wept Tov 
papruplov airod "Iwdyyys, wh Aéyww tls abrov 
watedixace, pdoxwy ev tH awoxadtpe tavta, 
*Eyh "ledvvns .... Kal ome Thy dwoxdAupw 
& tH vhow TeOewpnxeva.— Comm. in Matt. 
8 6 (t. v. p. 719). 

The name of the Emperor who condemned 
&t. John is not given here,—-the reaso.. bei 


INTRODUCTION. 


Eusebius (iii. 1) refers to Origen fer 
the statement that, in the distribution 6f 
their different spheres of duty among the 
Apostles, St. John was assigned Asia 
Minor, and Ephesus. 

Origen, as we know, was a decided 
anti-chiliast ; but he did not, like Dio- 
nysius of Alexandria, allow his doctrinal 
tendencies to influence his judgment as 
to historical facts. The same may be 
said of Clemens Alexandrinus. 

St. Hippolytus lived early in Cent 
ili.? (A.D. 220). He was the disciple of 
Irenzeus (see Photius, Cod. 48, 121, 202), 
to whose writings (Her. i. 263) he evi- 
dently refers. In his Refutatio omnium 
Heresium (vii. 36, ed. Dunker, p. 408), 
occurs a reference to Rev. ii. 6, Hip 
lytus observing that “ the Holy Ghost by 
the Apocalypse of John convicted the 
Nicolaitans.”* This is one of the few 
passages in which the name of any Book 
of the New Testament is introduced in 
the Aefutatio, In the well-known inscnip- 


stated, viz. because St. John himself has not 
given it ; for Origen is simply commenting on 
the fulfilment of Christ’s words in Matt. xx. 23. 
The king of the Jews (Herod, who is named 
here because he is named in Acts xii.) had slain 
one of the sons of Zebedee; ‘‘ the king of the 
Romans” condemned the other. This latter fact 
‘*tradition,” not Scripture, records ; and Ori 

thus contrasts (as well as by the last words, xa} 
€o1xe) the information imparted by the in- 
spired volume and that imparted by history. 

1 (17) "Iwdvyns thy ’Aclay [etAnxev] mpds obs 
kal divatplyas ev "Edeow TeAeuTa. 

? Hippolytus Thebanus (called ‘‘ the younger 
Hippolytus”) was a writer of Cent. x. or xi. 
Fabricius, in his edition of the works of St 
Hippolytus, partly in the appendix to vol. i. and 
partly in vol. ii, has given fragments of the 
chronicle erroneously ascribed to the earlier 
writer. These fragments are collected by Gal- 
landius (Bibi. Vet. Pair., t. xiv. p. 106), and 
assigned to Hippolytus of Thebes, who seems 
to have drawn much of his information from 
Symeon Metaphrastes, a Byzantine writer, are. 
A.D. 900. We there read :— 

(a) €Blace 5t 5 Gyios "Iwdvyns 5 Oeorddyos 
méxpt Aouerlov eee Bacirkéws ‘Popaler, 
as éx tobrouv elva Toy drayta tis (wis ab’Tow 
xpévov &éxa mpds éExardy.—/. c. p. 108. 

(5) "Iwdvyns 8t ev ’Aclg ord Aoxeriavol rev 
Baciréws eEopicbels ev Idruq tH vhow, ev § wal 
7d ebayyéAov cuveypdaro, kal Thy droxdAuip 
edcaro, ext Tpaiavod exoiuhOn ev "Epéoy.—De 
xi. Apostolis, Ze, p. 117. See below, p. 433, 
note *. 

3 ob [sciZ. Nicolai] rods pabyras evuBpl (ov [so 
the Paris MS. reads] rd Spor avedua 8a THO 
droxartypews "lwdyvou HAeyxe. 


INTRODUCTION. 


tion on his statue, we read that Hippoly- 
tus wrote ‘“‘ concerning the Gospel accor- 
ding to John and the Apocalypse” [tzép 
Tov kata Iwavyynv edayyediov Kai droxadi- 
ews (St. Jerome, De Vir. ///. 61, says only 
de Apocalypsi)|: see above (p. 406) the 
testimony of Andreas.! In his treatise 
also on Antichrist he repeatedly cites the 
Apocalypse as the work of St. John, “‘who 
when in the island of Patmos saw the 
Revelation ” [otros yap ev Hdtpw rj vjow 
dv 6p@ dzoxadvypw (c. 34)]; and he thus 
apostrophizes the author :—‘ O blessed 
John, Apostle and Disciple of the Lord, 
what sawest thou and heardest thou con- 
cerning Babylon” [paxdpre “Iwdvvy azr- 
orode cal pabyra tod Kupiov, ti ides Kai 
nkoveas wept BaBvddvos (c. 36, p. 18; ¢. 
48, p. 23; ¢. 49, 20., ed. Fabric.)]. In 
the remarks of Hippolytus on Daniel’s 
Fourth Beast, Rev. xiii 1 is distinctly 
referred to (see Mai, Scriptt. Vett. Nova 
Coll., t. 1., pars ii, p. 206, No. 19). 

Methodius (t A.D. 311), also mentioned 
by Andreas (see No. (1), note”, p. 406), 
brings us to the fourth century. He was 
Bishop of Lycia, and afterwards of Tyre. 
Quoting Rev. xx. 13, he speaks of the 
writer as the “ blessed John ” (De Resur- 
ret., ed. Combefis. 1644, p. 326), and in 
histreatise Convivium decem Virginum (ap. 
Galland., t. ili. 677) he refers in a striking 
manner to Rey. xiv. 1-4, as written by 
* the Christ-inspired John.” ? 

The last authorities appealed to by 
Andreas (see No. (1), note ?, p. 406), in 
addition to Papias, Irenzeus, Methodius, 
and Hippolytus, are Gregory [Naz.] and 
Cyril [Alex. ]. 

St. Gregory (f 390) applies to Christ, 
as being “assuredly spoken concerning 
the Son” [cadds zrept Tod Yiod Neydpeval, 


1 «*Ebedjesu (Cent. xiv.), in his catalogue of 
ecclesiastical writers, tells us :—‘‘ Sanctus Hip- 
polytus martyr et Episcopus composuit.... 
capita adversus Caium; et apologiam pro 
Apocalypsi et Evangelio Joannis Apostoli et 
Evangelistze.’—ap. Assemani, £2b/. Orient., 
vol. iii. P. i. p.15. Forsome account of the 
recovery of fragments of this commentary on 
the Apocalypse, see Note B on Rev. xii. 3. 

2 Grt de Kal "ApxumapOévos... . yepovey 6 
Adyos évavOp@irfhous . . . . 6 xpiordAnrrcs hiv 
mwapéotncev ev BiBAlw tis *"Amoxadtpews *Iwdv- 
wns, Aéyor Kal ei8or, nc iS0d 7d *Apvioy, kK. T. A. 
He also refers to Rev. xii. 1-6, ‘‘ kal &p6n peévya 
e@npcioy ev Te ovpave” Thy AmondAuiay 6 *Iwdvyns 
efrryobpevos Aéyet (2b., p. 716). 

New Test.—Vou. IV. 


417 


the words of Rev. i. 8, “ Which is and 
which was, and which is to come, the Al- 
mighty” [kai 6 dy Kai 6 jv, Kal 6 épydpevos, 
Kal 6 Tavtokpatwp.— Orat, Xxix. 17, t. 1. ps 
536, ed. Par. 1778]; and he also quotes 
the Apocalypse, as being an authority of 
decisive weight, where he is speaking of 
“the Angels” who preside over churches,! 
These statements, added to the testimony 
of Andreas and of Arethas (see No. (2), 
note!, p. 407), are sufficient to set aside 
the inference which has been deduced 
from the two poetical catalogues of the 
Canon of Scripture contained in the pub- 
lished editions of Gregory’s works (of 
which catalogues the second is, perhaps 
wrongly, ascribed to Amphilochius of 
Iconium—see Smith’s Dict. of Christ. 
Biogr. art. Gregory Naz.),—viz. that he 
did not receive the Apocalypse as in- 
spired Scripture.? 

St. Cyril Alex. (+ a.D. 444) accepts the 
Apocalypse without any question.? We 
may also compare the writings of St 
Cynil’s contemporaries, Isidore of Pelu- 
sium (Zf. il. 175, p. 208,—Aédwv KéxAyrat 
6 Xpiords: see also Ef. i. 13, 188, pp. 4, 
56); and Nilus (de Oraz. 75, 76, p. 494). 

In his list of writers who maintain 
the inspiration of the Apocalypse, Are- 
thas has added to the list of Andreas 
the name of St. Basil (+t 378), Bishop 
of Czesarea, and, therefore, another 
witness from Asia Minor. “The Holy 
Spirit,” writes St. Basil, “‘has spoken to us 

1 apos 5& tovs epecta@tas ayyéAous’ relOouas 
yap &Adous BAAns mpootareiy exkAnoias, ws 
"Iwdvyns SiddoKe pe Sid THs “AmoKaAtpews.— 
Orat. xiii. 9, 2. ¢., p- 755. ; 

? Note the bearing of this fact on the practice 
of the church in Asia Minor (see below, p. 425). 
A similar instance has been pointed out in the 
writings of St. Cyril of Jerusalem (+ 386). In his 
Catechesis iv., 35, 36, he seems to exclude the 
Apocalypse from the Canon; and yet he is 
familiar with its language, which he uses for 
the purpose of spiritual instruction (although he 
aoes not name the Book itself), and which he 
quotes as prophetic. E.g. in baptism, he tells 
the catechumen, xataputetn cis thy vontdy 
mapadecoyv* AauBdveis bvoua Kouvdy (Rey. ii. 7, 
17),—Catech. i. 4, p. 18; and he connects with 
Daniel’s prediction of Antichrist the words of 
Rev. xvii. 11,—ard d& Tav Séxa TodTwy Tos TpEis 
Tamewav mdvtTws bt1 avtds Bydo0s Baciretoet, 
—Catech. xv. 13, p. 230 (see Liicke, s. 630). 

3 He writes: 7d Tis dmroxaAtpews BiBAlov 
hiv cvvriGels 6 copds "Iwdvvns, 6 na) Tats Tay 
marépwv tetluntoa Whpos.—De Ador., vi., t. i 


p- 188. 
DD 


418 


by the blessed John that ‘In the begin- 
ning was the Word,’” ; and then he 
adds: “ But the Evangelist himself has 
shown us what is signified by such an 
expression as WAS, by saying “ Which is 
and which was, and the Almighty’”? 
(Rev. i. 8; xvi. 5). 

St. Ephrem Syrus—the chief Father 
of the Syrian Church, styled “ Propheta 
Syrorum ”—wrote circ. A.D. 370. Al- 
though Ephrem specially made use of 
the Peschito version (Lengerke, de Ephr. 
Syri arte hermen. p. 8; Wiseman, Hor. 
Syr., p. 107) calling it “our transla- 
tion ;” and although the Peschito omits 
the Apocalypse, he nevertheless refers to 
the Apocalypse itself as he refers to any 
other part of Scripture, ascribing it to the 
Apostle John. Thus, in the Greek 
translation of his works (Off. Gree, 
ed. Assem., Rome, 1743), Rev. xxi. 4, 5 
is thus quoted : ‘‘ As we hear the Apostle 
saying” [Kaas axovouey tod dmoorddov 
Aéyovros, De sec. Adventu (t.1i., p. 248)] ; 
—a reference to Rev. xx. 11 is thus 

refaced: ‘“‘As John shewed before” 
Frade "Iwavvys mpocdnAwoe, 26., p. 252; 
cf. p. 214] ;—and of Rev. i. 7 we read: 
“As also John the Divine preached, 
saying, ‘ Behold he cometh’ ” [xa@as xai 
"Iwdvvns 6 Oeodoyos exnprfe A€ywr- idod 
%pxerat, ib., p. 194]. In the original 
Syriac (Bib/. Orient., t. i. p. 141) we read, 
as Assemani renders :—“ In his Apoca- 
lypse John saw a great and wonderful 
Book written by God, sealed with Seven 
Seals” (Rev. v. 1); on which Assemani 
notes: “In this discourse the holy Doc- 
tor cites the Apocalypse of John asa 
canonical portion of Scripture which 
I have noted for this reason, that the 
judgment of the most ancient Syrians 


© BAX? adrds juiv 6 edaryyeAtoThs ev Erépw Ady 
0d TowovTov hy Td onucvduevoy edeiker, cimay, 6 
Oy nat 5 Rv Kal 6 mavroxparwp.— Adv, Eunom., 
ii. 14, Ofp., t. i. p. 249; and see 2., p. 282. 

Liicke corrects an error of Wetstein and 
Michaelis as to a passage in the works of 
Basil’s brother, Gregory of Nyssa (ft 395), who 
motes for a hortatory purpose Rev. iii. 15. 
reaeky writes :—#Kovca Tov evayyeAtoToU 
lwdvvov ev amoKptpors pds Tods ToLobToUs i’ 
aivlyuaros Aéyovtos, K.T. A. Liicke points out 
that ardxpuga here is equivalent to wuorind or 
mpopntixa (cf. Dion. Areop., De Eccl. Hier. iii. 
4), and by no means implies that Gregory re- 
garded the Apocalypse, in the modern sense of 
the word, as an ‘‘apocryphal” book. 


INTRODUCTION. 


concerning the authority of this Book 
might be manifest” (cf. t. ii. p. 332 c). 
Ephrem seems to have used an early 
Syriac translation of the New Testament 
which contained the Apocalypse. The 
Apocalypse is not contained in the 
Peschito,—the “simple” Syriac version 
of the New Testament, “of the most 
remote Christian antiquity” (Westcott, 
Z. c, p. 204).1 The inference, accord- 
ingly, is plain that Ephrem did not con- 
sider this omission any reason for not 
regarding the Book as inspired Scripture : 
and we are also to bear in mind, that, as 
has been already shown, the earliest 
teachers of the Church of Syria in the 
second century—Justin M. and Theo- 
philus of Antioch—acknowledged the 
Divine character of the Apocalypse. 
Although absent, however, from the re- 
cognized Syriac versions, a Syriac trans- 
lation of the Book was published in 1627 
by Ludovicus de Dieu,? which scholars 
generally assign to the sixth century, and 
of which the superscription runs thus :— 
“The Revelation which was given 


! Neither, apparently, was it contained in the 
Philoxenian version (A.D. 485-518), nor in the 
recension of this latter by Thomas of Harkel 
(A.D. 616). If, as Hug (Z2m/. i. s. 307) maintains, 
Ephrem did not understand Greek, his refer- 
ences to the Apocalypse grove that there must 
have been anearly Syriac translation of that Book, 
see Smith’s Christ. Biogr., art. Ephrem Syr. 
Hug quotes Sozomen (4.Z., iii. 16); Theodoret 
(Z.Z., iv. 29). 

2 Apocalypsis S. Fohannis, ex Manuscripto 
exemplari e Bibliotheca clariss. viri Fos. Scalie 
geri deprompta, charactere Syro et LEbreo, 
cum versione Latina et notis, Lugd. Bat. 1627. 
As to the omission of the Apocalypse from 
the earlier Syriac versions, Hug conjectures 
(Zin, i. s. 306) that it may have been originally 
omitted owing to the Millennarian controversy, 
or have been afterwards left out in Cent. iv, 
Walton would assign the Peschito to a period 
before the Apocalypse was written. Hengsten- 
berg makes the date to be the close of Cent. iii, 
Liicke concludes that the Apocalypse was not 
recelved as canonical till after the Peschito 
version was made,—i.¢., at the end of Cent. iL; 
but this, we have seen, is opposed to the whole 
current of early evidence. From the fact that 
Manes, who died A.D. 277, acknowledged the 
Apocalypse (Lardner, Cred. of the Gosp. Hist. 
Works, iii. p. 404), it has been fairly concluded 
that the Zacuma in the Peschito rifist have been 
filled up at a very early date. As to the edition 
of De Dieu, Dr. Tregelles (7he Greek Text of the 
Book of Rev., p. xxviii), thinks that this Syriac 
version of the Revelation ‘‘may perhaps be 
assigned to the sixth century.” 


INTRODUCTION. 


by God to the Evangelist John on the 
island of Patmos, upon which he was cast 
by Nero Cesar.”! See below, p. 433. 

This very distinct testimony of the 
leading Father of the Church in Asia 
Minor at the close of the fourth century, 
is to be set, as Dr. Westcott remarks, 
against any doubts which may then have 
existed in that region as to the canon- 
icity of the Apocalypse (see also the cases 
of Gregory Naz.and Cyril. Hieros., above, 
p. 417). And Dr. Westcott concludes, as 
to Asia Minor, that “ the Apocalypse was 
recognized from thefirst as the work of the 
Apostle in the districts most intimately 
interested in its contents” (/. 4, p. 340). 

Epiphanius, Bishop of Salamis in 
Cyprus (t A.D. 403), has no doubt 
whatever as to the Apocalypse (al- 
though his confused statements give rise 
to certain questions—see below, p. 432). 
Writing of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, 
he adds: “ Of the number of the holy 
prophets and the holy Apostles, the 
holy John also, through his Gospel and 
Epistles and Apocalypse, imparted from 
the same gift of the Holy One.” ? 

The following statements, however, of 
this writer which place the banishment 
of the Apostle to Patmos in the reign 
of the Emperor Claudius (a.D. 41-54), 
are remarkable:—St. John wrote his 
Gospel “ after the ninetieth year of his 
age, after his return from Patmos, which 
took place in the reign of Claudius 
Cesar ;” and then, referring to Rev. ii. 
20, he adds that the Apostle prophesied 
‘in the times of Claudius Czesar, when 
-1e was in the island of Patmos.”* This 


1 (18) ‘‘Revelatio quz facta est Johanni 
Evangelistze a Deo in Patamon insula, in quam 
injectus fuit a Nerone Czsare.”—aZ. Walton, 
Bibl. Polygiott., Lond. 1657. 

2 7a xaplouara....7d Mvedua 7d dyiov Sinyh- 
Garo’ of Te Gyiot mpop7Tat Kal of Gyior amdoroAot 
ey ols Kal 6 dyes "lwdvyns dia ToD evayyeAlou Kad 
TeV emoToAaY Kal Tis amoKaAtWews ek TOD a’ToU 
xaploparos Tod aylov petradddwre.— Her. li. 35, 
t. i. p. 457; cf. 2b, 32, p. 455, ed. Petav., 
1622. 

3 (19) peta Erp Cverhxovra Tis EavTod Cwijs, werd 
Thy avTod amo THs Wdrpov emdvodov thy em KAav- 
lov -yevouernvy Kaloapos.—Her. li. 12, t. i. 
p. 434. And again: airod d¢ mpopnretoaytos év 
Xpévois KAavdlov Kalcapos dvwrdtw, dre eis thy 
Wdtpov vijcov trjptev.—Jlb., c. 33, p. 456 (cf. 
the notes of Petavius vol. ii. pp. 90, 213) :-— 
see below, p. 432. 


419 


statement of Epiphanius will be examined 
in a future page. 

St. Chrysostom’s life unites the fourth 
and fifth centuries. His imcidental re- 
ference to Rev. xxi. 19-21—to the foun- 
dations of the heavenly Jerusalem, to her 
gates of sapphire and of pearls [xaropd- 
Owpyev ody airs Ta OewéAa, Tas TUAas Tas 
amd camdelpov Kal papyapitdv ovyKepe 
vas, Proem. in Matt., Hom. i.|—proves 
his familiarity with the Book; a fact 
which Suidas! confirms in his article on 
the word Join; “ Chrysostom moreover 
receives both his three Epistles, and the 
Apocalypse.” 

The evidence of the Eastern Church 
may be fitly summed up by that of 
Eusebius :— 

Eusebius, to whom we are chiefly in- 
debted for our knowledge of the leading 
facts as to the Canon of the New Testa- 
ment, had collected from all quarters, 
and has preserved for us in his History, 
the tradition of the Church from the 
earliest period respecting the Apocalypse, 
Although an ardent anti-chiliast, he 
records, with his usual fidelity, the evi- 
dence for the Apostolic authorship of 
the Book. At the same time he is care- 
ful to bring together every doubt, and 
every suggestion of doubt, which had 
been put forward from the first (see below, 
§5, p. 438), promising to submit the whole 
question afterwards to a final criticism— 
a promise which he has not kept.? 

Eusebius, writes Hengstenberg (/. ¢., 
vol, il. 434), ‘“‘clearly and distinctly 
recognizes the fact that the Book had 
the unanimous approval of antiquity, and 
that the external grounds were entirely 
on its side. He makes no attempt 
whatever to invalidate the importance of 


1 Sub voc. lwdvyns,—déxerar 5¢ 6 Xpuodoropos 
kal Tas emioToAas avTow Tpers, Kal Thy amoKdAuIw, 

? Thus, having noticed (ZH. Z., iii. 24), that 
the sentiments of many were in suspense (zepte 
€Aketat) as to the Apocalypse, he adds,— 
Sums ye why ék Tis Tay apxalwy papruplas ev 
oikely kaip@ thy emixpiow dékerar kal adTh 
And again (iii. 25), when enumerating ‘‘the 
Scriptures confessedly Divine” (éuoAoyotuevas 
Geta ypapal), he adds,—ém) totrois taxréov, a 
ye paveln, Thy dmrondAviiy “lwdyvov wep) Fs Te 
ddtapra KaTd Kapoy exOnoducba. And a little 
further on, he thus contrasts the two opposite 
opinions :—ér: te, ds env,  *Iwdvvov amonde 
Avyis, et paveln, hy Twes, os Epny, GBeTovow, ETEpos 
de eyxpivovor Tois buodoyoupevas. 


DD2 


420 


this testimony. . . He does not endea- 
vour by an authoritative declaration of 
his own to set aside what he cannot dis- 
rove. So long as the doubts based on 
internal grounds could not be success- 
fully disposed of... it was right to keep 
the question still open.” The conjecture 
of Dionysius Alex. (see below, § 5) is all 
that he can adduce against the Apostolic 
authorship of the Book ; and, even when 
doing so, he shows how little weight 
he can have attached to that conjec- 
ture. In his comment on the words of 
Papias already cited (see No. (5), note 3, 
p. 408), Eusebius dissents from Irenzeus 
by doubting whether Papias was “a 
hearer of John” the Apostle ; and he also 
argues that Papias speaks of “‘two Johns,” 
—the former of whom he [Papias] classes 
with Peter, James, Matthew, and the 
rest of the Apostles, clearly indicating 
the Evangelist [capds dyAdv rév eday- 
yedvorqv]; while he places the other 
outside the number of the Apostles, 
ranking Aristion above him, and distinctly 
calling him a “presbyter” [cadds te 
airév mpeoBurepov dvopate|. Then, fol- 
lowing Dionysius of Alexandria, Euse- 
bius refers to the account of “the two 
graves” at Ephesus, “each of which is 
still said to be that of ‘John;’” and he 
concludes that it was the second John 
— “unless, indeed, one should prefer 
the first,——who beheld the Vision 
“which bears the name of the Apo- 
calypse of John” :1—see below, p. 441. 
Dean Alford’s remarks on this ques- 
tion (Prolegg., p. 215) are perfectly just: 
“Certainly,” he writes, ‘ Liicke is wrong 
in his very strong denunciations of 
Hengstenberg for describing Eusebius 
as studiously leaving the question open. 
For what else is it when he numbers the 
Book on one side among the undoubted 
Scriptures with an «i ¢avein [“if it 
should seem so”], and then on the 
other among the spurious writings with 
an ¢« gdavein also: while at the very 


1 (20) &s Kal 51a tobrwy amrodelkvucOa Thy 
loroplay A707 Tay dbo Kara Thy Aclay duovunla 
wexp7icOa eipnxdtwy, dt0 Te ev’ Edéow yevérOa 
prhuara: xa éxdrepov *Iwdvvov er viv AéyecOat 
ols nat dvayKaiov mpooéxew Toy vod. eixds yap 
tov debrepov, ef wh Tis C0éAaL ThY EpHrov, Thy ex 
dyvéuatos pepopévnvy “lwdvvov dmoxdaviw éwpa- 
neva.—ZH. £., iii. 39. See below, p. 440. 


INTRODUCTION. 


moment of endorsing Dionysius’s con- 
jecture that the second John saw its 
Visions, he interposes e yy tes eOéAoe 
tov mparov” [unless one should prefer 
the first ”]. 

That a writer of the anti-chiliastic 
leanings of Eusebius should have gone 
no farther than this, and should have 
withheld the criticism which he pro- 
mised, is of itself no slight intimation as 
to his real opinion: but what places the 
matter beyond question is the unhesitat- 
ing manner in which, in his other writings, 
he cites the Apocalypse as Holy Scrip- 
ture, and places it among the “ Homo- 
logumena.” Thus, in his Demonstr. EZvan- 
gelica (viii. 2, ed. Gaisford, t. ii. p. 769), 
he quotes Rev. v. 5, and there finds proof 
that the Lord had not come to seal up 
the prophetic Visions, inasmuch as He 
had unveiled for His disciples the darkest 
predictions :'— “‘ Whence he saith,” Be- 
hold the Lion of the Tribe of Judah hath 
conquered, according to the Revelation of 
John” [66ev idov dyow “ evixnoev 6 A€wv 
x duds Tovda”. ... Kata THY aroKkdAupw 
*Iwavvov].4 

Dr. S. Davidson, too, has written with 
equal justice of Eusebius: “We cannot 
believe with Liicke that the reason of 
his hesitation lay in the want of sure his- 
torical grounds; it was mainly founded 
on doctrinal views.” —ZJntrod., 1848, vol 
lil. p. 547. 


§ 2.—b. External Evidence (continued). 


THE WESTERN CHURCH :— 

The well known document known as 
“The Muratorian Fragment,” claiming to 
have been written by a contemporary of 
Pius, bishop of Rome, cannot be assigned 
to a date much later than the year 
170 ;—for the episcopate of Pius is 
variously placed A.D. 127-142, and A.D. 
142-157 (see Credner, Zur Gesch, des 
Kanons,s.84). It may be regarded as a 
summary of the decision of the Western 


1 In his ‘Life of Constantine’ (iii. 33), he 
borrows from the Apocalypse the idea of the 
New Jerusalem (Rev. xxi. 2), which was an- 
nounced 8:2 mpopnrixay Ceomoudrov. In the 
LEcloge Prophetice (iv. 8, ed. Gaisford. p. 187) 
we read: érd(wy ydp éors kapdias wal veppots 
(Rey. ii. 23); and also (#%., c. 30, p. 228): dd 
kal xaTd Toy “lwdvyny, aldvov evayyéAioy [Rev. 
xiv. 6] éo0ara: 7d Tov Xpiotod evayyérsoy. 


INTRODUCTION. 


Church as to the Canon, shortly after 
the middle of the second century. Its 
testimony to the Apocalypse is as fol- 
lows:—“ The blessed Apostle Paul him- 
self following the order of his prede- 
cessor! John, writes to seven churches 
only by name in this order... . 
For John also, in the Apocalypse, though 
he writes to Seven Churches, neverthe- 
less speaks to all.? 

It may be added that, according to 
this document, the church of Rome, in 
the second century, while accepting the 
“ Revelation of John,” refused to read 
“the revelation according to Peter.” $ 

If the “ Muratorian Fragment” was 
written, as Bunsen (Azalecta Ante-Nicena, 
i. p. 126) conjectured, by Hegesippus 
(A.D. 170), an important ame is added 
to our list of witnesses, and one of the 
doubts to be considered below is set 
aside (see § 6, p. 446).* 

Evidence of a similai nature is sup- 
plied by the celebrated Codex Claro- 
montanus (D), a Greeco-Latin copy of 
the Pauline Epistles, which, immediately 
before the Epistle to the Hebrews, gives 
a Latin catalogue of the Books of the 
New Testament, and of the number of 
their orixor, or versus. We there read, 
that “John’s Revelation contains 1200 
verses,” “ johannis revelatio icc” [1200]. 
According to Dr. Westcott (2 «4, p. 25) 
this catalogue is of African origin, and 
of about the third century (‘‘ certe szeculo 
quarto antiquiorem”):—see also the 
Prolegomena to Tischendorf’s edition of 


1 This expression, ‘‘ predecessor,” as Credner 
has pointed out, means simply that St. John 
was an Apostle before St. Paul :—cf. Gal. i. 17 
{7 ¢., s. 86). 

2 ‘*Cum ipse beatus Apostolus Paulus, se- 
quens preedecessoris sui Johannis ordinem, non- 
nisi nominatim septem ecclesiis scribat ordine 
tali.... Et Iohannes enim in Apocalypsi, licet 
Septem Ecclesiis scribat, tamen omnibus dicit.” 
§ 6 (ap. Credner, /.c., s. 76; Routh, 4 ¢., i. p. 


5). 

3 “ Quam quidam ex nostris legi in ecclesia 
nolunt,” 27d., § 10. Muratori notes: ‘‘ Euse- 
bius (iii. 25) apocalypsim Petri inter dukios 
quidem libros recenset, non tamen abjicit veluti 
hereticorum foetum” (af. Routh, 4 ¢., p. 426). 

4 Mr. Donaldson’s objection to this conclue 
sion is that ‘‘if it had been a part of the work 
of Hegesippus, Eusebius would, in all proba- 
bility, have quoted it."—Christian Literature, 
iii. p. 270. 


A2¥ 


this Codex (Lipsiz, 1852); Scrivener, 
Intr. to New Test. Criticism, 2nd ed., 
p. 151. This manuscript (D), which is 
to be dated from Cent. vi., “is of great 
value as a Western witness” (Bleek, 
Introd@., i. p. 324). 

Dr. Westcott has brought forward from 
a still earlier period evidence of much 
weight. The history of the O/d Latin 
Version (Vetus Latina), he observes, can- 
not be traced before the time of Tertul- 
lian. Lachmann shows that in the Latin 
translation of Irenzus the scriptural 
quotations were taken from the recen- 
sion of the Vetus Latina (Nov. Test., 
Pref. p. x):—“In other words, the 
Vetus Latina is recognized in the first 
Latin literature of the Church..... 
The beginning of Tertullian’s literary 
activity cannot be placed later than 
ciré. 190 A.D.; and we shall thus ob- 
tain [we cannot allow less than twenty 
years for its publication and spread] the 
date A.D. 170, as that before which the 
Version must have been made. . . Ter- 
tullian and the translator of Irenzus 
(see v. 35, 2) represent respectively, 
I believe, the original African and 
Gallic recensions of the Vetus Latina” 
(2 ¢, p. 233). ‘‘ The Canon of the old 
Latin Version coincided, I believe, 
exactly with that of the Muratorian 
Fragment”? (2d. p. 234). 

There is no doubt, observes Liicke 
(s. 577), that the Apocalypse was re- 
garded by the Montanists (A.D. 140) as 
the work of the Apostle John (see p. 411, 
note %) ; and Tertullian (A.D. 160-240), 
who may be taken as their representative, 
quotes or alludes to almost every chap- 
ter of the Book :—e. g. comparing St 
Paul (1 Cor. v. 9-13) and St. John 
(Rev. ii, 18-22), he calls them both 
Apostles who enjoy “an equal share of 
the Holy Spirit” [‘‘ zequalitatem Spiritus 
Sancti,” De Pudic. 19|;—and again: 
“The Apostle John in the Apocalypse 
describes the two-edged sword proceed- 
ing out of the mouth of God” [Nam 
et Apostolus Joannes in Apocalypsi 
ensem describit ex ore Dei prodeuntem, 
bis acutum,” &c. Adv. Mare. iii. 14] ;— 
«Ezekiel knew, and the Apostle John 
saw the Heavenly City” [Ccelestem civi- 
tatem et Ezekiel novit, et Apostolus 


422 


Joannes vidit,” 7. c. 24]. See the 
numerous citations in Ronsch, Das eue 
Testament Tertullians, p. 530, &c. 

There is no trace, however, of Tertul- 
lian having first learned to know or value 
the Apocalypse through his association 
with the Montanists ; his testimony is the 
testimony of his church, “‘an inheritance, 
not adeduction” (Westcott, p. 233). If, 
he writes (Adv. Marc. iv. 5), ‘“ that is 
acknowledged to be more true which is 
more ancient, that more ancient which 
is even from the beginning, that from the 
beginning which is from the Apostles ; 
it will in like manner assuredly be 
acknowledged that that has been derived 
by tradition from the Apostles which 
has been preserved inviolate in the 
churches of the Apostles.” And having 
referred to the churches founded by St. 
Peter and St. Paul, he adds: ‘“‘ We have 
also the churches nurtured by John: for 
although Marcion rejects his Apocalypse, 
nevertheless the Succession of bishops, 
if traced to its source, will rest on the 
authority of John.”! As to St. John’s 
personal history, we have the well-known 
statement :— 

“Tf you are able to proceed to Asia, 
you have Ephesus: if you are in the 
neighbourhood of Italy, you have Rome, 
» . . where the Apostle John, after he 
came forth without hurt from the caldron 
of burning oil, was banished to the 
island.”? And further, having spoken 
of the persecution under Nero,? he tells 


1 “*Habemus et Joannis alumnas ecclesias. 
Nam etsi Apocalypsim ejus Marcion respuit, 
ordo tamen episcoporum ad originem recensus 
in Joannem stabit auctorem.” 

(21) ‘‘Si potes in Asiam tendere, habes 
Ephesum: si autem Italie adjaces, habes 
Romam, .. . ubi Apostolus Joannes, postea- 
quam in oleum igneum demersus a poe 
est, in insulam relegatur.”—De Prescr. Har. 36. 

Renan (/.c., p. 198) is disposed to accept 
this statement of Tertullian. 

8 (22) ‘‘ Reperietis primum Neronem in hanc 
sectam tum maxime Rome orientem, Cesar- 
iano gladio ferocisse ... ‘‘ Temptaverat et 
Domitianus, portio Neronis de crudelitate, sed 
qua et homo, facile coeptum repressit, restitutis 
etiam quos relegaverat.” Afol,—c. 5. Here 
Oehler notes that the words ‘‘et homo” signify 
that, in comparison with Nero (‘‘bellua”), 
Domitian had some feelings of humanity. On 
the other hand Valesius notes on this passage: 
“Ait Tertullianus, post Neronem qui primus 
geviit in Christianos, Domitianum quoque, 


INTRODUCTION. 


how the persecution of Domitian? came 
to an end; on which, as other writers 
state, St. John returned to Ephesus. 

St. Cyprian (A.D. 250) knows no distine- 
tion between the canonical authority of 
the Gospels and of the Apocalypse :—e. g. 
“The Lord awakens us by the trumpet 
of His Gospel, saying ‘He that loveth 
father or mother more than Me,’ &c. ; 
and ‘ To him that overcometh will I give 
to sit upon My throne’” (Matt. x. 37; 
Rey. iii. 21).? 

Victorinus, bishop of Pettau in Pan- 
nonia (who suffered as a martyr under 
Diocletian, A.D. 303), wrote, towards the 
close of the third century, his comment- 
ary on the Apocalypse—the earliest now 
extant. He naturally paid attention to 
the leading facts in the life of the author 
of the Book on which he commented ; 
and accordingly (writing on Rev. x. 11) 
he gives the information which we might 
expect :— 

“This he says, because, when John 
saw these things, he was in the island of 
Pathmos, condemned to the mines by the 


upote alterum Neronem, idem tentavisse: sed 
ut homines levi ac mobili sunt ingenio, cito ab 
incepto destitisse.” 


Here there are various readings for the word 
‘*portio,” viz. ‘‘preenomine,”—‘‘pro nomine,”— 
‘«preemonitu ;” Zortio, however, is supported 
by the pépos dy tis tod Népwvos wudrnros of the 
version of these words given by Eusebius 
(iii. 20). See below, p. 431. 

1 Hegesippus (af. Euseb. iid.) writes that 
Domitian ordered kataraioa 8% 8:2 mporrdy 
baros Tov Kata THs éxkAnolas diwyyudy,—words 
which seem to confirm the statement that the 
cessation of this persecution was commanded 
Domitian himself:—but see below, on Victors 
inus, No. (23) ; see also p. 430. 

2 “Tuba Evangelii sui nos excitat Dominus 
dicens, ‘Qui plus diligit patrem,’ &..... 
et ‘ Vincenti dabo sedere super thronum meum’— 
Ep. xxvi. 4. On Rev. xxii. 9 he writes: ‘‘Et 
in Apocalypsi angelus Joanni volenti adorare, 
se resistit et dicit, ‘ Vide ne feceris, quia cone 
servus,’ &c.”—De Bono Fatientia, c.25. Again, 
on ch. xvii. 15: ‘‘ Aquas namque populos signi- 
ficare in Apocalypsi Scriptura Divina declarat 
dicens, &c.”—£¢. Ixiii. 12. Enumerating the 
places where the number seven occurs, St, 
Cyprian writes: ‘‘Et in Apocalypsi Dominus 
mandata sua Divina et precepta Ceelestia ad 
Septem Ecclesias et eorum Angelis scribit.”— 
TO CITE 

% The commentary of Victorinus, as is well 
known, has been interpolated to a considerable 
extent ; but there is no reason whatever for not 
accepting the passages here quoted as genuine. 


INTRODUCTION. 


Czsar Domitian. There, accordingly, 
he beheld the Apocalypse. And when 
now, an older man, he supposed that he, 
by reason of his suffering (?), would re- 
Ceive his recall—Domitian being put to 
death, all his [Domitian’s] judicial sen- 
tences were cancelled. And John, 
teleased from the mines, afterwards 
handed down as follows this same Apo- 
calypse which he had received from 
God. 71 

And, again, commenting on Rev. xvii. 

» 10 — 

ar It is proper that the time should be 
understood at which the written Apoca- 
lypse was put forth: since Domitian 
was then Cesar; but before him there 
had been his brother Titus, and Vespa- 
sian, Otho, Vitellius, and Galba, These 
are the ‘five’ who have ‘fallen. ‘ The 
one ts, under whom the Apocalypse was 
written, namely Domitian. ‘ Zhe other 
[who] és xet yet come, means Nerva: ‘and 
when he cometh, he must continue a Uittle 
while, for he has not completed the 
space of two years.” ? 

This latter passage has manifestly sug- 
gested the rationalistic exposition of the 
Apocalypse. See the note on Rey. xvii. 
To. 

Victorinus elsewhere, when referring to 
the mention of the twenty-four Elders 
(Rev. iv. 4), thus names the author: 
“They are called Elders in the Apoca- 
Iypse of the Apostle and Evangelist 
John” [‘ Quos in Apocalypsi Joannis 
Apostoli et Evangelistze Seniores vocat,” 
&c.|,—De Fabrica Mundi, bc, p. 51: 
see also Routh, 4 ¢., ii. p. 455, &c., for 


? (23) “‘ Hoc dicit, propterea quod quando 
bzec Joannes vidit, erat in Pathmos in 
metallo damnatus a Domitiano Casare. Ibi 
ergo vidit Apocalypsin. Et cum jam senior 
putaret se per passionem accepturum recep- 
tionem,—interfecto Domitiano omnia judicia ejus 
soluta sunt. Et Joannes de metallo dimissus, 
sic postea tradidit hanc eandem quam acceperat 
a Deo Apocalypsin” (af. Galland., Bib Pair., 
iv. 59). Cf p. 415, note *, No. (15). 

* (24) ‘‘Intelligi oportet tempus quo scripta 
Apocalypsis edita est: quoniam tunc erat Cesar 
Domitianus ; ante illum autem fuerat Titus 
frater illus, et Vespasianus, Otho, Vitellius et 
Galba. Isti sunt guingue, qui ceciderunt. Unus 
exsiat, sub quo scripta est Apocalypsis, Domi- 
tianus scilicet. Alius nondum venit, Nervam 
dicit : ¢ cum venerit, brevi tempore erit bien- 
Bium enim non implevit ” (%5.. p. 61). 


423 


the numerous references to the Apoca- 
lypse in this same treatise. 

Dom Pitra (Spicilegium Solesmense, 
vol. i.) would assign to A.D. 220-250 an 
African bishop, Commodianus, of whom 
mention is first made by Gennadius of 
Marseilles, A.D. 495 (ap. Hieron., Off. 
li. 949). In a work by Commodianus 
entitled “‘Jnstructiones adv. Gentium 
Deos”! (ap. Galland., t. iii. p. 621), as 
well as in his “ Carmen Apologeticum,” 
first published by Dom Pitra (2 ¢., p. 20), 
the Apocalypse is frequently referred to, 
and Nero is taken to be Antichrist. The 
references, however, in this latter treatise, 
to the capture of Rome by the Goths, 
render it necessary to place the date of the 
writer after the year 410.7 The value of 
this Commodianus, therefore, as a witness 
is inconsiderable ; if we except this early 
(whatever be the date) identification of 
Nero with Antichrist. - 

Lactantius (A.D. 320) quotes no Book 
of the New Testament by name, with 
the exception of St. John’s Gospel and 
the Apocalypse. E.g.: “AsJohn teaches 
in the Revelation ” [* sicut shes Joannes 
in Revelatione.”],—Z/. 4 

The evidence of St. ee of Poictiers 
(¥ 368), of St. Didymus (f 394), of St. 
Ambrose (jf 397), and of St. Augustine 
({ 430) is to the. same effect :—‘ The 
Apocalypse is the genuine composition 
of the Apostle and Evangelist St. John.’ 
Dr. S. Davidson justly observes: ‘‘ The 
historical tradition relative to the Apoca- 


1 ‘¢Tn septem annis tremebit undique terra, 
Sed medium tempus Helias, medium Nero 
tenebit, 
Tunc Babylon meretrix incinefacta favilla, 
Inde ad Jerusalem perget, victorque Latinus 
Tunc dicet : Egosum Christus quem semper 
oratis.” 
(See Galland., 7 ¢. p. 635, vv. 620-625). 
The word ‘‘Latinus” refers to the interpreta- 
tion given by Irenzeus (v. 25) of the number 666, 
Rev. xiii. 18. 
? E.g. He thus refers to Rev. ix. 11; xi. 13 5 
xvii. 10, II: 
- .. . “Gothis inrumpentibus cer ey 
Rex Apolion erit cum ee 
Pergit ad Romam... 
Exsurgit mterea sub i ipso tempore Cyrus, . 
Ex infero redit, qui fuerat regno prereptus, 

Et diu servatus, cum pristino corpore notus. 
rr hunc autem Neronem esse vetustum. .. 
jecima pars corruit urbis 

Et Sak ibi homines septem millia plena.” 
©. 43, vv. 803-853) 


424 


lypse seems to have been interrupted by 
doctrinal views alone; “had no Mon- 
tanism or Millennarianism appeared, we 
should have heard of no voice raised 
against John’s authorship.” (Jntrod. to 
the Study of the N. T., 1868, vol. i. p. 
319.) 

From every quarter, indeed, the testi- 
mony of the early Latin Fathers to the 
Apostolic authority of the Apocalypse 
is decided and unanimous,—testimony 
which may be summed up in the follow- 
ing statements of St. Jerome (A.D. 330- 
420) :-— 

* And yet John, one of the Disciples, 
who is said to have been the youngest 
among the Apostles, and whom the faith 
of Christ had found a virgin, remained 
a virgin... . But that we may know 
that John was then a boy, the ecclesias- 
tical histories most clearly inform Us 
that he lived until the reign of Trajan, 
that is, that the Prophet fell asleep in 
the sixty-eighth year after the Lord’s 
Passion ; for in the island of Pathmos, 
in which he had been banished for the 
testimony of the Lord, by the Emperor 
Domitian, he beheld the Apocalypse 
containing the infinite mysteries of future 
things.” + 

And more expressly still :— 

“In the fourteenth ‘year, when Domi- 
tian stirred up a second persecution 
after Nero, [John], banished to the 
island of Patmos, wrote the Apocalypse 
which Justin Martyr and Irenzus inter- 
pret. But when Domitian was put to 
death, and his acts were rescinded by 
the Senate on account of their too great 
cruelty, under the reign of Nerva [John] 
returned to Ephesus, and abiding there 
until the reign of Trajan, he founded 
and governed all the churches of Asia; 
and dying in the sixty-eighth year after 


1 (25) ‘‘ Et tamen Joannes unus ex Discipulis, 
qui minimus traditur fuisse inter Apostolos, et 
quem fides Christi virginem repererat, virgo 
permansit.... Ut autem sciamus Joannem 
tunc fuisse puerum, manifestissime docent Ec- 
clesiastice Historie, quod usque ad Trajani 
vixerit imperium, id est, post passionem Domini 
sexagesimo octavo anno dormierit .... Pro- 


INTRODUCTION. 


the Lord’s Passion exhausted by old 
age, he is buried near the same city.” * 

And thus, St. Jerome, whose researches 
as to the text of Scripture, and labours 
in correcting its translation had been 
undertaken at the desire of Pope Da- 
masus,—speaks for the whole Western 
Church; and his conclusion as to the 
Apocalypse is supported by the inde- 
pendent testimony of St. Augustine.? 
Wherever Latin was spoken, the au- 
thority of the Apocalypse was recog- 
nized 


§ 3. Zhe Canon of the New Testament. 


When we proceed to combine the 
external evidence which all parts of the 
primitive Church have contributed to 
the Apocalypse, it is to be borne in mind 
that, as in the case of the other Scrip- 
tures, the fact of the acceptance of any 
Book of the New Testament as canonical 
is to be determined rather by the con- 
sentient testimony of different writers to 
its authorship, and divine character,— 
and the consequent assent to both of the 
whole Christian community,—than by 
any formal decision of the Church on the 
subject. The Apocalypse, it has been 
already pointed out, is contained in the 
“ Muratorian Fragment,” and in the Ver- 
sion known as the “Vetus [tala,” as well 
as in the catalogue inserted in the Codex 
Claromontanus (see above, p. 421). We 
have also seen that the evidence of St 
Ephrem Syrus, who represents Asia 
Minor in the fourth century, counter- 
balances any unfavourable inference 


1 (26) ‘‘Quartodecimo anno secundam post 
Neronem persecutionem movente Domitiano, in 
Patmos insulam relegatus [Joannes] scripsit 
Apocalypsin quam interpretatur Justinus Martyr 
ct Irenzus. Interfecto autem Domitiano et 
actis ejus ob nimiam crudelitatem a Senatu 
rescissis, sub Nerva principe rediit Ephesum, 
ibique usque ad Trajanum principem perseve- 
rans, totas Asie fundayit rexitque ecclesias, et 
confectus senio sexagesimo octavo post 
sionem Domini anno mortuus, juxta eandem 
urbem sepultus est.”"—De Vir. Jil, c. 9. See 
pp. 422-3, No. (22), and No. (23). 

2 Dr. Westcott Oh the Cangas 3rd = 

: ) notes that St. Augustine ‘‘ alludes 
St far as I know, to the doubts about the 
Apocalypse” :—‘‘ Et si forte tu qui ista [Pela 
gii] sapis hanc scripturam [Apoc, xi. 3-12] non 
accepisti; aut si accipis cemtemnis ia! 
(Serm. 299). 


INTRODUCTION. 


from the absence of the Book from the 
Peschito. We have likewise seen that at 
Alexandria, Origen, at the beginning of 
the third century, was ignorant of any 
question or doubt raised, before his time, 
as to the Apocalypse ; and, after doubts 
had been raised during the course of the 
century (see below), we are nevertheless 
given in the famous catalogue set forth 
by St. Athanasius (ft 373), the ancient 
Canon of the Alexandrine Church. In 
the authoritative document known as his 
Festal Epistle (Opp.,t. i. p. 767,ed. Ben.), 
to his enumeration of the four Gospels, 
the Acts, fourteen Pauline, and seven 
Catholic Epistles, Athanasius adds: 
“And, again, the Apocalypse of John. 
‘These are the fountains of salvation” 
[kat rddw Iwdvvov aroxaAwis: tatra myat 
Tov cwrnpiov]. 

If it be objected that the synod of 
Laodicea (circ. 350) does not include 
the Apocalypse in its catalogue of the 
Books of the Old and New Testaments, 
the reply is obvious,—even were this 
catalogue authentic,*—that those Books 
only are there set forth which were puéd- 
ficly read during Divine worship [éca 


’ St. Athanasius repeatedly quotes the Apo- 
calypse :—e.g. kal év GroxaAtWe tdde Aéyel, 
4 dy Kad 6 jy, wal 6 épxduevos (ch. i. 8).—Orat. 
Le Assan, 1. 1¥,-t. 3. p.. 3275 cl, 2. iv..28, 
p- 506; £¢. ii. ad Serap., c. 2, p. 547- 

7 Canon 60, in the printed editions of the 
canons of this Council, eonsists of a catalogue 
of nearly all the Books of Scripture. Canon 
59 forbids the public reading in churches of 
**psalms composed by private persons or of un- 
canonical books. The canonical Books only 
of the Old and New Testaments are to be 
read.” There are very cogent reasons for be- 
lieving that the catalogue of canon 60 was 
subsequently added, by an unknown hand, as 
the natural sequel of canon 59. This catalogue 
does not appear in the early Greek MSS. The 
printed editions which contain it are based, as 
Dr. Westcott points out, on MSS., with com- 
mentators’ scholia, not earlier than the latter part 
of Cent. xii. ; while the earliest MS. which gives 
the mere text, and which is dated early in Cent. 
Xi., omits the canon. The evidence of the Latin 
versions of the Laodicean canons is nearly 
balanced ; but the Syriac MSS., in the British 
Museum, of Cent. vi. or vii., contain canon 
§9, but without any catalogue added :—‘‘ On 
the whole,” writes Dr. Westcott, ‘‘it cannot 
be doubted that external evidence is decidedly 
against the authenticity of the catalogue as 
an integral part of the text of the canons of 
Laodicea.”—On the Canon, 3rd ed., p. 405; cf. 
Gefele, A¢., s. 749 ff 


425 


Si BiBXia  dvaywaoxerOar,—Car. 59 
(60); see Hefele, Concilien-Gesch., i 
s. 749]. It is well known that it was 
not unusual to abstain from the public 
reading of the Apocalypse,' partly on ac- 
count of its mysterious obscurity, as in 
the case of the Book of Ezekiel,—and 
partly from the use made of the Book in 
the chiliastic controversy. That anti- 
chiliasts (e.g. Origen and Clemens Al. ; 
see above, note %, p. 411) should have 
upheld the Apocalypse as warmly as de- 
cided chiliasts (e.g. Tertullian)—is one 
of the clearest proofs of the strength of 
the evidence in its favour. The con- 
clusions of Eusebius in his History illus- 
trate this result :—see above, p. 420. 

Coming down to the sixth century, 
Junilius, an African bishop (A.D. 550, 
ap. Galland., xii. 79, &c.), had heard 
from Paulus, a Persian of the School 
of Nisibis, that doubts had now begun 
to be entertained in the East on the 
subject of the Apocalypse [* De Joannis 
Apocalypsi apud Orientales admodum 
dubitatur”]. At this very period, how- 
ever, in the West, his friend Primasius 
as well as Cassiodorus expound the 
Book as Apostolic and Canonical. In 
the seventh century St. Isidore? of Seville 
+ 636), who mentions the doubts en- 
tertained in his day as to other Books 
of the New Testament, says not a word 
of any doubts as to the Apocalypse. 
The fourth Council of Toledo, too, at 
this same period (A.D. 633), in its seven- 
teenth canon, directs that the Apo- 
calypse, in consequence of certain doubts 
as to the authority of the Book, should 
be preached on in the Church between 
Easter and Pentecost; pointing, as Dean 
Alford thinks (Prolegg., p. 217), to the 
modern Orientals only, as Junilius had 
done. 

It has been mentioned above that 
the catalogue ascribed to the synod of 
Laodicea does not place the Apocalypse 
among the Books publicly read in the 


1 Liicke (s. 361) suggests that this was the 
practice of Asia Minor at the close of Cent. iv. 
See the remarks on Gregory Naz. and Cyril of 
Jerus., in note *, p. 417. 

2 See Primasius, Fro/., in Comment. ap. 
Migne, Patrolog., t. 68, p. 794; Cassiodorus, 

in Apoc., ap. Migne, £c., t. 70, p. 1406 5 
St. Isidore, De Ofiedis Ecch, Opp. t vi. Pp. 374s 


426 


services of the Church; and to this 
it should be added that neither does 
the last of the ‘ Apostolical Canons” 
(which includes the Gospel and the three 
Epistles of St. John) enumerate the Apo- 
calypse among the Books to be counted 
sacred. Nevertheless the “ Quinisext 
Council” (“In Trullo,” a.p. 692), which 
accepts both the “Apostolical Canons” 
and the canons of Laodicea, accepts at 
the same time in its second canon the 
decisions of the African synods (Concil, 
Carthag., A.D. 398, and A.D. 419) which 
distinctly include the Apocalypse as 
the composition of the Apostle John.’ 


§ 4. When and where was the Revela- 
tion written ? 


The evidence which has been already 
given exhibits how clearly the Church, 
from the very first, has recognized in the 
person who wrote “I John .... was in 
the isle that is called Patmos” (Rev. i. 9), 
the Apostle who in his Gospel describes 
himself as “one of His disciples whom 
Jesus loved” (John xiii. 23 ; cf. xix. 26; 
xxi. 7, 20).2 We have next to inquire 
when and where the Apocalypse was 
written ; and how far the intimations of 
the New Testament as to St. John’s 
career correspond with what history tells 


! Thus we read (Caz. xxiv.): ‘*Sunt autem 
_ canonicz Scripture, id est, Genesis . . . Jude 
Apostoli, liber i. ; Apocalypsis Joannis Apostoli, 
liber i.” ; and in the Greek text adopted by the 
Trullan Council,—eiot 5 ai xavovixad ypapal 
qour etcTw yéveois.... lovda &mogrdAov pla 
dmoxdAviis "lwdvyou BlBAos pla (ap. Justell. Bzb/. 
Fur. Can., i. p. 343). See Mansi, iii. 891 ; 
and cf. Liicke, 4 ¢., s. 648. 
* The author of Supernatural Religion writes : 
** We have no reason whatever, except the as- 
surance of the author himself, to believe that 
esus especially loved any disciple, and much 
ess John the son of Zebedee.”—vol. ii. p. 431. 
This allegation seems to be borrowed from 
Scholten (Der Ap. Fohannes in Kleinasien, 
s. 89 ff.), who, relying altogether on the fact that 
St. John does not name himself in his Gospel, at- 
tempts to prove that ‘‘the disciple whom Jesus 
loved” was not the Apostle John, but ‘‘an 
ideal personage ” (‘ eine ideale Personlichkeit,” 
8. 110),—‘‘no definite historical person ;” and 
that the fourth Gospel, which is to be distin- 
ished from the Jewish Gospel of Matthew, 
e Petrine of Mark, the Pauline of Luke, is 
elevated above all the tendencies of the time. 
On this conjecture, Renan (L’Antechrist, 
) observes: ‘‘ I] m’est tout a fait ‘mpoasitte 
Yadmettre cette opinion.” 


INTRODUCTION. 


us as to the time and the place. The lat- 
ter of these inquiries comes first in order, 

I. In three of the passages just cited 
from St. John’s Gospel, St. John’s name 
is connected with that of St. Peter. He 
is also St. Peters companion wherever 
he is spoken of in the Acts (ch. iii, iv., 
vill.) ; and from the Acts we infer that 
he continued at Jerusalem for some time 
after the Lord’s Ascension. He seems 
to have remained there for several years 
after his return from his mission to 
Samaria (Acts vili. 25), engaged in visit- 
ing, in like manner, the neighbouring 
churches. Thus, when St. Paul, three 
years after his Conversion, came back to 
Jerusalem, St. John is not there (Gal 
i. 18, 19),—he is, doubtless, absent on 
one of these visits. We do not find any 
further mention of his name until St. Paul 
“fourteen years after went up again to 
Jerusalem” (Gal. ii. 1), when we read of 
the assembling of the Apostles in Council 
(Acts xv.), where James “the Just” pre- 
sided as Bishop of Jerusalem (see Hege- 
sippus, af. Euseb., ii. 23). Even here, 
had we not the incidental mention of St. 
John’s name in Gal. ii. 9, we should not 
have suspected that, together with “* Ce- 
phas” and James “the Lord’s brother,” 
he occupied a position of personal autho- 
rity in the Church. Hence, it is by no 
means certain that he was not still in 
Jerusalem at the time of St. Paul’s last 
journey thither, a.D. 58 (Acts xxi. 17, 
&c.): indeed, it is probable that, as 
long as Jerusalem was the centre of 
the Judeo-Christian Church, it was 
the rule that some one, at least, of the 
Apostles—doubtless one of “ the pillars” 
(Gal. ii. 9)—should remain there; and 
that St. John continued so to reside until 


1 See the statement of Apollonius quoted above 
(note?, No. (9), p. 411) that our Lord had com- 
manded the Apostles to remain for twelve years 
in Jerusalem. Clemens Alex. (Strom. vi. 5, 
p. 762) quotes the same tradition from 
apocryphal Predicatio Petri,—peta dédcxa try 
ekéAGere cis Toy Kdcpor, uh Tis elep, ovK HKob= 
capev :—see Routh, 4 ¢., i. p. 484. Were we to 
accept this tradition as accurate, the Lord com- 
manded the Apostles to remain in Jerusalem 
until ‘after twelve years,” although the fear 
of persecution (Acts viii. 1) might tempt others 
to de Even were it obeyed literally, St. 
John need not have gone to Ephesus for several 
years afterwards (see Acts xx. 17, &c). 


INTRODUCTION. 


the alarm of the Roman war reached 
Judea, shortly before the year 66, and 
the defeat of Cestits who first besieged 
Jerusalem (cf. John xxi. 22). Eusebius 
(iii. 5) tells us that a divine warning now 
directed the Christians to depart from 
Jerusalem (cf. St. Luke xxi. 20, 21) toa 
city of Perza called Pella, where St. 
John seems to have organized the church 
under the Bishop Symeon, who, as He- 
gesippus records (af. Eus., iii. 32), was 
put to death by the Proconsul Atticus. 
And thus Pella may have been the 
starting-point of the Apostle on his road 
from Jerusalem to Ephesus. 

Renan (L’Antechrist, pp. 27, 183), 
having noticed that “the Apostle John 
appears in general to have accompanied 
Peter,” remarks—and there is no impro- 
bability in the remark, although there 
is no evidence whatever in support of 
it—“ we believe that the author of the 
Apocalypse has been at Rome” (see 
on Rev. xiv. 11). He arrives at this con- 
clusion by assuming (which is also quite 
possible) that the author has left in chap- 
ters xiii. and xvii. traces of the impression 
which the horrors of the persecution of 
the year 64 had stamped upon his mind: 
—‘ On est porté a croire que l’auteur de 
ce livre sétait trouvé mélé aux dits 
événements, ou du moins qu'il avait vu 
Rome.” “If,” continues Renan, “as it 
is permissible to believe, John accompa- 
nied Peter to Rome, we can here find a 
plausible foundation for the old tradition 
according to which John was plunged in 
a vessel of boiling oil near the place 
where at a later date (A.D. 271) the 
Porta Latina existed” (p. 198).2_ Renan 
(p. 207) also suggests that it was on the 
occasion of this his miraculous preser- 
vation (cf. Mark xvi. 18; Acts xiv. 20; 


1 Nicephorus (circ. 800, H. £., ii. 42) men- 
tions the report (icropeira:) that St. John re- 
mained in Jerusalem until the death of the 
Blessed Virgin (cf. John xix. 27). The statement 
made at the Council of Ephesus (Labbe, t. iii. 
547), that she accompanied St. John to Ephesus, 
and that she died and was buried there, is first 
referred to in Epiphanius (Her. 78, 11) :—this 
bears upon the question of St. John’s residence 
in Asia Minor (see below). 

2 See above No. (21), note %, p. 4223 cf. St. 
Jerome iz Matth, xx. 23; adv. Fovinian., i. 26, 
quoted in No. (25), note Pp 424.3 see also 

tmer and Bunsen, Zeschreib. der Stadt Rom, 
iii, part i. s. 604. 


427 


xxviii. 5) and after St. Peter had suffered, 
that St. John made choice of Asia Minor 
for his future residence. Whatever may 


. be thought of this suggestion, it is clear 


that it was not until after the death of 
St. Paul that St. John settled at Ephesus.? 

Ephesus was the first of the Seven 
Churches addressed in the Apocalypse 
(ch. ii. 1): it had been founded by St. 
Paul, who also addressed to it one of his 
Epistles, written A.D. 61, or 62 (see Wiese- 
ler, Chron. Synops., Ss. 455). That St 
John had not taught there during St 
Paul's lifetime follows from the express 
statements of the latter that, had another 
Apostle laboured in any church before 
him, he would not have included it in 
the circle of his ministrations (see Rom. 
xv.\205, 2. Cor. x. 16; ef. Gal. ii. .7, 8). 
From the Epistle to the Ephesians, too, 
as well as from Col. iv. 15-17, it appears 
that St. John had not yet been in Asia 
Minor; and in both 1 Tim, i. 3 and 
2 Tim. i. 18 Ephesus is referred to with- 
out any reference to St. John’s name. 
St. John’s residence in Ephesus, there- 
fore, is to be placed at a date subsequent 
to St. Paul’s death in the year 64. The 
dispersion of the Apostles may naturally 
have occurred during the siege of Jeru- 
salem, circ. A.D. 68; and thus St. John 
would be found, about this time, at 
Ephesus, and in the valley of the 
Meander (see above, p. 424). 

It was from Ephesus accordingly as a 
centre, as ancient writers unanimously 
attest, that St. John thenceforward go- 
verned the churches of Asia :—and 
this office, as the sole survivor of those 


1 Niermeyer also places St. John’s residence in 
Asia Minor about A.D. 65, shortly after St. Paul’s 
death: the news of that event seems to Nier- 
meyer to be a motive for leaving Palestine 
more na than the prevision of the national 
catastrophe: —see Revue de Thévlogie, Sept 
1856, p. 172. 

The conclusion of so calm and learned a 
writer as Bishop Lightfoot is worth recording s 
—‘‘ When, after the destruction of Jerusalem, St 
John fixed his abode at Ephesus, it would ap- 
pear that not a few of the oldest surviving 
members of the Palestinian church accompanied 
him into ‘Asia,’ which henceforward became 
the headquarters of Apostolicauthority. In the 
body of emigrants, Andrew and Philip, among 
the Twelve, Aristion and John the Presbyter, 
among other personal disciples of the Lord, 
are specially mentioned.”—Comm. on Colossy 
P- 45- 


428 


“who were reputed to be pillars” (Gal. 
ii. 9), he naturally filled. This is the 
express testimony of Justin M. (see p. 410, 
and No. (8) with the comment of Eu- 
sebius, iv. 18) ;—of Apollonius, Bishop or 
Presbyter of Ephesus (see No. (9), p. 411, 
note *) ;—of Irenzeus (p. 412, No. (11), 
note ”, and No. (12), p. 413, note ') whose 
intimate relations with Asia Minor render 
his testimony on the matter conclusive! ; 
—of Polycrates, Bishop of Ephesus (No. 
(14), p. 414, note !) ;—of Clemens Al. 
(No. (15), p. 415, note *) ;—of Origen 
No. (17), p. 416, note!) ;—of Dionysius 
Al. (ap. Euseb. vii. 25, see below, p. 440) ;— 
of Jerome (p. 424, note!, No. (26) ; cf. also 
Adv, Jovin.i. 26 ; in Ep. ad Gal. vi. ; and 
Epiphanius, Her. 78,11) ;—of Eusebius,? 
who writes (iil. 18), in the passage where 
he quotes the words of Irenzus (No. 
(10), p. 412, note’) that in the persecution 
under Domitian, “‘as is reported, John, 
at once Apostle and Evangelist, while 
still continuing in life, was condemned 
to dwell in the island of Patmos, on 
account of the testimony which he bore 
to the Divine Word ;”* towhich Eusebius 
adds that, after Domitian’s death, “ the 
Apostle John coming back from his 
exile in the island, resumed his resi- 
dence at Ephesus.” For these facts 
the historian appeals to “the report 
of those of old time among us :’— 
-by which words, we may note, Eusebius 
clearly intimates that he had other sources 
of information, in addition to Irenzus, 
respecting the fact of which he testifies, 
viz., the fact of St. John’s return from 
Patmos to Ephesus :—e. g. see his words 
quoted p. 416, No. (17). Elsewhere he also 
records of the Apostles how Peter was 
crucified with his head downwards, and 
how Paul was beheaded, and how John 


1 See also ddv. Har. ii. 25 ; iii. 1, 11; v. 26, 
30, 33; Zp. ad Vict., ap. Euseb. v. 24; Zp. ad 
Florin., ap. Euseb. v. 20. 

2 Cf. also H. £. iii. 1, 31; v. 243 Chron. ad 
Ann. 98. 

8 (27) °Ev rotte natéxe: Adyos Thy &mdaToAov 
Sua Kal cdayyedorhy "lwdyyny ert Te Bly eve 
Si:arplBovra, THs eis Tov Oeiov Adyov évexev pap- 
tuplas Tdrpov oixeiy karadicacOjvar Thy vioov 

. 6 Eipnvaios....onoly, x.7.A. (Iren., v. 30, 

). And further (4. £. iii. 20) : Tére [after the 
eath of Domitian] 3) ody Kal rdv amdoroAov 
‘advyny, ard THS KaTd Thy vijgov ovyis, Thy 
éxl ris Edécov diatpiBhy ameirnpéva, 5 Tov 
wap’ jpiv doxaloy wapabldwor Adyos. 


INTRODUCTION, 


was banished to an island [kat Iérpos 
ext “Pdéuns xata Kepadjs oravpovrat, 
TlatAds re avaréuverat, lwavvns te 


-mapadidorar|— Dem. Ev., iii. 5. 


In further proof of the Apostle’s resi- 
dence at Ephesus, one may adduce the 
statement said to have been made at the 
Council of Ephesus (see note?, p. 427), 
—not to mention the incidental proofs 
afforded by the reference of Tertullian 
to Polycarp (de Prescr. c. 32+); by the ac- 
counts of the Paschal controversy; and 
by the various narratives of events during 
the Apostle’s abode at Ephesus? This 
fact, therefore, being established, a con 
siderable interval in all probability 
elapsed between St. John’s first settle- 
ment at Ephesus and his exile to Patmos: 
—see the Paschal Chronicle, quoted 
No. (7), note }, p. 408. 

No less decisive is the testimony of 
early writers that the Visions of the 
Apocalypse were seen by St. John “in 
the isle that is called Patmos,” to which 
he had been banished (whether from 
Ephesus or before his abode there) “for 
the word of God and the testimony of 
Jesus” (Rev. i. 9; on Patmos, see the 
note i# /oc.). This sentence of banish- 
ment was in all respects conformable to 
the general usage of the Roman Empire, 
according to which the islands of the 
Mediterranean were employed as places 
of exile.* Eusebius quotes the testimony 


1 « Sicut Smyrnzorum ecclesia Polycarpum 
ab Joanne conlocatum refert.” Seep. 408, note*, 

? E.g. St. John’s composing his Gospel to 
refute Cerinthus (who, as we should note, came 
into prominence under Domitian, see Tillemont, 
ii, 54) ;—his rushing from the building where he 
happened to meet Cerinthus (Irenzeus, H@r. iii. 3) 5 
—the story of the young robber (Clemens Alex., 
Quis dives salv. 42);—his raising a dead man 
to life (Apollonius, a. Eus., v. 18) ;—his constant 
use of the exhortation, ‘‘ Little children, love one 
another” (St. Jerome, Z. ad Gal. vi. 10) ;—the 
fact of his burial ;—and the rie of = two 
graves (Polycrates, af. Euseb., v. 24; Dionys, 
Al, af. Eus., vii. 25) ;—events which all occurred 
at Ephesus, as already pointed out. Cf. too the 
statement of Tertullian, No. (21), p. 422. 

* The islands usually selected for exile were 
Gyaros, Pandateria, Pontia, Planasia (see p. 431, 
note *), as having neither harbour nor town, 
The fact of Patmos not being elsewhere mene 
tioned as a place of banishment leads Renan to 
reject the notion of an exile properly so called ; 
although, long after St. John’s time, Calandion, 
Patriarch of Antioch, was banished to Patmos, 
as a Nestorian heretic,—see Eusebius, Chron. apy 


INTRODUCTION. 


to this effect of Clemens Alexandrinus, 
and of Origen (#7. Z. iil. 18, 23,—see 
above, Nos. (15), (16). Passages like- 
wise reciting the fact have been also 
given from St. Hippolytus (p. 417) ;— 
Tertullian, No. (21) ;—Victorinus, No. 
(23) ;—Jerome, Nos. (25) and (26) ;— 
Epiphanius, No. (19);—the  super- 
scription of the Syriac version of the 
Apocalypse, No. (18);—and from 
Arethas (p. 407, note?) :—see also below 
Dorotheus, p. 431, note. Victorinus, 
it will have been seen, has added, to 
the other accounts, that St. John had 
been condemned to the mines in Patmos; 
and further, that, after his release, he com- 
mitted to the Church the record of the 
Visions which he had received (“de 
metallo dimissus, postea tradidit hanc 
eandem quam acceperat) ;”—see p. 423.! 

The past tenses in Rev. i. 2 (€uapripy- 
oe) and in Rev. i. 9 (e€yevounr) have been 
adduced in proof that the Revelation was 
not committed to writing until after the 
Apostle’s return from exile ; although 
the style of the Epistles to the Seven 
Churches has been urged on the other 
side. At all events, whether written in 
Patmos, or at Ephesus after he was 
restored to liberty, we can trace, in the 
imagery and in the allusions of the Apo- 
calypse, strong internal confirmation of 
what history tells us both as to the region 
in which St. John resided, and as to the 
scene where he beheld his Visions. 
“The Revelation,” writes Dean Stanley, 
“is of the same nature as the prophetic 
Visions and lyrical Psalms of the Old 
Testament, where the mountains, valleys, 
trees, storms, earthquakes, of Palestine 
occupy the foreground of the picture, of 


Mai, Scripit, Vett. Nov. Coll., t. i. 2, p. 16. 
(According to other accounts, he was banished 
to the African Oasis, A.D. 485; see Smith’s 
Dict. of Christian Biogr., art. Calandio). St. 
John, as Renan supposes (/.¢., p. 374), retired 
to Patmos of his own accord, in order to com- 
pose his work ;—or perhaps he wrote it on his 
return from Rome to Asia, full of reminiscences 
of the persecution which he had escaped ;— 
or an accident, or stress of weather may have 
compelled him to take refuge in the little port: 
and for this last conjecture a hint is afforded by 
the éyevduny of Rev. i. 9. 

‘ Arethas on Rey. vii. (af. Cramer, A¢., p. 286) 
considers that 6 ecvayyediorhs expnopwdeito 
vavta ¢y lwvlg tH Kar’ “Epecor, 


429 


which the horizon extends to the unseen 
world and the remote future. . . . The 
stern rugged barrenness of its [Patmos] 
broken promontories well suits the his- 
torical fact of the relegation of the 
condemned Christian to its shores as of 
a convict to his prison. . . . He stood 
on the heights of Patmos in the centre 
of a world of his own. . . . The view 
from the topmost peak, or indeed from 
any lofty elevation in the island, unfolds 
an unusual sweep, such as well became 
the ‘Apocalypse,’ the ‘ uzveiling’ of the 
future to the eyes of the solitary Seer. 
. . . Above, there was always the broad 
heaven of a Grecian sky; sometimes 
bright with its ‘white cloud’ (Rev. xiv. 
14), sometimes torn with ‘lightnings and 
thunderings,’ and darkened by ‘great 
hail,’ or cheered with ‘a rainbow like 
unto an emerald’ (Rev. iv: 3; viil. 7; 
xl. 19; xvi. 21). Over the high tops of 
Icaria, Samos, and Naxos rise the 
mountains of Asia Minor; amongst 
which would lie, to the north, the circle 
of the Seven Churches to which his 
addresses were to be sent. Around him 
stood the mountains and islands of the 
archipelago—‘every mountain and island 
shall be moved out of their places’; 
‘every island fled away, and the mountains 
were not found’ (Rev. vi. 14; xvi. 20), 
. . « When he looked around, above or 
below, ‘the sea’ would always occupy 
the foremost place. He saw ‘the things 
that are in the heavens, and in the earth, 
and zz the sea’ (Rev. v. 13; x. 63 Xiv. 
7); -.. the voices of heaven were like 
the sound of the waves beating on the 
shore, as ‘the sound of many waters’ 
(Rey. xiv. 2; xix. 6); the millstone was 
‘cast into she sea’ (Rev. xviii. 21); 
‘the sea was to give up the dead which 
were) Mg: (Rey. xx. 13> Ch Vil. I, 2, 45 
xX. 2, 5, 8; xvi. 3)."—Sermons in the 
East, 1862, p. 230. 

From Patmos St. John proceeded to 
Ephesus, where he seems to have resided 
until his death (Polycrates, No. (14), p. 
414; Origen, No. (17), p. 416), engaged 
in the organization and government of 
the surrounding churches (see p. 408, 
note?; and Eusebius, p. 415, note’), until 
the reign of Trajan, a.D. 98-117. This 
date we learn from Irenzeus (No. (11), 


430 


p. 412); and from what Eusebius records 
on the evidence of Irenzeus and of “ the 
ancients” (No. (7), p. 408; No. (27), p. 
428) Eusebiusis followed by Jerome (No. 
(26), p. 424), in fixing the date of the exile 
in the fourteenth year of Domitian (see 
the Chronicle quoted, p. 408, in note’). 
St. Jerome adds that the Apostle returned 
from Patmos under Nerva (A.D. 96): 
—he returned, according to Clemens Al. 
(No. (15), p. 415), “after the death of 
the tyrant.” St. Jerome further states 
that St. John died in the sixty-eighth year 
after the Lord’s Passion, and was buried 
at Ephesus: and although Tertullian 
and Hegesippus (p. 422) seem to place 
the return from Patmos before the death 
of Domitian, a passage has been adduced 
from Dion Cassius (lxviii. 1) to the effect 
that Nerva, on succeeding to the empire, 
set at liberty those who had been exiled 
by Domitian.! See on Victorinus, p. 423. 
The result, then, of the evidence 
amounts to this,—that shortly before, or 
shortly after Domitian’s death, a.D. 96, 
St. John was released from exile, and 
returned to Ephesus. There he resided 
until his death in the reign of Trajan, 
and there his tomb was famous for many 
years (Eus. ili. 31, 39; v. 243 Vil. 25; 
Jerome, de Vir. /1/.c. 9; see No. (20), p. 
420). The date of St. John’s death would 
thus be some time about the year 98.? 


1 nal 6 Nepotas tots te Kpiwouévous em 
doeBelg apjxe cal to’s gevyovTas KaThyaye. 
And Suidas writes,—art. Merva: oitos kal 
toy evayyeAioThy “lwdvynv ek Tijs 
Hdtpov avaxadréoas, Hyayey ev “Eder. 

2 For this result we have, as stated in the 
text, the authority of Irenzus, Her. ii. 22, 5; 
iii. 3, 43 of Jerome, de Vir. Ill. 9; adv. Fovin. 
1.14; Comm.in Dan. ix.; of Isidore Hispal., De 
Vita ct Obitu SS.c. 73. Isidore, adopting the 
words of St. Jerome, No. (26), makes St. John’s 

e to be 89. Pseudo-Chrysost. (Hom. de S. 
pe theol., ap. Opp. Chrysost., ed. Ben. t. 
vii.) ; Dorotheus (see below, p. 431, note ') ; 
and Suidas make the Apostle’s age to be 120, 
The chronicle ascribed to ‘‘ the younger” Hip- 

lytus (see p. 416, note?) makesit 110. The 

aschal Chronicle (ed. Dindorf, p. 470) makes 
it 100,—noting (see p. 461) that after St. John 
had spent nine years at Ephesus, he was ban- 
ished to Patmos for fifteen years; and that, his 
exile being ended, he lived twenty-six years in 
Ephesus. This would place St. John’s death 
in the seventh year of Trajan’s reign. 

The Abbé Nolte first published (7Zzeol, 
Quartalschr., Tiibing., 1862, iii. p. 406) a frag- 
ment of the chronicle of Georgius Hamartélus 


etoplas 


INTRODUCTION. 


II. Such being the facts as to the life 
of the Apostle John, to determine the 
time when the Apocalypse was written is 
a problem of the utmost importance,— 
whether we consider the authorship, the 
interpretation, or the Divine inspiration 
of the Book. The date to be fixed upon, 
while it must evidently suit the circum- 
stances of the writer and must not 
contradict admitted facts, should, at the 
same time, be sought for without refer- 
ence to any arbitrary hypothesis such as 
modern critics lay down, namely, that 
the Book must be regarded as an or- 
dinary human composition, containing 
neither prophetic utterance nor trace of 
Divine knowledge:—for the ‘higher 
criticism” of recent days assumes, as a 
first principle, that any alleged predic- 
tion must be a vaticinium post eventum, 

a.—The External evidence on this 
matter of the date is as follows :!— 

The statement which might seem to 
set all controversy at rest is that of 
Irenzeus, No. (10), who expressly asserts 


(Cent. ix.), where it is stated that, after the 
death of Domitian, Nerva recalled St. John 
from ‘‘ the island,” and permitted him to reside 
at Ephesus. Being now sole survivor of the 
Twelve Apostles, and having composed his 
Gospel, he was counted worthy of martyrdom ; 
for Papias of Hierapolis, being an eye-witness 
(avrérrns TovTou yevduevos), relates in the second 
book of ‘‘ The Lord’s Discourses” (No. (6), = 
408) that John was put to death by the Jews (8rs 
bd "Iovdalwy aynpébn). On this statement Keim 
(.¢., 3% Ausg., i. s. 42) founds one of his proofs 
(see below, p. 445) that the Apostle never resided 
in Asia Minor, because the Jews are spoken of, 
and therefore the scene of the alleged martyr- 
dom must have been in Palestine. Here, 
writes Keim, is “a newly discovered witness, 
which puts an end to all illusions.” As if 
Jews were not to be found at Ephesus, where 
the very fragment relied upon asserts that 
Nerva allowed St. John to reside! (see Godet, 
Zc, i. p. 63; Krenkel, 4c, s. 31). Renan 
(2.¢., p. 562) rejects the notion that Papias could 
have accepted this tradition, He notes :— 
‘*Georges Hamartélus ajoute qu’Origéne était 
également de cet avis; ce qui est tout a fait 
faux. Voir Origéne, Jz Matth., t. xvi. 6. 
Héracléon met aussi Jean parmi les apétres 
martyrs; Clém. d’Alex., Strom. iv. 9. Des 
faits comme le miracle de l’huile bouillante et le 
passage Apoc., i. 9, suffisaient pour justifier de 
telles assertions.” 

1 It should be noted that the result arrived 
at here differs from that which is ted in 
the Introduction to the Gospel of St. John (p. 
Ixxxvii). It is there assumed that the Apoca- 
lypse ‘* is before the destruction of Jerusalem.” 


INTRODUCTION. 


that “the Revelation was seen no long 
time since, but almost in our own gene- 
ration towards the end of the reign of 
Domitian” (A.D. 81-96). When we bear 
in mind what has been already proved 
(see p. 411, note '),—viz. that Irenzeus 
was the intimate associate of Polycarp 
who suffered martyrdom in the year 155, 
in the 86th year of his age (see above, 
p. 409) ;—when we remember, too, that 
in his Epistle to Florinus* (see above, 
p. 412) Irenzus does not appeal, as 
he sometimes does, to the information 
which he had received from others, but 
recalls to Florinus the reminiscences of 
their boyhood concerning their common 
master Polycarp,? of which reminis- 
cences one was that Polycarp was wont 
often to speak of his personal know- 
ledge of the Apostle John ;—in a word, 
when we perceive that Irenzeus had 
every opportunity of knowing the facts, 
and no intelligible motive for misstating 
them, the force of his evidence can 
hardly be disputed. 

Clemens Al., in the passage No. (15), 
merely speaks of the “death of the 
tyrant”; but it has been shown (p. 415, 
note 7) that Eusebius understood by 
“the tyrant” no other than Domitian. 
Tertullian, also, like Clemens Al., does 
not name the Emperor who banished St. 
John to “ the island ”—see No. (21) ; but 
his language in the passage No. (22) 
shows that he intended Domitian. At all 
events, the latter passage proves that it 
was the practice of Domitian, imitating 
the cruelties of Nero, to punish the 
Christians with exile.® 

1 Renan (Z’Antéhrist, p. 565) shows the 
weakness of Scholten’s attempt (Der Ap. 

hannes in Kleinasien, s. 63 ff.) to treat the 

pistle to Florinus as not genuine. Hilgenfeld 
also calls this attempt a ‘‘desperate under- 
taking” (Zizizit., p. 397). 

? Trenzeus writes (ap. Eus. v. 20): Sore pe 
Btvacba cimciv kal toy térov & @ KabeCSuevos 
BieAcyero 6 paxdpios TloAtKapmos .... kal Thy 
Tov caparos idéay Kat Tas diadckets &s éxorciro 
mpos 7 TA7Oos, kal Thy pmeTa "Iwdvvov cuvae 
oTpodhy as ariyyetAc, kal Thy wera TAY AoiTav 
Tay Ewpaxdtoy thy Kupiov kal os &mreuynudveve 
Tos Ad-yous avT@y, K. T. A. 

* That exile was a usual punishment under 
Domitian is shown by the story of Flavia 
Domitilla banished by him to Pandateria (Dion 
Cassius, lxvii. 14 ; xviii. 1) ; and Eusebius (iii. 18), 
in continuation of his reference to the words of 
Trenzeus, No. (10), mentions Pontia as the place 


431 


Origen, No. (16) considers that the 
Revelation was received “in the island,” 
and he is one of the witnesses quoted by 
Eusebius for the Apostle’s death at 
Ephesus, No. (17). Victorinus, No. (24), 
as we have seen, is still more explicit as 
to the time when the Apocalypse was 
written for the Church,—namely, when 
Domitian was the Cesar (“quoniam 
tunc erat Cesar Domitianus”). 

St. Jerome, No. (25), is no less clear 
as to the fact that the Revelation was 
given to St. John under the same Em- 
peror; and so, too, the later writers 
generally (e.g. Sulpicius Severus, Saer. 
fist. ii. 31; and Orosius): Eusebius also 
having three times stated that St. John 
was banished under Domitian,—(r1) in 
HZ, E. iti. 18 (No. (10); cf. v. 8), where, 
he quotes Irenzeus; (2) in iii. 20, No. 
(27), where, by referring to “the ancients” 
(6 rdv zap jpiv apxaiwy Aoyos), he re 
moves any imagination that Irenzeus was 
the only source from which he knew 
the fact; and (3) in iii. 23, where he 
quotes Clemens Alex., No. (15),—no- 
where suggests that any other opinion 
existed in the Church either as to the 
Emperor who sent St. John into exile 
or as to the date of the Apocalypse. 
There must, therefore, have been per- 
fect unanimity at the beginning of the 
fourth century! as to both these facts, 


of her exile ‘‘in the fifteenth year of Domitian,” 
—ijs «is Xpiorby pwaptupias everev. We read in 
Juvenal (i. 73) : ‘* Aude aliquid brevibus Gyaris, 
et carcere dignum ;” and Lampe (on St. John i.) 
quotes Modestius (Zege xxx., Digest. de pcenis) : 
“*Si yuis aliquid fecerit quo leves hominum 
animi superstitione numinis terrentur, Divus 
Marcus hujusmodi homines in insulam relegare 
rescripsit” (cf. on Rev. ii. 13) :—see p. 428, note *. 

1 The evidence which would place the exile 
at a later date need not be considered. Thus 
in a fragment ascribed to Dorotheus, Bishop of 
Tyre at the end of the third century, it is stated 
that ‘‘ John, the brother of James,” ‘‘ who also 
wrote the Gospel,” after he had preached Christ 
at Ephesus, was banished to Patmos by Trajan 
on account of his confession of the Christian 
faith :—see Selecta ad illustr. Chron. Pasch., 
ed. Dindorf, ii., p. 136; Cave, Hest. Zit, vol. i. 
p. 169. In the Latin version of this fragment 
of Dorotheus (ap. 426/. Patr. Lugd., ed. De la 
Bigne, t. iii. p. 426) it is added that St. John 
wrote zs Gosfel while in Patmos; and that, 
when recalled to Ephesus atter the death of 
Trajan, he published it through ‘‘ his host and 
deacon” Gaius (see Rom. xvi. 23; 3 John 1), 
the Apostle surviving to theageof120. ‘‘ But,” 


432 


although a subjective theory as to the 
authorship of the Book had been put 
forward in the interest of the anti- 
chiliasts, —a theory to be considered 
presently. 

The case then stands thus. Before 
Cent. iv. there is no variation in the 
historical accounts, All statements sup- 
port the conclusion that St. John was 
banished to Patmos by Domitian (A.D, 
81-96),—-some writers placing the exile 
in the fourteenth year of his reign,—and 
all agree that the Visions of which the 
Revelation is the record were received 
in Patmos. Clemens Al. and Tertullian, 
indeed, do not mention in express terms 
the name of the Emperor by whom St. 
John was sent into exile (see No. (15), 
and No. (21) :—but compare No. (22), p. 
422); and Origen, No. (16), states as the 
reason for his own silence as to “the King 
of the Romans,” that St. John has not 
himself given the name of the person 
who passed sentence on him ;—but 
nothing that is said, not even the re- 
mark of Dorotheus (see p. 431, note '), 
is at variance with the general belief as 
summed up by Eusebius. If external 
evidence is of any value at all, it is of 
value here: no amount of “subjective” 
conjecture, or arbitrary interpretation, 
can set aside the verdict of history. 

At a later period, indeed, some state- 
_ ments meet us which, at most, are in- 
stances of eccentric speculation.? Thus 
Epiphanius mentions Claudius asthe Em- 
peror who banished St. John (see No. (19), 


this version proceeds, ‘Sunt tamen qui dicunt 
eum non sub Trajano in insulam Pathmon 
relegatum esse, sed sub Domitiano Vespasiani 
filio.’ Theophylact (on St. Matt. xx. 23, ti, 
p- 107) also says: "IdkwBov pty ‘Hpddns amé- 
wrewev, Iwdvynv 5¢ Tpatavos natedlkace paptu- 
povvta TH Ady THs GAnbelas. 

1 Godet (Comm. on St. Fohn’s Gospel, Clarke’s 
transl. i. p. 244) writes : ‘* We fix the composition 
of the Apocalypse about the year 95.” 

2 E.g. Andreas, on Rev. vi. 123 vii. I, men- 
tions that ‘‘some” persons understood these texts 
of the Jewish war; and Arethas, on Rev. vii. I- 
8, would seem to place the date of the Apocalypse 
before the Jewish war, although on Rey. i. 9, he 
a the date under Domitian. On Rev. iii. 10, 

further writes: # roy ém) Aoueriavod diwypdy 
Adyet, Sebrepov bvTa peta Népwva &s EvoéBios 
loropet [H. £. iii. 17], bre wal airds 5 ebayye- 
ee why ae bx’ cid Tod Aoperiavod 
aarcxplin, x. T. r. (ap. Cramer, Cadena, 
227). See also Ziillig, on ch. xvii. 10. : 


INTRODUCTION. 


Pp. 419),—a statement which few ancient 
or modern writers deem worthy of accept- 
ance.! Infact, according tothis statement, 
St. John returned from his exile “ in ex- 
treme old age,” and when his life had 
lasted about ninety years ; and therefore, 
seeing that Claudius reigned from the year 
41 to the year 54, were we to assign “the 
return from exile to the last of these dates, 
we should have St. John aged ninety in 
the year 54: in other words, thirty-three 
years older than our Lord, and sixty- 
three at least when called to be an 
Apostle: a result which is at variance 
with all ancient tradition whatever.”— 
Alford, Prolegg., p. 232. Bishop Words- 
worth, in his Commentary (/nfrod., 
158), suggests—but the suggestion is 
more ingenious than conclusive —the 
possibility of a false reading in the pas- 
sage, viz) KAAYAIOY, for PAABIOY, 
the copyist forgetting that Domitian 
was sometimes called Flavius.’ 


1 Of the moderns Grotius (followed by 
Hammond), on Rev. i. 9, takes up the account 
of Epiphanius, and appeals to Acts xviii. 2, 
and to Suetonius (Claudius, 25); arguing that 
St. John was exiled to Patmos as being a Jew ;— 
that, when the persecution of the Christians 
ceased under Vespasian, he was recalled from 
the island ;—and that he was again banished 
there by Domitian. 

? E.g. :— 

(2 8) ‘Cum jam semianimum laceraret Flavius 
orbem 

Ultimus, et calvo serviret Roma Neroni.” 

Fuven., iv. 370 

Bishop Wordsworth, by quoting the words 
of Epiphanius in the context of this statement, 
supplies proof that Epiphanius could not have 
meant Domitian :—Epiphanius ‘‘says that St. 
John, in the Apocalypse, writing to the Seven 
Churches of Asia, predicts the rise of heresies 
which did not then exist, and foretells that a 
woman would appear at Thyatira, who would 
call herself a prophetess; and he adds that 
these things came to pass long after the death 
of John, inasmuch as he prophesied in the times 
of Claudius Czesar, when he was at Patmos.”— 
Zc. p. 157. But it is clear that in Rev. ii. 20 
St. John is not sredicting future errors; he is 
censuring errors already committed. In matters 
of history, indeed, Epiphanius is no authority 
whatsoever ;—thus, as Bishop Lightfoot has 
pointed out (Cont. Rev., Aug. 1876, p. 412)3 
‘*Epiphanius states that Antoninus Pius was 
succeeded by Caracalla, who also bore the 
names of Geta and M. Aurelius Verus, and who 
reigned seven years; that L. Aurelius Come 
modus likewise reigned these same seven years 
that Pertinax succeeded next, and was follow 
by Severus”; and so on—See De Fond. et 


Mens., c. 16, 


INTRODUCTION. 


Still less weight is to be attached to 
the external evidence for placing the 
composition of the Apocalypse under 
Nero. The two solitary witnesses to 
this effect are the superscription of the 
Syriac version published by Lud. de 
Dieu, No. (18), ascribed to the sixth 
century ; and Theophylact (+ a.D. 1107). 
As to the former of these two witnesses, 
it was long ago remarked by Stephen Le 
Moyne (Varia Sacra, Lugd. Bat., 1694) 
that the Syriac translator probably in- 
tended not the first Nero,! but a second 
Nero, viz. Domitian, who was also a 
persecutor ; and he quotes the verses 
just cited from Juvenal, No. (28), in 
proof that Domitian was sometimes 
called Nero.? Indeed, that Domitian 
was popularly known as a _ second 
“Nero,” was notorious ; as may be in- 
ferred from the words of Tertullian, No. 
(22), p. 422. 

That the Syriac translator may have 
meant by “Nero” “Domitian” (compare 
the various reading “prenomine Ne- 
ronis” in No. (22) p. 422) is by no means 
impossible ; and it should be remem- 
bered that both Nero and Domitian are 
specially referred to as persecutors and 
enemies of the Christian faith :—e. g. 
by Melito of Sardis (ap. Euseb., iv. 26), 
in his Apology addressed to M. Anto- 
ninus.? See also St. Jerome, No. (26). 

Theophylact is the other witness for 
the alleged fact that St. John wrote in 
Patmos during the reign of Nero (A.D. 
54-68). In the preface to his Comm. 


! Lucius Domitius, afterwards the Emperor 
Nero, was son of Cnzeus Domitius Ahenobarbus, 
representative of the illustrious Domitian gezs, 
and of Agrippina, the sister of Caius Caligula. 

The full name of the Emperor Claudius 
(a.D. 41-54) was Tiberius Claudius Drusus 
Nero Germanicus. After his adoption by 
Claudius (A.D. 50), Nero was called, Nero 
Claudius Czesar Drusus Germanicus. Domitian 
(A.D. 81-96) was called, Titus Flavius Domi- 
tianus Augustus. 

2 In further proof of this fact, we may also 
compare the verses of Ausonius :— 

(29) ‘‘His decimus, fatoque accitus Vespa- 
sianus ; 

Et Titus imperii felix brevitate : secutus 

Frater, quem calvum dixit sua Roma 

Neronem.”—De xii. Cesaribus. 

® Melito writes :—pdvo: rdyvrwv, dvamresobevtes 
bxé twwv Backdvwy dvOpdrwy, Tov Kal jpas ey 
BiaBorg xatracrjca Adyov AOéAncay Néowy ral 
Moueriavds (ap. Routh, Rel, Sacr., t.i. p 187). 


New Test.—Vo.. IV. 


433 


in Joann. (t. i. p. 504), Theophylact 
states that St. John wrote his Gospel 
(not the Apocalypse) in the island of 
Patmos, thirty-two years after the As- 
cension,—thus placing the exile of the 
Apostle under Nero.’ And yet the same 
Theophylact, as we have already seen 
(p. 432, note), asserts that St. John 
was condemned by Trajan.2 Theo- 
phylact, therefore, is either entirely in 
error in what he states in his preface 
to the Gospel of St. John,—as is most 
probable in so late a writer,—or we do 
not understand the passage. 

It has been necessary to dwell upon 
this evidence—the only evidence which 
Christian antiquity offers—in support of 
the opinion that the banishment of St. 


1 His words are, 5:4 tov idfov EvayyeAlow 
® nad cuvéypayey ev Tdrpe TH vio e&dpioros 
diareAGy peta TpidKovta dbo rn THs TOU Xpioe 
Tov dvarhpews. 

2 It may be well to notice in like manner the 
two statements of ‘‘the younger” Hippolytus 
in note ?, p. 416; especially the word Aouerlov 
in the former of the passages. If by this he 
intended Domitius Nero, the mention of Trajan 
in the second passage is exactly parallel to the 
confusion in Theophylact. Guericke (Zin/eit., 
s. 285) attempts to prove that the different 
ancient writers who record that the exile to 
Patmos took place under Domitian really in- 
tended Domitius, t.e., Domitius Nero. Thus, he 
understands from the words of Irenzeus, as given 
in No. (10)—apbs t@ TéAa THs AopeTiavod 
&px7js—that Aouetiayod (because the article is 
wanting) is an adjective formed from Aopeérios, 
and that the sense is ‘‘the reign of Domitius.” 
To urge no other objection, we can point to 
more than one passage in Eusebius which de- 
cides the matter; e.g. ili. 23,—perd Thy Ao-= 
petiavod TeAEuTHY :—ill. 18, év Ere: wevTexaides 
dtp Aouetiavod peta wAclotwy éErépwy Thy 
@daBlav AowerlAAay x.7.A. Would Guericke 
understand here ‘‘the 15th year of Mero”? 
Niermeyer, who assumes that Domitian means 
Nero, and who makes St: John arrive in Asia 
Minor about the year 65, argues thus :—Ter- 
tullian, if we may trust Jerome (?) ascribes the 
banishment of St. John to Nero; Irenzus to 
Domitian ; Epiphanius to Claudius. In the want 
of positive data, Christian tradition has attached 
itself to these three names in turn, without seeing 
that Nero, Domitian, and Claudius are one 
and the same person. Nero was also called 
Claudius; and he was a Domitian, being of 
the gens Domitia (Revue de Théologie, Sept. 
1856, p. 172). 

Niermeyer, however, cannot show that Nero 
was ever fopularly known as ‘‘Claudius;” 
and Tertullian, as we have seen, in a pointed 
manner distinguishes Nero from Domitian. St. 
jeans makes no such statement as to Tertul- 
ia as Niermeyer ascribes to him. 


EE 


434 


John to Patmos occurred under the 
Emperor Nero, and that the Apocalypse 
was written before the destruction of 
Jerusalem (A.D. 70),—because it is a 
leading object with rationalistic critics 
to establish this early date. It is, in- 
deed, manifest that there is nothing in 
itself contrary to the acceptance of the 
Apocalypse as inspired Scripture, or to 
the belief that it was the work of the 
Apostle John, in admitting that it was 
written in the age of Nero.’ But, inas- 
much as such a conclusion contradicts 
the concurrent voice of the most trust- 
worthy writers of the first four centu- 
ries, who place the composition of the 
Apocalypse between the years 95 and 
97; and because the rationalistic inter- 
pretation of the Book depends upon the 
dogmatic assumption that it can only 
refer to events which happened before it 
was written (2. ¢, as rationalists assume, 
before the year 70), it is important for 
the Christian argument not only to set 
aside the alleged “ external proof” of the 
early date (as has now been done), but 
also to examine the “internal reasons” 
which have been brought forward in 
support of the same result. 


§ 4 (cont.). b.—The Internal Evidence. 


It has become a principle of rational- 
istic exegesis that St. John refers, through- 
out this Book, to events in his own age, 
—events which had already occurred, 


1 The evidence of history (as we have seen) 
proves that the Revelation was written some- 
where about A.D. 95-97; and this result is 
supported by ‘‘ Dupin, Basnage, Turretin, 
Spanheim, Le Clerc, Mill, Whitby, Lampe, 
Lardner, Tomline, Burton, Woodhouse, Elliott, 
Ebrard, Hofmann, Hengstenberg, Thiersch,’’ 
and others,—see Dr. S. Davidson (Jntrod. to the 
N. T., vol. iii. p. 599). On the other hand, a 
writer of such genuine piety as Auberlen writes: 
**The evidence contained in the Book itself is 
more in favour of the view... . that it was 
written shortly before the destruction of Feru- 
solem.”—Danisl and the Rev., p. 235. Stier 
argues that it was written under Nero, from 
the mention of the ‘‘ten days,” z¢, the ten 

ecutions (ch. ii. 10). This result is adopted 
y Liicke, Neander, Schwegler, Baur, Ziillig, 
De Wette, Diisterdieck (apparently following 
Zeller, Vortrage u. Abhandl., 1865, p. 212, ff.) 
Renan, Reuss, &c., &c.:—see also Bunsen’s 
Sibelwerk, viii. s. 478. The author of Supers 
natural Religion (vol. ii, p. 392) is, of course, 
of the same opinion. 


INTRODUCTION. 


and which were notorious to all. It 
is also assumed that the Apostle fully 
shared in the popular delusion as to 
the return of Nero, who, we are told, 
is the Antichrist of the Apocalypse. Thus 
Hermann Gebhardt (Der Lehrbegriff der 
Afpokalypse, Gotha, 1873, s. 432) who 
allows that the Apostle John was the 
author as well of the Apocalypse as 
of the Fourth Gospel and the Joannean 
Epistles, asserts (s. 234) that the Apoca- 
lypse was written under Galba, a.p. 68. 
He accordingly maintains : ‘‘It is incon- 
testable that the author has erred [“ geirrt 
hat”] when he expects that Nero will 
appear again, in a short time, as Anti- 
christ out of hell, and that then the end 
will come” (s. 13). 

And here it is to be observed that it is 
in that strange mixture of heathen and 
Jewish, and, in many parts, Christian 
superstition known as the “ Sibylline 
Oracles,” that we meet in book iv.— 
which is ascribed to the age of Titus, 
A.D. 79 (see Note E on ch. ii, 20)— 
what seems to be the earliest allusion 
to the survival of Nero.? 

Under various forms, this is the prin- 
ciple which underlies the rationalistic 
interpretation of Rev. xvii. :—see on ch. 
xvii. 9, and the note im Joc.; cf. also 
on ch, xiii. 1. Indeed this idea that 
Nero is Antichrist was, according to 
Renan, “the parent of the Apocalypse,” 
—‘“ mere de l’Apocalypse” (i. ¢., p. 351). 
The “internal evidence,” then, which is 
brought forward to prove the compo- 
sition of the Apocalypse during the 
reign of Nero, or shortly after his 
death, is as follows :— 

i. ‘The Book was written before the 
destruction of Jerusalem’ :—This theory 
was originally put forward by Lud, 
Alcasar (see below, § 12), and accepted 
by Grotius, Hammond, and Lightfoot, as 
enabling themto apply certain texts to the 
fate of Judaism. Rev. xi. 1, we are told, 
proves that the Temple must have been 
still standing; while verse 2 (cf. ch. xx. 
g) informs us that the City was in a state 


1 (30) xa tér’ am “IraAlms Bacircds wéyas, 
eb iy ‘pa cay btp xépov Edpphrao, 
Ei ‘es, &xvotos, brép wépov 
liste 52 unrpgov Syos orvyepoto odvoi0 
TAhcera, K. T. A. 
ver. 119, &c.3 cf. vv. 137-139. 


INTRODUCTION 


of siege, of which the result is stated in 
Luke xxi. 24. Some writers also argue 
from ch. vii. 4-8 that the Twelve Tribes 
were still in existence. In answer to 
this argument it is sufficient here to say, 
that this exposition of St. John’s words 
not only assumes that they must apply 
literally to the literal Jerusalem—an ap- 
plication of which no proof whatever is 
given; but also takes for granted that 
language, founded upon the language of 
earlier prophecy (e.g. Ezek. xl. 3, &c. ; 
Zech. ii. 2), and therefore manifestly 
figurative, is to be understood in its 
baldest and most unspiritual sense. 

ii. ‘The Seven Heads of the Seven- 
headed Beast, ch. xiii. 1 ; xvii. 3, indicate 
seven individual men, that is to say, 
seven Roman Emperors,—Babylon (ch. 
xvii. 5) being Rome.’ Now inch. xvii. ro 
we are told that five have fallen ; that the 
sixth is now reigning; that the seventh 
is not yet come. In verse 11, we further 
read that the Beast “¢hat was, and ts 
not, is himself also an eighth, and is of the 
seven.” This must be Nero, argues Reuss? 
(to quote a single writer on this side) :— 
it cannot be Augustus, or Tiberius, or 
Claudius, none of whom came to a 
violent end; nor can it have been Cali- 
gula, who did not stand in a hostile rela- 
tion to the Church; there remains only 
Nero, in whose death the people did not 
believe, and who was expected from the 
East, to regain his throne by the aid of 
the Parthians. We read in ch. xiii 3 
that the deadly wound—the “ death- 
stroke” of the Beast—was healed. And 
thus Nero, the 7/72 Emperor, and who 
is “of the seven,” returns to reign as the 
aighth, as Antichrist :? see the note on 
ch. xiii. 3. 

Not to urge as an objection to this 
line of argument, that it assumes the 
Apostle John to have shared in a popular 
delusion, and to have written under the 


1 History of Christian Theology in the Apost. 
Age, by E. Reuss (London, 1872), p. 380. 

” Bleek (Zin/eit., Clarke’s tr., vol. ii. p. 225), 
having accepted as true this fiction of Nero re- 
turning as Antichrist after the death of the Em- 
peror thenreigning, concludes: —The Apocalypse 
** thus seeks to determine the time and circum- 
stances of the Lord’s coming, and thus goes 
beyond the declarations of the Lord Himself. 
~ «+. . It can therefore in this respect.... 
have no normative authority for us.” 


435 


influence of ignorance and passion (so 
Renan, / ¢., p. 356) ;—nor to insist upon 
the fact that Victorinus, with whom this 
system of interpretation seems to have 
originated, begins to count from Nero’s 
successor, Galba (see No. (24) p. 423)3 
—nor yet to dwell upon the shrewd re- 
mark of Schleiermacher: “I see no 
certainty of interpretation here, Nero 
is at one time one ead, but afterwards 
the entire Beast” (Einleit. ins Neue 
Testament, s. 456) ;—not to urge such 
objections as these, the historical diffi- 
culties are not easy to be overcome, 
It is to be asked, in the first place, 
with which of the Czsars does the 
series begin? If, as many hold,—e. g. 
Wetstein, Stuart, Bertholdt, Kohler, Re- 
nan (44, p. 407),—with Julius Cesar 
(and no valid reason can be assigned why 
the series should not begin with Julius) 
then Nero is the sixth, not the f/t4 Em- 
peror, and the theory at once collapses,? 
But if—as the great majority of this 
school maintain—the series begins with 
Augustus, there is the greatest variety of 
opinion as to who is the seventh Emperor, 
and as to the Emperor under whom the 
Apocalypse was written. For we have 
(1) Augustus, (2) Tiberius, (3) Caligula, 
(4) Claudius, (5) Nero, (6) Galba, (7 

Otho, (8) Vitellius, (9) Vespasian, & 
Titus. According to Reuss (4. ¢.): “The 
sixth Emperor of Rome was Galba, an 
old man, seventy-three years of age at 
his accession. The final catastrophe 
which was to destroy the City and Em- 
pire was to take place in three years and 
a half [#.2, the 42 months, the 1260 days, 
the 33 Zimes]. For this one simple reason, 
the series of Emperors will include only 


1 See, for further proof, the notes on ch. xiii, 3; 
and the notes on ch. xvii. 10. For the argument 
founded on the supposed interpretation of the 
‘*number of the Beast” (ch. xiii. 18) as signie 
fying Nero, see the notes zz “oe. 

The rationalistic theory is not even origi 
This notion of Nero returning as Antichrist is 
mentioned very contemptuously by Ambrosius 
Autpertus, or Ansbertus (cre. A.D. 770) 3 
“Septem enim Bestiz capita septem Romanos 
reges intelligentes, et unum de ejusdem Bestie 
capitibus in mortem occisum Neronem astruentes, 
- - - » Quem profecto intellectum cuilibet sequi 
(ut minus sapiens) non facile dixerim, maxime 
cum et ab ipsis mediocribus quam sit absurdus, 
possit sciri.”"—Max. Bibl wm, t xiii pp 
592. 

EE? 


430 


one after the then reigning monarch, and 
he will reign but a little while. The 
writer [St. John] does not know him; 
but he knows the relative duration of his 
reign, because he knows [!] that Rome 
will in three years and a half perish 
finally, never to rise again”!:—on 
similar grounds, Ewald, De Wette, Gue- 
ricke, Volkmar, Krenkel, Aubé,” &c. &c., 
also fix upon Galba. On the other hand, 
Liicke, Bleek, Diisterdieck, &c. fix upon 
Vespasian : Galba, Otho, and Vitellius, 
they argue, are not to be reckoned at 
all,—their united reigns being regarded 
merely as an interregnum. This con- 
clusion they infer from a casual observa- 
tion of Suetonius ;3 and thus, combining 
ch. xvii. 10 and ch. xiii, 1-14, the 
Apocalypse, we are told, was written 
between the end of December 69 and 
the spring of A.D. 70, just before Jeru- 
salem was captured :—or, more closely 
still, if “the Lord’s Day” (ch. i. ro) 
means Easter Day, St. John beheld 
his Visions on the Christian Easter Day 
of the year 70 (see Diisterdieck,* 7i¢. 
Exeget. Handb, tib. die Offenb., s. 51). 


' The argument is, that when the Jews (and 
St. John was a Judaizing Christian) saw the 
ruin of their Holy City and Temple to be im- 
minent, they still felt persuaded that Jehovah 
would not forsake His people; while for the 
Christians the expectation was—“‘ the Lord is at 
hand.” The fiction of Nero’s return was now 
embraced ; and men, we are told, believed 
(and St. John among them) that Nero was to 
come back with a countless host, from Parthia, 
to execute vengeance on Rome. See Dio Chry- 
gost., xxi. p. 504, ed. Reiske; St. August., De 
Civ. Det, xx. 19, 33; Lactantius, De Mort. 
Persec. ii. 

27M. B. Aubé (fist. des Persécutions de 


VEglise, Paris, 1875), accepting these conclu- 
sions,—as the results ‘‘les plus solides de la 
critique de notre siécle appliquée aux écrits du 
Nouveau Testament,’—writes: ‘Ce sixiéme 
roi, ou plut6t ce sixiéme empereur, est Galba, 
ui régna, comme on sait, de juin 68 4 janvier 
e. C’est entre ces six mois que l’Afocalypse a 
été écrite ... . Galba a soixante douze ans A 
gon avénement; aprés lw viendra le septi¢me 
empereur ‘qui n’est pas encore venu’ et qui 
tombera bientét; car Néron reparaitra et res- 
gaisira le trone . ... . auteur de l’Afocalypse 
est ici l’écho de la tradition populaire.”—pp. 
117-120. 

5 “Rebellione trium principum et cede, in- 
certum diu et quasi vagum imperium suscepit 
firmavitque tandem gens Flavia.”— Vespasian, 
c I. 

* Diisterdieck arranges thus: —The Seven 


INTRODUCTION. 


Renan (p. 302-355) differs slightly as to 
the date :—Galba was proclaimed Em- 
peror on the evening of June 8, a.p. 68; 
and Nero killed himself on the 9th. On 
January 2, A.D. 69 the Legions pro- 
claimed Vitellius; on the roth Galba 
adopted Piso; on the 15th Otho was 
proclaimed, and on the evening of that 
day Galba was slain. In this state of 
confusion, the hopes of the false Nero of 
Cythnos (Tac. Ais¢. ii. 8, 9) were raised; 
and “it was then (at the close of January, 
69) that a symbolical manifesto ”—or, as 
Renan elsewhere (p. 434) calls it, a politi- 
cal “ pamphlet,” viz. the Apocalypse— 
“‘was circulated among the Christians of 
Asia.” It isdoubtful, Renan adds, whether 
St. John knew of Otho’s existence; but 
the Apostle has a full belief that the res. 
toration of Nero will immediately follow 
the downfall of Galba. 

It is worthy of notice that the results 
which have been just described are de 
duced solely from “internal” considera- 
tions,—Renan and his school discarding 
the mass of external evidence adduced 
above for the date under Domitian, al- 
though they accept the same evidence 
when it testifies that the author of the 
Apocalypse was St. John. If “internal” 
evidence, however, is to be appealed to 
here, there is no absence of such evi- 
dence on the other side, e.g. see on 
ch. ii. 4, and on ch. xi. 2; cf. also the 
arguments of Godet, quoted at p. 437: 
—and, as to this whole question, see the 
notes on ch. xvii. 

The preceding summary of the opi- 
nions of the modern rationalistic schoot 
as to the Apocalypse may close with the 
result given in the Protestanten-Bibel, 
NV. T. (Leipzig, 1873),—viz. that the 
date of the Book admits of being de- 
termined with a certainty rarely attain- 
able in the writings of antiquity :—“It 
was evidently composed between the 
day of Nero’s death, June 9, A.D. 68, 


Heads are Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, 
Claudius, Nero (these five have fallen, ch. xvii, 
10), Vespasian (the sixth, who is present). 
and Titus (‘*the other [who] is not yet come”). 
Rejecting the fable of the return of Nero, Diis- 
terd. makes the eighth to be Domitian, the second 
son of Vespasian,—understanding the words of 
ch. xvii. 11, é« Tay érrd éotw, to mean “ filius 
unius eorum” ;—cf. Matt. i. 3, 5,6; Lukei.27; 
Rom. ix. 10 :—/.¢, & 52. 


INTRODUCTION. 


and August ro, A.D., 70, on which day 
the Temple of Jerusalem, which John 
had hoped to see sparec, was reduced 
to ashes by the Romans. After that day, 
no one could hope (as the writer of Rev. 
xi. 1 did hope) that the Sanctuary would 
be preserved on the capture of the City.” 
—s. 997. (For the date a.D. 44-47, see 
the argument of Ziillig and Lakemachers 
quoted in the note on ch. xvii. Io). 
If the testimony of history, however, is 
to have any weight, hypotheses of this 
nature, proceeding from mere imagina- 
tion or from total scepticism, will not 
receive the assent of sober criticism. 

In support of the historical evidence, 
internal arguments are not wanting :— 

i. ‘The condition of the churches of 
Asia Minor.’ These churches had been 
founded by St. Paul between the years 
55 and 58. Consider the reproaches 
addressed to Ephesus, to Sardis, to Lao- 
dicea. A religious revival, especially 
when caused by the ministry of a Paul, 
and that, too, in the most flourishing 
cities of Asia Minor, does not pass away 
in ten years. Nay, St. Paul wrote to 
Ephesus and to Colossz in the year 63 ; 
in 63 or 64 St. Peter wrote to all the 
churches of that region (1 Pet. i, 1); 
and neither Apostle hints at any dead- 
ness in their religious life. Can we then 
ascribe to St. John, four or five years 
later,—i.e., in the year 68,—the language 
Oi-eh. ii. 5; i. 3,16? See Godet, 
Etudes Bibliques, 2™ série, p. 326; 
and the note on ch. ii. 4. 

ii ‘ The ecclesiastical organization 
which the Apocalypse takes for granted, 
is no less incompatible with a date so 
early as the year 68.’ Hitherto the 
titles ‘presbyter’ and ‘bishop’ are 
synonymous: compare Acts xx. 17 and 
28 ;—Tit. i. 5 and 7 ;—Acts xiv. 23 and 
Phil. i 1. “‘It is only toward the end 
of the Apostolic age that the presbyteral 
authority is concentrated in the person 
of a chief of the flock, who assumes 
specially the name of Bishop. The 
Epistle of Clemens Romanus, written 
probably under Domitian ; and the Epis- 
tles of Ignatius, which date from Trajan, 
are the first patristic inonuments of that 
form of ministry which we meet in the 
Apocalypse : ‘ Write to the Azge/ of the 


437 


Church of ....’ This personal term, 
Angel, as well as the responsibility which 
the reproaches and the praises of the 
Lord cause to press upon the functionary 
so designated, do not permit us to see 
in him a being collective, or abstract ; 
nor yet an Angel properly so called, the 
invisible patron of the flock. This can 
be only the Bishop, such as we meet him 
in all the churches of the end of the first 
century. The Apocalypse makes us con- 
template the transition from the primitive 
presbyterian constitution to the monarch- 
ical organization universally admitted in 
the second century. This detail, then, 
excludes as positively the epoch of the 
year 68, as it agrees naturally with the 
date indicated by Irenzus.” — Godet, 
VA iL ey fe 

iu. ‘An ecclesiastical usage is referred 
to in ch. 1. 3, “‘ Blessed is he that readeth, 
and they that hear,’ &c.’ These words 
imply a public, official reading in full 
religious assembly for worship; and not 
merely private or individual reading. 
The contrast between the singular and 
the plural indicates this; the present 
participle also (6 avaywdéoxwv) implies 
an habitual act repeated :—‘ Now the 
stated reading of the Apostolical writ- 
ings in public worship cannot have 
commenced in the year 68 .... 
This usage did not exist, as a received 
form, before the ruin of Jerusalem, a.p, 
70; and consequently the Apocalypse 
which here points to this custom cannot 
have been composed in the year 68.”— 
Godet, 4c, p. 328. On Rev. iL 3, Renan 
notes: “Il s’agit ici de la lecture dans 
Yéglise par 7Anagnoste.”—1. ¢., p. 360. 
The Church supplied, by the public 
reading of the writings of the Apostles, 
the want which the loss of their personal 
ministry left behind. 

iv. ‘The use of the expression, “the 
day of the Lord” (ch. i. 10), is unknown, 
before the destruction of Jerusalem, to 
the Apostolical writings.’ The usual 
phrase had been, “the first day of the 
week,”—e.g. Acts xx. 7; 1 Cor. xvi. 2. 
“ The Lord’s day” belongs to the later 
Apostolic age, when the Church had 
broken off all ties with the Synagogue. 
This fact proves that the date of the 
Apocalypse indicated by Ireneus, viz 


438 


urder Domitian, is that which alone 
suits such language.—Cf. 4. ¢., p. 329. 

v. We know from the Acts of the 
Apostles that the Judeo-Christian Church 
still participated, in the year 60, in the 
worship of the Temple. We are to bear 
in mind, too, the Epistle to the Hebrews 
written in the year 67 or 68 :—and yet, 
“Tn ch. ii. 9; iii. 9, Jews are spoken of 
as ‘the Synagogue of Satan.’.... A fact 
sO momentous as the destruction of 
Jerusalem and of the Jewish nation can 
alone explain the use of such an epithet 
applied to the ancient people of God.” — 
Crs. Gp. 250: 

vi. The banishment of the author of 
the Apocalypse agrees precisely with the 
kind of punishment inflicted under 
Domitian (see above, pp. 428, 431); 
while under Nero, at the supposed date 
of the Book, the punishment was death.— 
Cra, p.. 330: 


§ 5.—Doubts as to the Apostolic Author- 
ship. 


EXTERNAL EVIDENCE: — The testi- 
mony of ecclesiastical writers during 
the first four centuiies has established 
the fact that the Apocalypse was 
written by the Apostle St. John. We 
have next to consider the nature of the 
doubts which were entertained on the 
subject during that period, and which 
we have seen reflected in the uncertain 
utterances of Eusebius (No. (20), p. 420). 
All such doubts centre in the person of 
Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria, A.D. 
247. From the time of Papias, as has 
been already noticed—see No. (4), 
Chiliasm of a Jewish type had prevailed 
more or less definitely in the Church. 
It has also been pointed out that both 
Chiliasts and Anti-chiliasts accepted the 
Apostolic authority of the Apocalypse 
—see p. 411, note*% About the year 
254, a work entitled a “ Refutation of the 
Allegorists,” and written in defence of 
a literal Millennium, was published by 
Nepos of Arsinoe; and his opinions 
were warmly contested by Dionysius 
(Euseb., vii. 24). Dionysius, who was a 
pupil of Origen, regarded this work 
as tending to degrade the Christian’s 
hope in ‘‘the glorious and divine ap- 
pearance of our Lord ;’—as persuading 


INTRODUCTION. 


the simple brethren “to look for mean 
and perishable things, and such as re- 
semble those that now exist in_the 
kingdom of God.”! The lengths to 
which the Allegorists of the time pressed 
their arbitrary interpretation of Scrip- 
ture, and the dissatisfaction felt at their 
system of spiritualizing its language 
led men into the opposite extreme, 
and favoured the gross literalism which 
looked forward to a sensual Millennium. 
Dionysius, who was an Allegorist, natu- 
rally opposed the opinions of the Chi- 
liasts ; and he unhappily adopted, as the 
means of refuting their error, the method 
of doubting whether the Book, on which 
they rested their cause, had an Apostle 
for its author. The arguments which 
were urged in proof of this conclusion 
were purely internal and subjective ; and 
there is no proof whatever that any 
historical evidence was brought forward 
in support of them :—‘ The doctrine 
taught in the Apocalypse,’ it was said, 
‘is false; and consequently the Book 
cannot be Apostolic.’ 

Dionysius, indeed, implies that he was 
not the first to urge similar doubts: 
“Some,” he writes (af. Euseb., vii. 25) ‘ ot 
those who were before us rejected and 
altogether discarded the Book” (Twés péev 
ovy TV TPO Hav 7AOeTHOaV Kal averxevacav 
mdvrn To BiBdiov). ‘These persons,’ he 
proceeds, ‘asserted that the inscription of 
the Apocalypse which ascribes the Book 
to St. John, is false,—the author being 
Cerinthus, who, in order to defend his 
carnal doctrine as to the Millennium, 
sought to support himself by a name 
worthy of credit.’ Here Dionysius, ap- 
parently, refers to the Alogi—a sect 
which came into existence at the close 
of Cent. ii:— who were strenuous 
opponents both of Montanism, and ot 
Chiliasm. From this point of view they 
rejected all St. John’s writings—not the 
Apocalypse only—on account of his 





' St. Jerome (Proem. in Isai., lib. xviii. t. iv. 
p- 767) observes that, if we understand the Apo- 
calypse of St. John, ‘‘according to the letter, 
we must Judaize ; if spiritually, we shall appear 
to gainsay the sentiments of the Latins, Tertul- 
lian, Victorinus, Lactantius ; and of the Greeks, 
Irenzeus, against whom Dionysius, bishop of 
Alexandria, wrote . . . . ridiculing the fable of 
the Thousand Years, and of a terrestrial Jeru- 
salem made of gold and gems,” &c. 


INTRODUCTION. 


teaching as to the Comforter, and as to 
the Millennial kingdom ; just as the 
Marcionites rejected other parts of Scrip- 
ture. Their opinions are described by 
Epiphanius (er. li. 32, p. 454 ff.) — 
‘How,’ argued the Alogi, ‘can the Apoca- 
lypse profit us, with its tale of the Seven 
Angels and Seven Trumpets?’ Nay, 
they added, the Book is self-contradic- 
tory ; for the Seer is ordered to write to 
the church of Thyatira, where no Chris- 
tian church exists (ras ody eypade TH pn 
ovon,—7b., p. 455). Thus the objections 
of the Alogi were founded, partly on “ in- 
ternal” grounds; partly on the assertion 
that the Church had disappeared, in the 
second century, from Thyatira—a con- 
jecture not difficult to understand from 
the description of that church in Rev. 
ii, 18-25. As to such objections, De 
Wette (Zinl, ii. s. 356) and Liicke 
(s. 578) agree that they had neither 
critical, nor (in St. John’s day) historical 
grounds to rest upon. The Alogi, how- 
ever, further asserted, as Dionysius tells 
us, that Cerinthus was the author of the 
Apocalypse :—of this Book, they alleged 
that neither an Apostle nor a Saint was 
the author; but that the heresiarch Cerin- 
thus desired to prefix a name deserving 
of credit to a fiction of his own (KypuOov 
Se rov Kal THY am ékeivov KAnMeicav Kypw- 
Oavynv ovornodpevov alpecw, a&idmrurrov 
exipnica GeAjoavra TO éavTod TAaTpaTL 
dvoua.—ap. Euseb., 2d.). Our modern 
Critics have introduced another wit- 
ness in support of this opinion :— 
Cerinthus forms the point of transi- 
tion from the Judaizing sects to Gnosti- 
cism ; and Irenzus (fer, iii. 3-11) had 
heard from Polycarp of his controversies 
with St. John. At the close of Cent. ii. 
(A.D. 196-219), Caius, a Roman pres- 
byter,\—apparently a friend and com- 
panion of Irenzeus (see p. 411, note !),— 
writing against the Montanist Proclus 
(Euseb. iii. 28; cf. Tertullian, adv. Valen- 


1 Bishop Lightfoot questions the actual ex- 
istence of the Roman presbyter Caius; and 
supposes that the Dialogue between Caius and 
Proclus (Eus., iii. 31) was written by St. Hippo- 
lytus. At all events, he observes, the author 
was a Roman ecclesiastic, who wrote probably 
& quarter of a century after Polycrates—Comm. 
(" cages p- 46; see Te Furnal of Philology, 

Pp 


439 


tin., c. 5) speaks thus of Cerinthus :!— 
“Moreover Cerinthus also [who] through 
revelations, written as if by a great 
Apostle, speaking falsely further brings 
in for us tales of marvel shown to him 
as if by Angels,—affirming that after the 
Resurrection comes an earthly kingdom 
of Christ, and that men dwelling in 
Jerusalem are again to be the slaves of 
lusts and pleasures” (Routh, Z «, ii. p. 
128),—and so on as to the carnal delights 
of the Millennium. These words have 
been taken, without any sufficient reason, 
to mean that Caius ascribed the Apoca- 
lypse to Cerinthus. Why, asks Hug 
(Zindeit., 4te Aufl, ii. s. 511), may not 
these ‘revelations as if from a great 
Apostle,’ be regarded as statements 
forged by Cerinthus in the name of others 
besides St. John,—such as ‘the Apoca- 
lypse of Peter,’ or ‘the Apocalypse of 
Paul’? St. John’sname is not mentioned ; 
nor do we here read, as is usual in such 
references, of “ the Apocalypse” abso- 
lutely, but, in the plural, of ‘apoca- 
lypses.’” Dean Alford, indeed, would 
set aside Hug’s interpretation that some 
other book is meant, and not “the 
Apocalypse of John”: because “no such 
book is to be traced, though we have 
very full accounts of Cerinthus from 
Ireneeus (Her. i. 26) and Epiphanius 
(Her. xxviil.),’—Prolege., p. 210; but, 
whether Cerinthus did or did not write 
such a book, is not the plain meaning 
of Caius that which is more clearly 
expressed by Theodoret* (who tells us 
that Caius wrote against Cerinthus), 


1 GAAG Kal KfpivOos | 6) 80 amoxardvpewy as tmd 
GmootéAov peydaAou yeypaumevwy Teparodoytas 
jpiv as 80 ayyéAov avT@ Sederypevas Wevdd= 
poevos metoaryel, A€yov peTa THY dvdoTaoW 
emlyeiov elvat Td BaciAeoy Tod XpicTod, kK. T. A. 

2 G. Paulus, quoted by Hug, suggests that 
Cerinthus sought, by his reference to the Millen- 
nium (Rev. xx.), to recommend his own false 
opinions under the shelter of a carnal exposition 
of the words of St. John,—‘‘suumque plasma 
ea Canonice Apocalypseos similitudine adfecta 
exornasse.”—-Histor. Cerinth., § 30. 

3 (31) obros [viz. Cerinthus] émoxart pes tides 
@s avtbs tebeapévos emrAdoaro, Kal dcaeiAav 
Tivev didackaAlas ouvébnke, Kal Tod Kuplou rhp 
Baotrclay Epnoev enlyerov Ececbar> kal Bpaow 
kal réaw wverpordarnge, kal diAndovias épavrdoOn, 
kal ydpous, Kal Ovolas, rad Eoptds, ev ‘lepovoaAym 
TeAoupevas, Kal Tatra em) yxiAlots reo TEeAETe 
OjcecOa.— De Her. Fabulis, ii. 3, ed. 1642, 
t. iv. p. 219. 


440 


namely, that Cerinthus claimed himself 
to have seen certain revelations disclo- 
sing the coming of a grossly carnal 
Millennium ?—Cf. also Philastrius of 
Brescia (f 387), Her. 60. 

And thus the supposed evidence of 
Caius against the Apocalypse disappears, 
—although some, e.g. Dean Alford, still 
regard it as weighty ; and the opinion 
that the Apocalypse was ever ascribed to 
Cerinthus, rests upon the unsupported 
testimony of the Alogi. This conclusion 
is accepted, among English scholars, by 
Dr. Routh (ii. 138), and by Professor 
Westcott, who notes: “I may express my 
decided belief that Caius is not speaking 
of the Apocalypse of St. John, but of 
books written by Cerinthus in imitation 
of it. The theology of the Apocalypse 
is wholly inconsistent with what we 
know of Cerinthus’s views on the Person 
of Christ.” —J.c., p. 254. 

The evidence of Dionysius himself (af. 
Eus., vii. 25) is now to be considered. 
His reasoning rests altogether on “ in- 
ternal” grounds. From this fact we 
may conclude that no “ external” or his- 
torical proof could be urged, in the middle 
of Cent. iii, against the Apocalypse ; 
otherwise, Dionysius, who was at the 
pains of quoting the Alogi, would cer- 
tainly not have failed to avail himself of it. 
Having referred to the previous doubts 
of the Alogi, Dionysius proceeds to say 

that for himself he could not venture to 
reject the Book ; for, though he does not 
understand it, he suspects that some 
very profound meaning lies beneath its 
words (kai yap «i py ouvinus, add’ irovod 
ye votv twa Babvrepov eyxetobar Trois 
pyyactv): and then, going on to ex- 
amine what that meaning may be, he 
concludes that itis not to be understood 
literally (advvarov S& atryv Kata TH 
mpoxeipov amrodeigas voeioOar Sidvovav,—is 
the account of Eusebius, 7ézd.). Dionysius 
had also found that the objections urged 
against the Apocalypse by the opponents 
of Chiliasm were insufficient :—The Book 
itself declares that its author was named 
Tohn; and he allows that it is the work 
of a man “ holy and inspired” (ayiov pév 
yap twos Kai Georvevotov ovvava) : but, 
nevertheless, he cannot admit “ that this 
John was the Apostle, the son of Zebedee, 
the brother of James, who wrote the Gos- 


INTRODUCTION. 


pel and the Catholic Epistle.” He can- 
not, indeed, tell who was the “John” that 
wrote the Book, for there were many of 
the same name as the Apostle (wohAovs de 
opovipous “Iwdvvy To aroctoAw vopile 
yeyovéva), who were called after him in 
token of respect, as the faithful are wont 
to call their children Peter and Paul. 
It was not John Mark who is spoken of 
in the Acts, for he did not accompany 
St. Paul to Asia (Acts xv. 39) :—* but I 
think it was some other John of those 
who were in Asia, since men say (¢aziv) 
that there were two graves at Ephesus, 
and that each was the grave of John.” 
(This mention of “the two graves” is the 
single fact which Dionysius can bring 
forward, in proof of the existence of the 
second “ John”—see No. (20), p. 420). 
And yet, notwithstanding this Hite 
his epistle to Hermammon (ag. Euseb., 
vii. 10) he quotes—just as Eusebius (see 
Pp. 420) subsequently quotes—the Apoca- 
lypse as prophetical and inspired. This 
epistle to Hermammon, was written, 
A.D. 262, under the 1esgn of Gallienus, 
after the close of the three and a half 
years’ persecution by Valerian which 
began A.D. 257, and not long before the 
death of Dionysius: “ And to John,” he 
there writes, ‘is it in like manner re- 
vealed, ‘And there was given unto him 
(saith he) a mouth speaking great things 
and blasphemy; and there was given 
to him authority, and forty and two 
months ;’ [Rev. xiii. 5]. (kai 7a ‘Twdvyg 
6poiws ree kal €500n yap air, 
dyoi, oTopa.... kal... esovgia Kat 
pijves TETTApaKovTa dvo).” Both predic- 
tions, adds Dionysius, have been won- 
derfully fulfilled in Valerian. 

That the Apocalypse was not written 
by the author of the Fourth Gospel, 
Dionysius seeks to prove by the follow- 
ing arguments :— 

i.) ‘The writer of the Apocalypse 
names himself (ch. i. 1, 4, 9; xxii. 8); 
the Evangelist never does so.’ The ob- 
vious reply is, that St. John is here writ- 
ing in the Prophetic style ; and in it 
anonymous prophecy is inadmissible :— 
cf Dan. vil. 15 5 vill. 1, 15; ix. 25 aeens 
and the other prophets fassim. 

(ii.) ‘The Apocalypse differs from 
St. John’s other writings in style, in the 
character of its Greek, and by its 


INTRODUCTION 


parbaric idioms and solecisms’ (see 


below, pp. 454-61). 

{iii.) ‘ The Apocalypse further differs 
in its tone of thought, and by the ab- 
sence of the characteristic terms fre- 
quent in the Fourth Gospel and the 
Catholic Epistle’ :—whoever examines 
the matter, adds Dionysius, will find, in 
both, the same words and phrases recur- 
ring—“ life,” “light,” “ truth,” “ grace,” 
“joy,” “love,” and so forth; while the 
Apocalypse is quite distinct, and, when 
compared with these two, of an entirely 
foreign character (see below, p. 451).? 

The objections (1i.) and (iii.), which form 
the staple of modern criticism also, are 
neither stronger nor weaker in the mouth 
of Dionysius than when employed by 
writers in this nineteenth century :—as 
such they will be considered below. 
Meanwhile it is to be borne in mind 
that, so far as historical evidence goes, 
there is absolutely no proof whatever 
in favour of any other author than St. 
John. Dionysius does not deny that 
the author of the Apocalypse beheld the 
Visions which he describes; or that he 
was endowed with the Divine gift of 
prophecy. He was embarrassed by the 
arguments which the Chiliasts founded 
upon the Book; and he knew that certain 
objections had been raised as to its 
authenticity; but he deliberately re- 
jected those doubts, and accepted the 
Book as inspired Scripture. Although 
he could not account for the style 
of the Apocalypse, he was unable to 
ascribe it—as he desired to ascribe it— 
to any other than the Apostle among the 
many persons who bore the name of 
“John.” And thus, this earliest effort to 
apply subjective criticism to the Books 
of the New Testament, utterly failed to 
establish itself in opposition to adequate 
historical proof. The positive testimony 
of Clemens Al. and of Origen (see above 
Pp. 415), predecessors of Dionysius in the 


1 ciphoe: thy (why... 7d vee . Thy &AfPeav 
oe. THD xapy, Thy xapiv, ahy dydany se 
*AdAAouTarn dt Kal gévn mapa tTavTa 7 amoKde 
Audis. . . “Ett 58 kal rhs ppdcews thy diapopdy 
tor: rexuhpac Bat Tow evayyeAiov Kal THs émio= 
TOATs pbs Thy aroxdAvy. Dionysius had just 
before ‘‘ conjectured ” as to the writer,—rexyal 
powat yap ke Te Tov HOovs Exatépwy . . kal THs 
rot BiBAlov dietaywyis Acyoudvns, wh Tv abtoy 
eva,—ap. Euseb., A. EL. vii. 25. 


A4t 


school of Alexandria, may fairly be ad- 
duced as conclusive against the subjec- 
tive theory of that writer. 

Eusebius, indeed, has attempted, as 
we have already seen (p. 420), to found 
an argument on the “conjectures” of 
Dionysius. Adopting the singular 
reasoning which finds proof of the non- 
apostolic authorship of the Apocalypse in 
the mention of the two graves at Ephesus! 
(No. (20), p. 420), Eusebius proposes 
to disinter from the words of Papias, 
No. (5), the mysterious form of “the 
Presbyter John,’—of whose existence 
Dionysius seems to have had no know- 
ledge at all,—and suggests that this was 
the unknown “John” whom Dionysius 
had failed to discover. No writer between 
Papias and Eusebius has mentioned the 
name of this enigmatical personage, who 
has furnished the theme of such pro- 
tracted controversy in modern times. 
It has been argued with much force, by 
Hengstenberg and others,” that no such 
person existed; and that “John the 
Presbyter” is no other than the Apostle 
himself, who styles himself “Elder” in the 
superscriptions to his second and third 
Epistles. Still, when one examines the 
words of Papias, No. (5); and notices 
there the occurrence of the name 
“John” twice,—once, in conjunction 
with other Apostles, and once, in con- 
junction with Aristion (all, however, 
being apparently styled “disciples of 


1 St. Jerome writes: ‘‘ Nonnulli putant duas 
memorias ejusdem Apostoli Joannis esse.”—De 
Vir. Ill. c. 9. 

2 KE. g. Zahn, ‘‘Papias von Hierapolis,” 
Studien u. Kritiken, 1866, s. 649; Lange; 
Guericke; Riggenbach; &c. Renan (Vie de Fésus, 
13™° éd., p. lxxiii.) also writes: ‘‘ L’existence 
de ce Presbyteros Fohannes n'est pas sufisamment 
établie. Elle semble avoir éte imaginée pour 
la commodité de ceux qui, par des scrupules 
d’orthodoxie, ne voulaient pas attribuer A 
calypse & lApétre. L’argument qu’ "Eustbe 
tire en faveur de cette hypothése d’un passage 
de Papias n’est pas décisif. Les mots 4 tl 
"Iwdvyns dans ce passage ont pu étre inter- 
poles (?), Dans ce cas, les mots mproBirepes 
‘Iwdvyns, sous la plume de Papias, désigneraient 
DP Apétre Jean lui-méme (Papias applique ex- 
pressément le mot mpeoBirepos aux Apétres ; 
cf. 1 Pet. v. 1); et Irénée aurait raison contre 
Eusébe en appelant Papias un disciple de Jean. 
Ce qui confirme cette supposition c’est gue 
Papias donne Presbyteros Johannes pour un 
disciple immédiat de Jésus.” 


442 


the Lord’» and further, when one 
Notices the lifferent tenses used,— 
“what Andrew or Peter, &c., said” 
(<ivev) ; “what Aristion and the Pres- 
byter John say” (Aéyovow),?— it is 
hard to avoid the conclusion adopted 
by Eusebius, that Papias had in mind 
two persons named “John,” one the 
Apostle, the other “the Presbyter.” To 
infer, however, from the mere fact of the 
existence of such a person that he was 
the author of the Apocalypse, is perhaps 
the most daring venture which subjec- 
tive criticism has ever assayed. We have 
seen—indeed Dionysius (see p. 440) has 
noticed the fact—how common was the 
name “John” (see p. 406, note'): and 
this of itself affords a strong presumption 
that the writer who speaks with such 
authority to the churches of Asia (Rev. 
ii. 7, &c.) ;—-whose name was sufficient 
to show who was that “‘ James the brother 
of John,” whom Herod “killed with the 
sword” (Acts xii. 2) ;—who was content 
to announce himself simply as “ I John” 
(Rev. i. 9) ;—was one so well known 
and pre-eminent in the Church as 
to need no distinguishing title: in a 
word, one who could be no other than 
the Apostle. Only arrogance, indeed, ora 
deliberate intention to deceive, can 
account for the assumption of this 
simple title by a different writer. Were 
_a forger to have desired to appropriate 
the name of one of the original Twelve, 
is it likely that, when assuming a name 
so common, he should have given no 
clearer intimation of the person for 
whom he wished to be taken, than the un- 
ambitious address, “ John to the Seven 
Churches” (Rev. i. 4)? If the author 


1 The same may be said of the word ‘‘ elders,” 
On the word ‘‘elder” in the passage No. (5) 
(Eus., 7. £. iii. 39), Bishop Lightfoot observes : 
** What class of persons he (Papias) intends to 
include under the designation of ‘elders’ he 
makes clear by the names which follow. The 
category would inciude not only Apostles like 
Andrew and Peter, but also other personal 
disciples of Christ, such as Aristion and the 
second John. In other words, the term with 
him is a synonym for the Fathers of the Church 
in the first generation.” — Contemp. Review, 
August, 1875, p. 379. 

3 Bishop Lightfoot (4 ¢, p. 583), however, 
thinks that, here, ‘‘ the tense should probably be 
tegarded as a historic present introduced for 
the sake of variety.” 


INTRODUCTION. 


was not a forger,—and neither Diony- 
sius nor Eusebius imply that he sought 
to deceive,—must he not have given 
some note of identification such as St. 
Luke has given (Acts i. 1), or as St 
Jude has prefixed to his Epistle? ‘The 
Presbyter John,” on the other hand, 
seems to have been a person so obscure 
that no early writer, except Papias,— 
neither Polycarp the contemporary of 
St. John (see p. 409), nor yet Polycrates 
of Ephesus (see p. 413) when enume- 
rating those who were eminent (neydAa 
arotxeta) in Asia,—has referred even by 
a distant allusion to his existence. The 
conclusion, therefore, seems to be esta- 
blished, that the “ Presbyter John ”— 
admitting that he ever existed—was a 
person too insignificant to leave any 
trace behind him ;? and that to ascribe 
to him the authorship of the Apocalypse, 
is the most arbitrary and the most im- 
probable of hypotheses. Liicke (s. 657) 
thus sums up the verdict of antiquity: 
“The oldest and the universal tradition 
of the Church—if you will, the orthodox ° 
opinion—is that the Apocalypse is a 
work of the Apostle John, the undoubted 
author of the Fourth Gospel and of the 
three Catholic Epistles which stand in 
the Canon under his name.” 


§ 6.—The present stage of subjective 
Criticism. 

The subjective doubts suggested by 
Dionysius of Alexandria, and developed 
by Eusebius, have fructified; and every 
possible combination of the different 
aspects of the problem has found its 
advocates in modern times. The ques- 
tion as to the relation of the Apostle 
John to the two principal works which 
bear his name, admits of four answers :— 


1 The ‘‘ Apostolical Constitutions” (vii. 46), 
indeed, mention, in connexion with the Aristion 
(Ariston) of Papias, a John bishop of Ephesus, 
successor of Timothy and of the Apostles, and 
chiefly of the Apostle John who installed him 
in his office—rifs 5€ "Edeoov Tiudbeos ev ind 
TlavaAov, Iwdvyns d¢ bd euod "Ilwayyov—on which 
Le Clerc notes: ‘‘Est quidem Johannes hic 
meA conjectura Johannes ille Presbyter apud 
Eusebium, atque ex eo apud Hieronymum.”— 
ap. Coteler., t. i. p. 387, ed. 1724. The mention 
of Aristion (éi/.) as Bishop of Smyrna adds some 
weight to this interpretation of the statement of 
the Apostolical] Constitutions. 


INTRODUCTION. 


The Apostle John has written 

I. The Apocalypse as well the Gospel; 

II. Certainly the Gospel, but not the 
Apocalypse ; 

III. Certainly the Apocalypse, but 
not the Gospel ; 

IV. Neither the Gospel, nor the Apo- 
calypse. 

After the settlement of the Canon of 
the New Testament (always excepting 
the doubts, already considered, which 
were founded upon the misuse of the 
Apocalypse by the Millennarians) this 
question was not reopened until the age 
of the Reformation.! The verdict of 
antiquity, as represented in the answer 
No. I., was universally accepted. In 
the sixteenth century, however, Erasmus 
(followed by Carolostadt), having re- 
produced the doubts suggested formerly 
by Dionysius, and at this period by 
Luther and Zwingli, declared himself in 
favour of the answer No. IJ. During 
the rest of Cent. xvi, and during 
Cent. xvil., criticism was silent; but at 
the beginning of Cent. xviii, doubts 
once more arose,—called forth, perhaps, 
by the numerous expositions of the Apo- 
calypse which had appeared in Cent. 
xvil. The first attempt in England, writes 
Liicke (s. 496), at a ‘‘ more fundamental 
critical inquiry” as to the Apocalypse, 
was that of “the unknown author” of 
‘The New Testament in Greek and 
English, form’d agreeably to the illus- 
trations of the most learned commen- 
tators,—London, 1729.) The more 


1 Thus, Nicephorus Callistus (Cent. xiv.) 
accepts as an almitted fact that St. John, when 
in exile in Patmos under Domitian, wrote his 
Gospel and his fepby kal &vOeoy amoxadvbw 
(ii. 42). In his enumeration (ii. 46) of the Books 
of the Canon he observes that some persons 
imagined (tives epavtac@noay) that the Apoca- 
lypse was written by the Presbyter John :—here 
he is clearly referring to Eusebius (see above 
P- 441). See Alford, Prolegy., p. 220. 

2 The author of this Arian Version of the 
New Testament, now known to be W. Mace 
(see Cotton’s ‘Editions of the Bible,’ p. 87), 
relies upon the precedent of Dionysius Alex. ; 
and asserts as to the Fathers who bear testi- 
mony to the Apostolic authorship of the Apoca- 
lypse, that ‘‘ Justin Martyr was remarkable for 
his illiterateness; Irenzeus for his credulity ; 
and Tertullian for his atheistical philosophy. 
The credibility, therefore, of a*fact founded 
®@pon such evidence is less than nothing.”— 
Pp» 1022, 


443 


important treatise of F. Abauzit, ‘A 
Discourse historical and critical on the 
Revelation ascribed to St. John,—Lon- 
don, 1730, first appeared anonymously 
in its English translation; and called 
forth from Dr. Leonard Twells the third 
part of his ‘Critical examination of the 
late new text and version of the New 
Testament’ (¢.¢, the version of W. 
Mace). This treatise of Twells Liicke 
(s. 498) describes as “ unquestionably 
the first comprehensive and fundamental 
attempt to defend the Johannean au- 
thenticity of the Apocalypse, as well on 
internal as external grounds ;” and by 
it an end was put to the controversy in 
England. Semler and Oeder took up 
the question in Germany about the year 
1769, and alleged that the Book was a 
forgery by Cerinthus who ascribed it to 
St. John. This revival of the opinions of 
the Alogi has received no countenance 
from subsequent critics, however ex- 
treme their scepticism; although the 
theories that the author was “ John’ 
whose surname was Mark”! (Acts xii, 
12); or ‘‘the Presbyter John ;” or a 
fictitious “‘ Johannes Theologus” of later 
date than the Apostle (Ballenstedt, P/ilo 
u. Johannes, Gottingen, 1812); or “a 
rabbinically learned Christian of Lao- 
dicea” (Liitzelberger) ; or, generally, an 
unknown writer named ‘“ John,”’—were 
variously maintained. This last theory 
is supported by Ewald, Credner, De 
Wette, Neander, Liicke, Diisterdieck, 
and others: its stronghold is the alleged 
discrepancy in style between the Gospel 
and the Apocalypse, together with other 
“ternal” grounds (see below, § 7)5 
and its motive is an anxiety to uphold 
the authenticity of the Fourth Gospel. 
The next stage of criticism, repre- 
sented by the answer No. III, is that 
of Baur and the school of Tiibingen. 
For the first time, in the year 1820, K, 
G. Bretschneider* suggested doubts as 


1 So Beza in his annotated New Testament: 
—‘‘ Quod si quid aliud liceret ex stylo conjicere, 
nemini certe potius quam Marco tribuerim, qui 
et ipse Joannes dictus est.”—Prolegg. in Apot., 
ed. Cantab. 1642, p. 744. In modern times Hitzig 
also (Ueber Foh. Markus u. seine Schriften, 
1843) has revived the hypothesis rejected by 
Dionysius Alexandrinus. 

2 Probabilia de Evang lit et Epp Frannis 
Apostol indole et origine. . 


444 


to the authorship of the Fourth Gospel, 
and prepared the way for the theory of 
Baur and Zeller (p. 406, note*). The 
difference of style, so much insisted upon, 
gave rise to the dilemma,—“ Either the 
Fourth Gospel is the authentic work of St. 
John, and, consequently, the Apocalypse 
is not an authentic work of the same 
author; or the converse is true, and the 
Apocalypse was written by the Apostle, 
and the Gospel was not.” Heretofore, the 
former member of the dilemma had been 
usually adopted by critics, following Dio- 
nysius Alex. ; but the school of Tiibin- 
gen—in its turn taking up the dilemma— 
has adopted the latter member. Writers 
of this school insist upon the early and 
definite decision of ecclesiastical tradi- 
tion in favour of the authorship of the 
Apocalypse by the Apostle John, and of 
his residence in Asia Minor; they usually 
dwell on the testimony of Justin M. 
who, as they argue, was unacquainted 
with St. John’s Gospel; and they also 
‘rely upon the genuinely Apostolical (that 
is to say, ‘‘ genuinely Jewish”) type of 
thought presented by the Apocalypse. 
Hence they conclude that this Book 
alone is the work of the Apostle John; 
and they consequently assert, on ac- 
count of the alleged difference of style, 
that the Fourth Gospel and the three 
Epistles did not proceed from him. 
. A distinct theory has been proposed 
by Volkmar,! in holding which he seems 
to stand alone ; viz., that the Apoca- 
lypse is a forgery by a Christian versed 
in the Scriptures, devised during the 
lifetime, and in the name of St. John,— 
“under nis shield,” as Volkmar ex- 
presses it (‘‘ unter dem Schilde des letz- 
ten Hauptes der 12 Apostel,” s. 42),— 
and with the design of carrying out that 
hostility to Pauline doctrine (see Note A 
on ch. ili. 19) which it is a favourite 
assumption of modern rationalists to 
ascribe to the Apostle John. This 
theory is a sort of compromise be- 
tween the attempt to deny that the 
Christology of the Apocalypse pro- 
ceeded from one of the original Twelve 
Apostles, and the wish, at the same 
time, to maintain that an original 


1 Commentar sur Offenbarung Foannes, von 
Dr. Gustav Volkmar, ich, 1 


INTRODUCTION. 


Apostle was opposed to the teachirg 
of St. Paul.? 

The unsatisfactory results of cither 
member of the dilemma presented by the 
answers No. II. and No. III., has led to 
a partial return to the answer No. L.,— 
although by no means in the sense in 
which any system of orthodox theology 
accepts it. Hase in his Leben Jesu (4te 
Ausg., s. 5), and Réville, in two articles 
in the Revue de Théologie (vol. ix. p. 
329; vol. x. p. 1), entitled Jean le pro- 
phete et Jean lévangéliste, admit, on the 
one hand, the authenticity of the Apoca- 
lypse; and, on the other, the authen- 
ticity of the Fourth Gospel and the 
Epistles: but they assert that an essen- 
tial divergence distinguishes these wri- 
tings,—a divergence which they account 
for by the hypothesis that, in the in- 
terval between the composition of the 
Apocalypse and of the Fourth Gospel, a 
profound transformation took place in 
the faith of the Apostle John :—* When 
the Apocalypse was written, Jerusalem,” 
argues Hase, “was still standing; and 
thus the passage from this Book to the 
Gospel must have been a transition 
from a lower to a higher point of view: 
—a progress in religious conception, 
and also a progress in style, manifested 
when the Apostle John found himself at 
Ephesus, where Paul had laboured be- 
fore him.” When assailed on account 
of this theory by the chief of the School 
of Tiibingen, Hase answered by con- 
tending that the transformation in St. 
John’s opinions was caused by his 
sense of the Divine judgment which fell 
on the Jewish Sanctuary, and also by 
the normal development of the Christian 
mind :—“ The Gospel,” he writes, “is 
the Apocalypse spiritualized.”—Dée Tid, 
Schule, s. 26-30. The same theory has 
been proposed in Holland, by Profes- 
sors Scholten and Niermeyer. It is 
evident, however, that whatever can be 
urged in answer to the imaginary con- 
tradiction between St. John and St 
Paul (see below, and on ch. ii. 2) will 
equally hold good in answer to this 


' “Der Verfasser, gleichvie! welcher Johannes, 
gehort zu dem Kreis der altesten Christenheit, 
welche den Paulinismus, der das Gesetz aufhebt, 
als einen Verrath am alten Bund betrachtet.”— 
Volkmar, /<., s. 25. 


INTRODUCTION. 


amaginary contradiction between St. 
John and himself. 

Yet again, the controversy has veered 
to a different point :—we are now asked 
to adopt the answer No. IV.; and, in 
order to see that St. John wrote neither 
the Fourth Gospel nor the Apocalypse, 
to disbelieve the fact of the Apostle’s 
residence at Ephesus; nay, of his having 
ever been in Asia Minor, a fact which 
Strauss (Leben Jesu, P. ii, v. § 74) fully 
admitted. The ministry of the Apostle 
John in Asia Minor was first called in 
question by Vogel in 1800, and in 
1826 by Reuterdahl who suggested that 
the accounts of St. John’s residence at 
Ephesus and exile to Patmos, were de- 
rived from Rev. i. 9, and from it alone. 
The question was taken up by Liitzel- 
berger in 1840, who contended that St. 
John died before the Epistle to the Gala- 
tians was written in Palestine; and, ac- 
cordingly, that he had never been at 
Ephesus. The hypothesis of Liitzel- 
berger has been revived and defended by 
the late Dr. Theodor Keim.! Keim, 
as we have already seen (p. 406, note 3), 
admits that “from Justin M. to Irenzeus 
and the great Fathers, the Revelation of 
John was recognized as the work of the 
Apostle ;” and he also allows that the 
Book “clearly enough refers its own 
composition to Asia Minor and Ephesus” 
(B. i. s, 164) :—but he nevertheless at- 
tempts to prove that, “ according to all 
historical evidence, the residence of the 
Apostle John in Asia Minor is set aside ; 
and this in such a manner as to deter- 
mine the question not only concerning 
the Gospel, but also concerning the Reve- 
lation; . . . . and thus the last support 
left to the composition of the Gospel by 
the son of Zebedee is removed” (/ «., 
s. 156). An earlier writer, Bleek (Z. <., ii. 
Pp. 232), while maintaining that the Apo- 
calypse was the work of “ John the Pres- 
byter,” had admitted that such a theory is 
not without its difficulties, if the Apostle 
John was then living in Asia Minor and 
in the region where the Book appeared. 
In. order, therefore, not to contradict 
the historical evidence which so clearly 
proves that St. John was a resident in 


* **Geschichte Jesu von Nazara,” Ziirich, B. 
i. 1867 ; B. ii. 1871 ; B. iii. 1872. 


445 


Ephesus, Bleek had conjectured that he 
did not come there until after the Apoca- 
lypse was written. This conjecture seems 
to have suggestel] his system to Keim 
(B. 1. s. 156 ff.), who seeks to prove, 
(1) that all the Apostles died long before 
the end of Cent. i.; (2), that St. John 
never resided and laboured in Asia 
Minor; (3), that the account, usually 
accepted, of his residence at Ephesus is 
not more ancient than Irenzus; and 
that Irenzeus, through a mistake, changed 
“the Presbyter John” of Papias, No. (5), 
into the Apostle John,—erroneously con- 
necting with the latter what he had 
heard in Asia Minor, when a boy. 

(1) As to the early removal by death of 
the Apostles, Keim rehes on Rev. xviii. 
20; xxl.14. These texts give no support 
to his conclusion: for ch. xviii. 20 can 
only refer generally tothe persecution 
of the Church—ver. 24 speaking merely 
“of the blood of prophets and of 
saints,” without any article to restrict 
the meaning, and without any mention of 
Apostles; while in ch. xxi. 14, the Twelve 
Names on the Twelve Foundations sym- 
bolize those who had founded the king- 
dom of God, without any allusion to 
their death or their survival. That 
some, at least, of the Apostles did sur- 
vive the destruction of Jerusalem, may 
surely be gathered from such texts as 
Matt. xvi. 28 and the parallel passages; to 
which we may add the “ when ye shall see 
(iSnre) Jerusalem compassed with armies,” 
of Luke xxi. 20. See below, p. 440. 

(2) Keim urges the silence of the earliest 
Christian writers as to the residence of 
St. John in Asia Minor. We are here 
to bear in mind how scanty the writings 
are which remain from this period ; and 
that even these are nearly all hortatory, 
controversial, or apologetic :—when the 
New Testament itself is quoted, the 
names of the writers are seldom given, 
Where, one may ask, was that positive 
necessity which the avrgumentum a silentio 
requires, for any mention of St. John? 
If we omit the New Testament, how little 
do we know of St. Paul? Polycarp ad- 
dressing the Philippians (c. iii.) speaks of 
St. Paul who had written an Epistle to 
that church ; but the church of Philippi 
had no relations with St. John. Men 
like Ignatius, writing in fear of their 


446 


lives, naturally confined themselves to 
the burning questions which agitated the 
Church, unconscious of the historical 
demands of posterity :—Thus, writing to 
Rome, Ignatius (c. iv.) refers to the 
connexion of that church with St. Peter 
and St. Paul; he addresses Ephesus 
(c. xii.) as the city through which the 
saints passed to a martyr’s death ;! his 
epistles to Smyrna and to Polycarp are 
occupied with the dogmatic and other 
interests of the time. The Epistle 
of the church of Smyrna relates to the 
persecutions of the Christians ; and was 
written to the neighbouring churches 
which needed no information as to St. 
John. Keim’s chief reliance, however, 
is placed on the silence of Hegesippus 
(circ. A.D.170). Eusebius (& £. iii. 32; cf. 
Routh, 4 ¢., i. 205, &c.) has preserved a 
few fragments of this writer’s “‘ historical 
memorials” (trouvjpara), in which he 
tells us that the Church was at peace till 
the time of Trajan; that the Apostles 
had gradually died off, and been suc- 
ceeded by others who had heard with 
their own ears the Divine Wisdom ; 
and that errors had now sprung up 
because there was no Apostle to correct 
them. Hegesippus accordingly places 
the death of the last Apostle in imme- 
diate causal connection with the out- 
break of Gnostic error ; he assigns both 
facts to the reign of Trajan, and is thus 
in perfect agreement with Irenzeus and 
the others (see p. 430) who state that St. 
John survived till that period.? 

(3) “ But among the silent,” writes 
Keim (s. 161), “there rises one who 
speaks,” Papias bishop of Hierapolis near 


1 There is a hint (c. xi.) that St. Paul was 
not the only Apostle who had laboured at 
Ephesus :—the receivers of the Epistle are those 
of kat dmoaotd rots wdvrote curferav év 
Buvduer *I, X. 

? If the ‘Muratorian Fragment’ (see p. 421) 
was written by Hegesippus, as Bunsen holds, 
Keim’s objection is still less forcible. On this 
argument that, if St. John had been at Ephesus 
at all, Papias and Hegesippus must have men- 
tioned it, and Irenzeus and Eusebius have quoted 
them to that effect,—Mr. Matthew Arnold 
observes: ‘‘As if the very notoriety of John’s 
residence at Ephesus would not have dispensed 
Ireneus and Eusebius from adducing formal 
testimony to it, and made them refer to it just 
in the way they do! ”"—Contemp. Review, May, 
1875, p. 988. 


INTRODUCTION. 


Ephesus, the friend of Polycarp bishop 
of Smyrna —see No. (6). From the 
passage No. (5) Keim infers that Papias 
neither personally knew the Apostle 
John, nor even presupposes, in those 
words, his existence in Asia Minor; 
Papias having merely been connected 
in his early days with one Aristion, and 
a Presbyter or ‘‘ Elder” named John, 
who were both “disciples of the Lord.” 
And the reason given for such an infer- 
ence is, that, in this enumeration of 
seven Apostles, St. John—had he really 
been bishop of the neighbouring city 
Ephesus—could not have been placed 
by Papias so low as sixth The 
Apostle, accordingly, was never in Asia 
Minor at all; and the positive assertion 
of Irenzeus—with whom the error first 
arose—and of others, that St. John 
lived and died at Ephesus, originated in 
the desire cherished in Asia, as well as at 
Corinth and Rome, to claim an Apostle 
as transmitter of the pure Christian tra- 
dition in opposition to Gnosticism. And 
thus it has come to pass that the Apostle 
John has taken the place in history of 
“the Presbyter John”—a personage of 
whose existence we know absolutely 
nothing, except from this casual men- 
tion of his name by Papias. Keim’s con- 
tention, then, amounts to this, that what 
Irenzeus had heard in his boyhood re- 
specting “‘ John the Presbyter,” he falsely 
ascribed to John the son of Zebedee ; 
and this with such success as to impose 
on all succeeding writers down to the 
present day. When the evidence, how- 
ever, as to St. John’s history which has 
been examined in the foregoing pages 
is borne in mind, it is hard to avoid the 
conjecture of Ewald (Gov¢ting. gel. Anszeig. 
1867, s. 41) that Keim could not have 
meant seriously to defend such a con- 
clusion. As a matter of fact, Keim is 


1 As to the position here assigned to the 
name of the Apostle John, Bishop Lightfoot 
writes :—‘‘ No rational account can be given of 
the sequence, supposing that the names are 
arranged ‘in order of merit’. ... The two 
names, which are kept to the last and associated 
together, are just those two members of the 
Twelve to whom alone the Church attributes 
written Gospels. As Zvangelists, the names of 
John and Matthew would naturally be con- 
nected.”—Contemp. Review, October 1875, p 


839. 


INTRODUCTION. 


mistaken when he asserts that Irenzeus 
was the first to announce the residence 
of the Apostle John in Asia Minor ; for 
we have the distinct evidence to the 
contrary of Apollonius who, as we know, 
lived in the days of Polycarp and Pa- 
pias, and who wrote before Irenzeus : 
even Keim allows that Apollonius wrote 
A.D. 170-180.! Apollonius, more- 
over, was free from any controversial 
bias in favour of the Apocalypse, for he 
wrote against Montanism (see p. 411) ; 
and he was able, as being himself an 
Asiatic, to bear testimony to St. John’s 
residence and work at Ephesus, and 
to a special miracle which was there 
performed by the Apostle—see No. (9). 
Again, Keim assumes that Polycrates 
(see note °, p. 413) was in error as to the 
Apostle Philip ; and hence he concludes 
that Polycrates shared in the general con- 
fusion as to the Apostle John—although 
he was himself bishop of Ephesus, 
and for forty years a contemporary of 
Polycarp. See also p. 430, note* In 
fine the theory of Keim requires us to 
believe that four independent witnesses 
~ Apollonius at Ephesus, Irenzeus in 
Gaul, Clemens at Alexandria, and Ter- 
tullian in Africa,—shared in the same 
misconception; and that this miscon- 
ception has come to be accepted as 
history, while every trace of the true 
facts has been obliterated.” 

And thus it may easily be seen how 
groundless is this latest attack on the 
Apostolic authorship of the Apocalypse, 
founded as it is upon the denial of St. 
John’s residence in Asia Minor. Hil- 
genfeld without hesitation concludes : 
“John is, with full certainty, to be 
upheld as the Apostle of Asia” (“Jo- 
hannes als Apostel Asiens ist mit 
voller Sicherheit zu behaupten,” Z «c., 
S. 395). The evidence for the fact of 
the Apostle’s residence in Asia has been 
already stated (pp. 427-30): and the 


1L.c, i. S. 1543 anm. 2, s. 164. Keim 
(s. 169) also allows that the Apostle was con- 
founded with, or exchanged for, the author of 
the Apocalypse, before the confusion arose be- 
tween John the son of Zebedee and ‘‘ the Pres- 
byter John” ; because Justin Martyr, some time 
before Irenzus, was a witness to that error,— 
gee No. (8), p. 410. 

® See Mr. Sanday’s remarks on Keim, in 7%e 
Academy, July 1, 1871. 


44; 


epistle of Irenzus to Florinus (pp. 8, 
27); the passage from Polycrates (No. 
(14), p. 414); and the opening chapters 
of the Apocalypse itself—to go no farther 
—will ever remain three solid bases on 
which our belief may rest with full his- 
toric certainty.! 


§ 7. Doubts as to the Apostolic Author- 
ship. 


INTERNAL EvibENCE. — We have 
seen how the current of modern Ra- 
tionalism has set in the direction 
of fully admitting the composition of 
the Apocalypse by the Apostle John, 
the son of Zebedee,—the conclusion 
which it has been the chief object 
of this Introduction to prove. This 
admission, whatever its value may be, 
is to be placed to the credit of the 
present argument, without accepting in 
any sense the result which is thereby 
aimed at, namely the rejection of the 
Fourth Gospel on the ground of its inter- 
nal discrepancies from the Apocalypse. 
As scholars, on the other hand, of the 
stamp of Liicke, Diisterdieck and Ewald, 
who accept the Fourth Gospel as the 
composition of St. John, seek to over- 
throw the authenticity of the Apoca- 
lypse by means of the same alleged 
discrepancies, it is necessary to exa- 
mine whether such discrepancies really 
exist. 

It is evident at a glance that the 


! This result, given in his own words, is a/most 
admitted by Renan (/c., p. 569). Luthardt, on the 
Fourth Gospel (1874, s. 122), thus sums up the 
answer to Keim :—(i.) Irenzeus cannot have con- 
founded the Apostle John with ‘‘ the Presbyter 
John,” since he carefully distinguishes between 
the Apostles and other disciples of the Lord ; 
and since he appeals, in controversy, to facts 
which cannot be rejected by those against whom 
he urges them;—(ii.) Nor can the supposed 
error of Irenzeus as to St. John’s residence at 
Ephesus be ascribed to this confusion, since, 
independently of Irenzeus, the same tradition 
existed in Asia Minor as well as in Rome, and 
with Clemens Alex. (see above, p. 415);—(iii.) 
Had St. John not been at Ephesus, Polycarp 
could never have appealed to his example in the 
Easter controversy, as we know that he did,— 
ovre yap 6 ’Avlkntros toy ToAvKaproy metoas 
édbvaro wh Tnpetv, are peta lwavvov Tov padnrod 
Tov Kuplov juav kal tay AoiTmay amoor Amy, 
ols ovvdierpupey, Gel rernpnxdta.—ap, Eus, 
Vv. 24. 


448 


Apocalypse presents wide divergences 
in structure and form from ‘the other 
writings of St. John; but it is equally 
evident that such divergences are im- 
plied in the nature of the Book itself. 
From first to last the Book is a reflexion 
of the Old Test., echoing the prophetic 
voice, and exhibiting all the severity of 
the prophetic language. The style and 
manner, too, of the Apocalypse, as of 
any other composition, must, of neces- 
sity, be influenced by the position of the 
author throughout :—one need only call 
to mind the hymns of Mary, and Za- 
charias, and Simeon, differing as they 
do from the usual style of St. Luke. 
Some writers seem to think that St. 
John could write in only one style, 
and that, a style fixed and unchange- 
able; forgetting how different the sub- 
jects are on which the Apostle has 
written, as well as the influence of the 
prophetic state on a prophet’s utter- 
ances. The fact is that the diver- 
gences in form and structure between 
the Apocalypse and the Fourth Gospel 
present themselves as natural and in- 
evitable ; while, at the same time, the 
analogies which may be traced between 
the ideas and the language of both 
writings, are too numerous, and are 
often marked with too great subtilty, to 
be fortuitous. The Gospel, no less than 
the Apocalypse, is marked by its depen- 
' dence on the Old Test. The Apocalypse, 
indeed, as well as the Gospel, is through- 
out full of allusions to, as distinct from 
direct citations of, the earlier Scriptures,— 
allusions which are interwoven, as if un- 
consciously, with the author’s style. For 
example, let Rev. i. 10; iv. 2; xvii. 3; 
xxi. 10, be compared with Num. xxiv. 2 ; 
2 Chron. xv. 1; Isai. Ixi. 1; Ezek. xi. 
5 3—Reyv. iv. 3, with Ezek. 1. 28 ;—Rev. 
vil. 1, with Dan. vii. 2 ;—Rev. xiv. Io, 
with Jer. xxv. 15. See also the Messi- 
anic allusions in Rev. ill. 7; v. 5; xxii. 
16. So in the Gospel, let John i. 51 be 
compared with Gen. xxviii. 12 ;—John 
ii. 16, with Jer. vii. 1: ;—John v. 29, with 
Dan. xii. 2 ;—John ix. 39, with Isai. xlii. 


1 On this whole subject, see articles in the 
numbers of the Revue de Théologie for June, July, 
and Sept. 1856, entitled “ De l’authenticité des 
&crits johanniques daprés Antonie Niermeyer, 
par M. Busken-Huet.’ 


INTRODUCTION. 


7 ;—John x. 16, with Isai. lvi 8. The 
Messianic allusions are no less clear :— 
Christ must first “be manifest unto 
Israel,” John i. 11, 31 ;—Nathanael ad- 
dresses Him as “ King of Israel,” John 
i. 49 ;—‘ Salvation is of the Jews,” John 
iv. 22 ;—and finally, the “‘ Hosanna” of 
John xii. 13. 

But the question must be considered 
more systematically. 

I. And first of all as to the reasons de- 
rived from internal characteristics, against 
the composition of the Apocalypse 
by an Apostle, the great majority of 

“doubts” founded upon such grounds 
almost carry with them their own refu- 
tation :— 

(a) ‘The entire history of the exile 
of the Apostle John in Patmos under 
Domitian is, we are told, a fiction 
founded on Rev. i. 9, which is the record 
of an unreal vision :—so Eichhorn, Ne- 
ander, Bleek. Not to mention the posi- 
tive evidence already adduced, Winer 
(Real-Worterbuch, 1. 592) justly ob- 
serves that the ecstatic condition of the 
Seer does not commence until ver. 10o,— 
the ninth verse bearing all the marks of 
a plain historical narrative in which, 
under the circumstances of the time 
(see note 3, p. 431), there is not the least 
improbability. 

(8) ‘he author does not call himself 
an Apostle ; he does not speak of him- 
self as an Apostle, or in the manner in 
which an Apostle might be expected to 
speak : so Liicke, Keim, &c. But why 
should the title “‘ servant” (dodAes) Rev. 
i. x (ch ch. x. 7; xi 18) prove that 
he was not an Apostle, when we find the 
same title assumed by St. Paul, Rom. 
i. 1; Gal.i. 10; Phil. ix 5 aie 
again the title ‘‘ partaker” (cvyxowwvés), 
Rey. i. 9, which is also used by St. Paul, 
1 Cor. ix. 23; Phil. i. 7;—or “brother” 
(ddedpos) Rev. i. 9 (cf. ch. xix. 10; xxii, 
9), a mode of speech which occurs in 
Rom. i_ 13; 1 Cor. 1 10; Gales 
&c.? The writer is naturally referred 
to as a “prophet” (as in Rey. xxii. 
9; cf. ch. x. 7), just as were Ezekiel 
and Daniel. The style, moreover, 
and manner throughout the Book agree 
in all respects with the character of 
the “son of thunder” (Mark ii. 17) 
as depicted in the Gospels, e.g. Luke 


“M 


INTRODUCTION. 


ix. 54. Cf also p. 428, note?; and 
gee paragraph (e) below. 

(y) ‘The Author speaks of the Twelve 
as he would not have done had he be- 
longed to their number,’—e. g. in Rev. 
xviii, 20; xxi. 14 (on these texts see 
also p. 445). When Keim argues here, 
that in ch. xviii. 20 the Apostles are 
spoken of “ oljectively,” he forgets that 
they are similarly spoken of in 1 Cor. 
xii. 28; Eph. iii. 5 ; while Rev. xxi. 14 
does no more than reflect the teaching 
of such passages as Matt. xvi. 18; xix. 
281; Eph. li. 20,—passages which also 
set aside the objection that it is incon- 
sistent with the humility of an Apostle, 
as prescribed in Mark x. 43, 44, to call 
himself and his fellow Apostles ‘ Foun- 
dations.” The remark of Ewald, that 
it is likewise inconsistent with Apostolic 
humility to record these promises of 
future blessedness, may be answered by 
referring to the far plainer words of St. 
Paul, Phil 1. 21=23.; 2 Tim. -iv.7,/8); 
not to mention Dan. xii. 13; or St. 
John’s styling himself in the Gospel 
“the Disciple whom Jesus loved.” 

(5) ‘ The reflexion of the language 
and imagery of ancient prophecy which 
marks the Apocalypse, shows that the 
Visions recorded by its author are not 
original; but a mere repetition of the 
words of earlier Seers, in which he 
clothes his own anticipations of the 
future.’ This is an argument really di- 
tected against the whole prophetic 
Volume, where we find successive pro- 
phets employing the very expressions of 
earlier predictions and developing their 
sense (see Lee on /nspiration, 4th ed., 
p. 326, &c.): it is also a denial of that 
progressive character which marks all 
Revelation, as set forth in Heb. i. 1. 

(<) ‘The Christ of the Apocalypse is 
not the Christ of the Gospels :—in the 
Apocalypse He is “ the Lion of the Tribe 
of Judah” (Rev. v. 5); He “shall rule 
the nations with a rod of iron” (Rey. 
xix. 15); He leads His armies “clothed 
with a vesture dipped in blood” (Rev. 


1 When discussing this question, Scholten 
(4 ¢., s. 129) asserts that Matt. xix. 28 is 
a There is, however, really no more 

ubt as to the genuineness of this verse than 
as to the genuineness of any other verse in the 
New Test. :—see Tischendorf, 8th ed., 27 loc. 


New Test.—Votu. IV. 


449 


xix. 13). Is this,’ we are asked, ‘the 
Jesus of Matt. xi. 28-30; xii, 18-20?’ 
The answer is clear: The Christ of the 
Apocalypse zs the Christ of the Gospel,— 
Christ in His character of King (Matt, 
xxv. 31-46),—Christ in His character 
of Judge (John v. 22-29; cf. Ps. ii 
Isai. lxiil. 1-6). See also the note on 
Rev. ili. 21. 

II. Again, it is urged that ‘the Apoca- ~ 
lypse differs from the other writings of 
the Apostle John by the severity of its 
spirit, and temper, and tone.’ 

Is this conclusion, however, borne 
out by facts ? 

The fiery spirit of St. John (cf. Mark 
iii, 17 ; Luke ix. 54) has, no doubt, left 
its impress on the Apocalypse. The 
loving words of the Epistles to the 
Seven Churches are mingled with stern 
tones of reproof to Ephesus (ch. ii. 5), to 
Pergamum (ch. ii. 16), to Laodicea (ch. iii, 
16). Of those who worship the Beast, 
“the smoke of their torment goeth up for 
ever and ever” (ch. xiv. 11; cf. vv. 10, 20). 
They who are not written in the Book of 
Life are “cast into the lake of fire” (ch, 
xx. 15). Butwithalltheirgentleand loving 
utterances the other Joannean writings 
present the same aspect of severity,— 
see John iil. 36; vi. 703 vill. 443 xv. 6; 
1 John il. 19; v. 16; 2 John io. Ifit 
is said in Rey. xvi. 5, of the avenging 
justice of God, “ Righteous art Thou” 
(Aixatos <?),—so in John xvii. 25, God is 
addressed ‘‘O righteous Father” (Ilarip 
dicate). And yet with all this, the prin- 
ciple that ‘“‘God is love” is deeply 
stamped upon the Apocalypse.  Al- 
though the Book, as describing the 
Divine judgments, dwells on the wrath 
of God (cf. John v. 22-29), still we 
never lose sight of His mercy and 
loving-kindness. The thought contained 
in ch. vii. 17, which is repeated in ch. 
xxi, 4,—that “God shall wipe away 
every tear from the eyes” of men—is 
also implied in ch. xxi. 7, where the idea 
of ‘‘son” includes that of “ Father.” 
This same thought reappears in another 
form in ch. xxi. 3 : “ God himself shall be 
with them, and be their God,” where 
the words “their God” at once recall 
John xx. 17. If in John iii. 17, God 
comes in Christ not to judge but to 
save; in the Apocalypse, God comes in 


kF 


450 


Christ to judge—but, only after the work 
of mercy has been accomplished, ch. xix. 
II; xx. 11-15. The judgment of the 
world, indeed, and the conflict between 
Christ and the world are the constant 
theme of the Fourth Gospel, e.g. John 
KH, 31>) KVA8g; 20/51) KVin Ex50 May; 
that peculiar feature of the Apocalypse 
—the First Resurrection—is not ob- 
scurely foreshadowed in John v. 25- 
29: see on Rev. xx. 

Let the following passages also be 
compared: Rev. i. 5; iii. 4; v. 9, with 
x John i. 7 ;—Reyv. ii. 17 with John vi. 
32;—Rev. iii. 20 with John xiv. 23 ;— 
Rev. vii. 16 with John vi. 35 ;—Rev. 
xxl 6; xxii. 17 with John iv. 10, 14; 
Vil. 37. 

III. The question as to the identity 
of doctrine is next to be considered. 
And first of all, as to the Christology of 
the Book :— 

(a) The Christology of the Apocalypse 
perfectly reflects that of the Fourth 
Gospel. The Ancient Church styled 
the Author of the Apocalypse Z/eologos 
(see the remarks introductory to ch. i.), 
because he taught the Godhead of the 
Logos ; and this fact Scholten (4 ¢, s. 9) 
turns into the objection that the ‘‘ Apo- 
theosis of Jesus is stated too strongly to 
be ascribed to a contemporary and dis- 
ciple of Jesus,’—see e.g. ch. ili. 21. 

The title Logos, “The Word,” de- 
scribes as an exclusive attribute the 
Person of Christ :—In the Fourth Gos- 
pel we read (i. t) “The Word was 
God” (@eds jv 6 Adyos). In Rev. xix. 13 
He is called, at His Second Coming, 
“the Word of God;” as in rt John i 
1, He is called “the Word of Life.” 
When He is called absolutely “the 
Word,” in John i. 1, the genitive (rod 
@cod) underlies the sense;— just as 
when “The Life” (4 wy, John i. 4), 
also taken absolutely, is applied to 
Him: cf. John v. 26. Accordingly, in 
the Apocalypse (ch. xix. 13), where 
Christ appears as the supreme and final 
Revelation of Jehovah, the genitive (rod 
@covd) is added to the absolute 6 Adyos. 
The titles, too, which paraphrase the 
name Jehovah, are, with but slight notes 
of distinction, applied to God and Christ: 
— Alpha and Omega,” “the First and 
the Last,” “the Beginning and the End,” 


INTRODUCTION. 


“the Holy and True,” “the Amen,” 
He that is “alive for evermore” (Rev. 
i 8, 17; ii 7, 14; xxi 6; xxii 13), 
In Rev. iii. 14 Christ is “the Beginning 
of the Creation of God” (% épy7,see John 
i 1; cf. Col. i 15). In this passage 
of the Apocalypse, the title (7 dpyy) 
cannot mean a being prior to all others, 
“the first created,” any more than “the 
Last” (ch. i. 17) can mean, ‘One who 
comes /as¢t or after others: it means 
‘the Beginning,’ ‘the primal Source’— 
principium not initium (see in loc.)— 
from Which all Creation flows; just as 
“the Last” means the end to which all 
Creation returns. Through Christ all 
things created are connected with God: 
—and this is the thought which “the 
Word,” as represented in the Fourth 
Gospel, conveys, see John i. 3; ch 
Rev. iv. 11. The pre-existence of 
Christ is also implied,—see John xvii. 
5; and cf Rev. xii. 8 with John 
XVii. 24. 

The name “Jesus Christ” occurs in 
Rev. i 1, 2, 5; and in the Fourth 
Gospel in ch i. 17; xvii. 3. The title 
“Son of God,” which is frequent in 
the Fourth Gospel, is found in Rev. 
ii, 18; and similarly the title “Son of 
Man” occurs e/even times in the Fourth 
Gospel, and appears in Rev. i. 13; xiv. 
14. Throughout the Apocalypse Christ is 
styled “the Lamb,”—e.g. ch. v. 6; and 
the title is applied to Him twenty-eight 
times. In the Fourth Gospel He is 
“the Lamb of God,” John i. 29, 36 
In John xix. 36—“a bone of Him shall 
not be broken”—the reference to Ex. 
xii. 46 proves that “the Lamb of God” 
is the Paschal Lamb, the “ Lamb slain” 
(a phrase more than once to be found 
in the Apocalypse, ch. v. 6, 9, 123 
xili. 8), by Whom and by Whose blood 
the sins of the world have been taken 
away,—see John i. 29; 1 John L 7° 
ii. 2; Rev. i. 5;1 vi. 14. (On the 
Greek word rendered ‘ Lamb,” see 
below, p. 457). The idea of Br i 
demption” is also expressed in Rev. VW. 
9; xiv. 3, 43; cf. John vi. 55 jaaeee 
xv. 13. In Rev. iii. 21 Christ sits 


1 In Rev. i. 5, a few authorities give the 
reading Aotcayr: in place of Avcav7s. Cf. the 
former with the use of Aovew in John xiii. 10. 


INTRODUCTION. 


the Father’s throne; in Johni. 18 He is 
the Son who is in the bosom of the 
Father ;—in Rev. i 4, 5, asin 2 John 3, 
“orace and peace” come from Christ as 
well as from God. Like God, the Lamb 
is the Temple and the Lamp of the 
heavenly City (Rev. xxi. 22, 23); He 
receives worship at the same time, and 
in the same manner as the Father (Rev. 
v. 11-13); and that worship belongs to 
Him which may not be rendered to 
Angels (ch. xix. 10; xxii. 9) :—all this 
but reflects the thought expressed in 
John v. 23, “that all may honour the 
Son, even as they honour the Father.” 

In the Fourth Gospel, God revealed 
in Christ is Life, Light, Love (e.g. John 
L 4, 5,935 Xv. 9, 10; XvVil. 2, 26 ; evs 
John iv. 8, 16),—abstract terms which 
express the three characteristic thoughts 
of St. John. In the Apocalypse, God 
is He “that Zveth for ever and ever,” 
einer os x Gs xvi 7.5) c& vik 2 
God is Ligh?, ch. xxi. 23; xxii 5; cf. 
ch, iv. 3 :—while the words of chi 5; 
iii. 9, reflect all that the Fourth Gospel 
and the Joannean Epistles declare as to 
the Divine Zove. (See above the ob- 
jection urged by Dionysius of Alexandria, 
(iii.), p. 441). ; 

If we compare Rev. v. 9 with John 
Xvii. 4, 5 (observe xai viv,— And now,” 
#. ¢., ‘ My work being accomplished’), we 
at once perceive that the Apocalypse and 
the Gospel present the death of Christ 
from the same point of view. In Rev. 
xii. 11, we read that when Christ's king- 
dom was founded, the Dragon was sub- 
dued and his power broken :—this is also 
the doctrine of John xii. 31; xiv. 30; 
1 John iti. 8. Christ speaks of God as 
“My Father” (John i 16; xiv. 2), as 
“My God” (John xx. 17) :—and so 
also in Rev. i. 27 ; iL 2,5, 12, 21 (in 
Rev. xiv. 1, God is called “His [the 
Lamb’s] Father”). In John vi. 51; 
Vili, 12; x. 7, 11, He uses the emphatic 
“T am ;’"—and so too in Rev. i. 8, 17; 
& 23; xxi 6; xxii 13, 16. Compare 
also the formula “I will give” [“ water,” 
“ bread],” in John iv. 14; vi 51, as in 
Rev. ii. 7, 17; xxi. 6. As a shepherd 
He feeds His flock, Zads them, and 
they follow Him, Rev. vil. 17; xiv. 4: 
this image occurs in John x. where it is 
transformed into a complete parabolic 


451 


discourse,—cf. John xxi. 16. He leads 
to “the fountain of the water of life,” 
Rey. vil. 17; xxi 6; xxii. 17 ;—cf. this 
thought with John iv. ro, 14; vii. 37. Asa 
Bridegroom He receives the Church as 
His Bride, Rev. xix. 7; xxl. 2, 9;—cf. 
John ii. 29. Compare in like manner 
Rey. i. 7, with John xix. 37 ;—Rev. ii. 7, 
with r John vy. 11;—Rev. i. 11, with 
John xi. 26 ;—Rev. i. 7, with John x. 9; 
—Rev. iii. 20, with John xiv. 23; xvii 
21-26 ;—Rev. xxi 23, 24, with John 
Vill 12 ;—Rev. xiv. 4, with John xiii 36, 

Christ is placed in the same rank with 
God in Rev. vi 16; xii. 10; Xiv. 4; xxi 
22 ;—and so He is placed in John v, 
17-26; Vill. 19; X. 15; xvii. 1; 1 John 
ii, 23. The doxologies in Rev. v. 13; 
Vil. 10; Xi. 15, where the same expres- 
sions are applied to Christ and to God, 
merely reflect such texts as John viii. 16 ; 
XV. 235 XV1. 3; XVil. 3; I John. 3; ii. 223 
2 John 3,9. Such passages, indeed, as 
Rev. xx. 6; xxi. I, 3, are founded on 
the great principle announced in John 
x. 30, “I and the Father are one” (cf 
xiv. 9). As God is worshipped in Rev. 
iv, 8-11, so is Christin Rev. v. 12, 13:— 
Angels and men “honour the Son even 
as they honour the Father,” John v. 23. 

Acts of the same kind are ascribed to 
God and to Christ. The “sending” of 
the Angel “to show unto His servants 
the things which must shortly come 
to pass,”—an act ascribed to God in 
Rey. xxii 6, and ascribed to Christ 
in Rev. i. 1; xxii. 16,—corresponds to 
the “sending” the Comforter by the 
Father in John xiv. 26, and by Christ 
in John xv. 26. If both God and Christ 
are the light of the Heavenly City in 
Rev. xxi. 23; xxii 5, the presence ot 
both is the recompense of the faithful 
in John xiv. 18, 23, and their protection 
in John x. 28, 29. 

If Christ is “ He which searcheth the 
reins and hearts” in Rev. ii. 23, we read 
to the same effect in John i 24, 25: 
—cf. John vi. 61, 7o. 

In both the Fourth Gospel and the 
Apocalypse the “ Tabernacle” of God, 
or of Christ is with (or among) men, 
John i 14; Rev. vi. 15; xxi. 3 :—in 
the former He speaks of His body under 
the figure of a Sanctuary (vads), John ii. 
19; in the latter He is Himself the 


FF 2 


452 


Sanctuary of the New Jerusalem, Rev. 
XXi. 22. 

The references to the Resurrection in 
Rey. i. 17, 18 ; ii. 8, are parallel to those 
in John ii. 19; x. 17, 18 :—compare, 
too, Rev. i. 18, where Christ has “the 
keys of death and of hell,” with John 
V. 213 Vi. 393 xi. 25 ;— Rev. i. 5 (“the 
first born of the dead”), with John xiv. 
19; xx. 17 ;—Rev. xii. 5, (the “Man 
Child Who... was caught up unto 
God”), with John vii. 33; xiii. 3; Xvi. 
16. In Rev. i. 18, Christ is “ the Living 
One,”—He “that is alive for evermore ;” 
in John xiv. 6, 19, He names Himself 
“the Way, the Truth, and the Life ;” 
and declares “‘ Because I live, ye shall 
livealso.” © 

In fine,—the doctrine of the ‘ subor- 
dination ” of the Son, expressed in Rev. 
i. 1, is the reflection of what is taught 
in John v. 19, 26; x. 29; xiv. 28. 

The Gospel, in short, presents Christ, 
in His state of humiliation, as the object 
of faith; the Apocalypse reveals Him 
in His state of Glory, as a King carrying 
out the scheme of redemption, and exe- 
cuting judgment. Each Book is the 
complement of the other ; and both, by 
their union, make up one perfect whole. 
The Evangelist looks to the past ; and 
brings to light those features of the life 
of Christ which set forth the glory of the 
- Word made flesh :—the writer of the 
Apocalypse studies with the same care 
the future; and unfolds the progress of 
the Kingdom of God. 

(4) The doctrine of the Holy Spirit :— 

The Lersonality of the Holy Ghost is 
an admitted doctrine of the Fourth 
Gospel; so also in the Apocalypse, the 
Divine Spirit is a distinct Person :—(1) 
He appears, in the entire fulness of 
His being, distinct both from God the 
Father and from Christ, symbolically 
represented as “ the Seven Spirits which 
are before the throne,” Rev. i. 4; iv. 5 
(cf. John xv. 26); and then as “ the 
Seven Spirits of God” which Christ 
“hath,” Rev. iii. 1; v. 6. In the last 
of these passages we may discern an 
analogy tothe statement of John ii. 34, 
that the Spirit is given “without mea 
sure” to Christ,—a fulness distinct 
from that of any gift to man, as the 
absence of the article in John xx. 22, of 


INTRODUCTION, 


itself, mdicates. (2) “The Spirit” ap 
pears absolutely in Rev. ii. 7 (and the sex 
parallel places); xiv. 13: xxii. 17. In 
this sense ‘the Comforter” teaches and 
reminds the Disciples (John xiv. 26); 
and when He comes, will testify of Jesus 
(John xv. 26). Compare, too, 1 John 
iv. 1, with the references to “ the Spirit 
of prophecy in” Rey. xix. 10; and “the 
spirits of the prophets in” Rey. xxii. 6. 

(c) The Ministry of Angels—of which 
the Apocalypse from beginning to end 
testifies—is taught by Christ in John i 
51; is confessed by the people, John xii. 
29; is represented as a matter of fact, 
John xx. 12, 13. 

(2) The Christian life :— 

(1). The formula, “‘to keep the com- 
mandments” of God or of Christ, so 
continually employed by the Apostle, 
is variously expressed (rypetv ta ye 
ypapp., Ta epya, Tov Adyov, Tas évToAds, 
Ta inaria, &c.) in Rey. i 3; ii 265 iL 
8; xii, 17; xvi. 15 ;—the verb is used 
absolutely in ch. ii, 3, but always in 
this moral sense. With the exception 
of John ii, 10, this is always the sense 
of rypety (24 times) in the Fourth 
Gospel, and in. the first Epistle of St 
John. (2) We read in Rev. xxi. 27; 
xxii. 15 of him that “doeth (zoédv) a 
lie ;"—in John iii. 21; 1 John i 6 of 


him that “doeth the truth.” (3) In 
Rev. i. 9 (cf. ch. ill, to), of “the pa- 
tience which is in Jesus” (izropovy) ;— 


with which cf. the “ abiding” (meveev) in 
Him, John xv. 4; 1 Johnii. 6; 2 Johng. 
(4) Ifthe “beloved” are commanded “to 
prove (SoxyudCew) the spirits,” in 1 John 
iv. 1, —thé Church of Ephesus is com- 
mended (Rev. ii. 2) for having “ tried” 
(wetpacew) “them which call themselves 


Apostles.” (5) The use of the verb 
dpveio bat, “thou didst not deny my 
faith,” or “my name,” Rev. ii, 135 iL 


8, is entirely parallel to its use in John 
xviii, 25-27 ; 1 John ii. 22,23. (6) And 
so is the mention of the trials of the 
faithful, Rev. ii. 10; ili. ro, to such pas- 
sages as John xv, 18-21; xvi. i-4, - 
John iii. 13. Compare also Rev. iii. 11, 
with 2 John 8 -—Rev. i. 9, 19, with 
Joh xv. 2, 5 ;—Rev. vil. 145 Xxii. II, 
14, with 1 John iii, 3. (7) “To walk” 
(weir) is used to denote moral 
action in Rev. iii. 4; xvi. 15; xxl. 24; 


INTRODUCTION. 


John viii. 12 ; xii. 35 ; and ten times in 
the three Epistles,—e. g. 1 John i. 6; 
2 John 4; 3 John 3. (8) The verbs 
Supav, wevvay are used to denote the pro- 
found cravings of the soul—and in this 
sense only—in Rey. vii. 16 ; xxi. 6; xxii. 
Mevohw iv.) 13,14; 15} Vi. 353 Vil. 
37, xix. 28. (9) In fine, the full con- 
ception of the Christian life is summed 
up by St. John in the thought of “ over- 
coming the world.” In expressing this 
thought the verb vixav is used to denote 
the triumph over evil, not only abso- 
lutely,—as throughout the Seven Epis- 
tles, Rev. ii.; ii.,—but also with an 
object: compare especially Rev. xii. 
Hise Xu. 77° John xy. 33; 9 John 
i 13,/14; v.. 4. See the note on ch. 
ii, 7. 

To be excluded from eternal life is 
represented in Rev. ii, 11; xx. 14 ; XXi. 
8, as “the second death ;” and this same 
figurative sense of “death” is found, in 
the New Test., only in John xi. 25, 26; 
1 John v. 16, 17:—on the idea of 
spiritual death, cf. John v. 24, 1 John 
ii. 14. And finally, the judgment of 
men “according to their works” is ex- 
pressed alike in Rev. xx. 12, 13, and 
John v. 29 (cf. Rom, il. 6). 

(e) Eschatology — 

The doctrine of the Apocalypse pro- 
perly so-called, as revealing the Second 
Advent of Christ,—His ‘“‘ Coming,” His 
“ Presence,” the ‘‘ Parusia” (1 John ii. 
28; cf. Matt. xxiv. 27, 37, 39),—and 
especially the future perfection of the 
kingdom of God, has been termed 
“ Eschatology ” (see Liicke, Z 4, s. 23). 
This, the leading theme of the Book, 
is brought forward exactly after the 
same manner as is the leading theme 
of the Fourth Gospel. From the very 
first, in ch. lil. 12, we meet “the New 
Jerusalem” of ch. xxi. ;—already in ch. 
xl. 7, we meet “the Beast” of ch. xiii. 
So in the Gospel also :—from the out- 
set (John i, 29, 51; vi. 71), the Saviour’s 
death and betrayal, and resurrection and 
glory are placed in the foreground; 
while the Lord’s future return to judge 
and to recompense is referred to in the 
Gospel and the Epistles in such a man- 
mer as to recall the various aspects 
of Apocalyptic Eschatology,—John v. 
a8, 29; VL 39, 40, 44,545 Xl. 245 xiL 


453 


48; 1 Joka ii. 18, 28; iv. 3, 173 2 
John 7. The First Advent sf Christ 
in the Spirit is, indeed, the great theme 
of the Fourth Gospel; but still His 
Personal return is the chief thought with 
which He comforts the disciples—see 
John xiv. 2. In John v. 28, 29, more- 
over, the Gospel points to His visible 
return; and on this subject, as Luthardt? 
observes, we must neither spiritualize 
the Gospel, nor materialize the Revela- 
tion. In the Gospel the ordinary forms 
of language are used to express the 
thought ; in the Revelation all is con- 
veyed by figures. In the former, the 
standpoint is the presence of the Spirit ; 
in the latter, the issues of history. The 
Apocalypse, at each instant, recalls and 
reflects the prophetic language of the 
Old Test.; while it also sums up the 
Eschatology of the New. ‘Thus, the 
teaching of St. Paul as to the “ Parusia” 
(1 Cor. xv. 23; 1 Thess. iv. 15; cf. Rev. 
xxli. 20),—and “the Israel of God” 
(Gal. vi. 16; cf. Rev. vu, 4),— and the 
“Jerusalem which is above” (Gal. 
iv. 26; cf. Rey. xxi. 2),—is repeated 
in the symbolism of the Apocalypse. 
Eschatology is, by its very idea, the 
history of the future,—the history of 
the building up of the kingdom of 
Christ, on the ruins of the kingdom 
of Satan. In a word, the history of 
Christian hope is re-echoed, throughout 
the ages, in the central thought of 
the Apocalypse—‘“ The Lord is at 
hand.” 

(f) Demonology:— 

In the kindred texts of the Apoca- 
lypse, ch. xii. g and ch. xx. 2, the chief 
titles of the spirit of evil are accumulated: 
—indeed, the epithets, Devil (8éBodos, 
Rey. ii. 10; John viii. 44; 1 John ii 8, 
and Satan (Saray), Rev. ii. 9 ; John xii 
27),are common to all St. John’s writings. 
The remarkable designation of the evil 
one as, “the Prince of this world” 
(6 dpxwv tod Kécpov tovrov, John xiL 
313 xiv. 30; xvi. 11), is reflected in 
the statements that Satan and his 
agents ‘deceive the whole world” 
(Rev. xii. 9; xi 145 xix. 203 xx 
3, 8, 10);—that “a throne” is given 


1 St. Fohn the Author of the Fourth Gospel, 
Clark’: tr. p. 273. 


454 


him (Rev. ii. 13) ;—that the Dragon 
bears ‘‘ seven diadems ” (Rev. xii. 3) ;— 
that his agent, the Beast, bears “ten 
diadems” (Rev. xiii. 1), and receives 
from the Dragon “his throne” (Rev. 
xiii. 2; cf. ch. xvi. 10). In both the 
Apocalypse and the Fourth Gospel we 
read how the effects of the evil principle 
are ascribed to Satan personally: e. g. 
murder and lying,—Rev. ii. 13 ; lll. 9; 
John viii. 44; 1 John ii. 21, 22; iil, 12. 
In 1 John iii. 10, the wicked are “ the 
children of the Devil,’ while in Rev. 
ii, g they are “the synagogue of 
Satan.” Compare Rev. xii, 11 with 
1 John ii. 13, 14;—Rev. xii. 7-9, 
with John xii. 31; xvi. 11 (cf. also 
John xiv. 30; xvi. 33). See Note A 
on ch, xiii. 

IV. Zhe Language and style of the 
Apocalypse :— 

The objection which, at all times, 
has formed the principal argument 
against our ascribing the Apocalypse to 
the Apostle John, rests upon its style,— 
a style which Liicke and others affirm to 
be so distinct from that of the Fourth 
Gospel and the Joannean Epistles, as to 
compel us to infer a different author. 
The peculiar style of the Apocalypse 
is recognized on all hands: it results 
naturally from the excited condition of 
prophetic ecstasy. The distinction is 
clearly defined between one who speaks 
- “in the Spirit” (év wvevuars, Rev. 1. 10 ; 
iv. 2, &c.) and one who speaks “ with 
the understanding” (7@ vot, 1 Cor. xiv. 
15). We know how St. Paul describes 
the former state in 2 Cor. xii. 2-4; and 
we can trace the effect of this spiritual 
exaltation in the contrast between the 
historical and the predictive portions 
of a Prophet’s utterance:—cf. Isaiah 
XXXVI. ; XXxXvii. with the rest of the Book 
(see Lee On Inspiration, p. 180, &c.). 
To explain, on “rational” grounds, this 
phenomenon of the diversity of style and 
language presented by writings of the 
same author, various theories have been 
started. Some tell us that St. John’s 
old age deprived his diction of its 
wonted force and vigour; while others, 
who place the date of the Apocalypse 
before the date of the Gospel, consider 
that his residence at Ephesus affected 
and softened the Hebraistic peculiarities 


INTRODUCTION. 


of his earlier style. Harenberg has 
even suggested that the Apocalypse was 
originally written in Aramaic. 

So early as the third century, it has 
been already pointed out [see (ii) and 
(ii), p. 441], the peculiarities of shle 
which mark the Book were used as an 
argument to prove that the writer of the 
Fourth Gospel and of the First Epistle 
of St. John could not have been the 
author of the Apocalypse. Of the Gos- 
pel and Epistle Dionysius Alex. writes 
that they were composed “not only 
without blemishes, but in elegant and 
polished Greek ; their author evidently 
possessing the gift of both knowledge 
and expression (ris yrooews, THs ppd- 
aews). He who beheld the Apocalypse, 
on the contrary, had the gift of know- 
ledge, but not that of expression :—his 
Greek is not accurate; it abounds in 
barbarous idioms and sometimes even 
in solecisms ;”* and so forth, 


1 Milton’s critics argue in exactly the oppo- 
site way. Comus appeared in 1637; Paradise 
Lost in 1667 ; Samson Agonistes in 1671, three 
years before the poet’s death. The melodious 
versification of Comus, the sublime richness of 
Paradise Lost, the rugged grandeur of Samson 
Agonistes, harmonize respectively with the age of 
Milton when he wrote these works. In the case 
of Shakspere, ‘‘harshness and obscurity” are 
placed by his critics ‘‘among the notes of 
his third manner ;” nor would his style in this 
last stage, ‘‘even were it possible by study to 
reproduce it, be of itself a perfect and blameless 
model :”’—see Fortnightly Review, 1876, p. 30, 
‘* The three stages of Shakspere.” 

2 “ Erklar. der Offenb. Fohannis,” s. 72: 
—see Liicke, s. 441. That the Book was 
originally written in Greek, is evident, not 
only from the fact of its having been addressed 
to Greek-speaking communities, but also from 
the familiarity with the Greek language which 
the work displays :—for example, in such in- 
stances as the Greek names of precious stones, 
ch. xxi.; the Greek measures of weight and 
length, ch. vi. 6; xiv. 20; xxi.; the Greek 
rendering of Hebrew words, ch. ix. 11; the 
symbolism of Greek letters, ch. i. 8; xxi. 63 
xxii. 13,— especially ch. xiii. 18 ; not to mention 
the use of classical expressions such as 7rupfds, 
hptdpiov, pecoupdynua, daxlvO.vos, TadayTiaios, 
EdAov Ovivov, Tetpaywvos, Siavyns, &e. One 
may add, too, the use of the LXX. when re- 
ference is made to the Old Test. :—cf., e.g., 
vii. 9 ; xi. 9, with Dan. iii. 4, 7, 29; Vv. 193 vi 
25;—ch. v. 5, with Isai. xi. 1, 10, &c. (see 
below). 

® Dionysius writes that the Fourth G 
and First Epistle were written :—od pédvor 
émtalorws Kata “hv ‘EAAhvev pwvhy, GAdAd Kal 
Aoyietata Tais \¢teot, Tols TuAACYiOpois, Tals 


INTRODUCTION. 


As will be seen presently, this descrip- 
tion unduly exaggerates the anomalies 
and diversities of style: meanwhile, the 
attempt of Beza and Hitzig (see p. 443, 
note ') to prove, from the resemblance 
in diction between the Apocalypse and 
the Second Gospel, that the writer of 
the former was the Evangelist John 
Mark, illustrates how frail is the sup- 
port which this line of argument supplies 
to any theory of authorship.! Let this 
aspect of the objections urged be now 
considered. 

The Apocalypse, we are told, as con- 
trasted with the Fourth Gospel, and the 
Joannean Epistles contains :— 

(a) ‘Hebraisms or Aramaic idioms.’ 

In reply to this statement, if urged 
as an objection, an analogous instance 
may be adduced :—The style of Jose- 
phus, when he writes the history of 
the Old Test., is more decidedly 
Aramaic than when he describes the 
events of his own time, and does not 
refer to a foreign model (see Winer, 
Grammatik des N. T. Sprachidioms, 
6 Aufl., 1835, § 3, s. 31). Doubtless, 
the Hebrew element in the Apoca- 
lypse? where St. John delineates the 
bright or the gloomy outlines of the 
future, after the manner of the Hebrew 
Prophets, is far more conspicuous 
than in those earlier compositions of 
his in which he too, as well as other 
New Test. writers, calmly records his 
own reminiscences. In the former his 
thoughts flow év zvevpar, in the latter 
é& vot. Indeed, it is evident of it- 
self that the historical portions of the 


ovrrdtert ais épynvelas (ap. Euseb. vii. 25) ; 
but in the Apocal se—bidAerrov, ka) yA@ooay 
oim axpiBGs EdAAnViCovcay avtod BAétw, GAN 
Bidpact wtv BapBapixois xpmpevor, kal mov Kal 
godoix!Covra: (%5.). 

1 The similar attempt of Hartwig according to 
Ebrard (A7it. d. Ev. Gesch., s. 855), has paved 
the way for the correct method of demonstrating 
the authenticity of the Apocalypse. 

? E. g., the instances of pleonasm in the case 
bi ae redundant ronouns in relative sentences, 
Rev. iii, Bs vii, 2, 93 xx. 8; which 
cee much more ” frequently i in the LXX., in 
accordance with the Hebrew idiom,—see Ex. 
iv. 17; 1 Kings xi. 34; Ps. xxxix. 5; Isai. i. 
a1, &c.: compare Winer, § 22, 4, a, s. 134. 
Compare too the case of the ‘‘relative adverb,” 
Rev. xii. 6, 14,—see Deut. iv. 5, 14, 26; 
3 Macc. xiv. 34. 


455 


New Testament would naturally depart 
far more from the style md manner of 
the Old than the prophetical; and 
this fact may be illustrated by what 
Matthiz notes in his grammar (vol. i, 
Introd. p. 11, Kinrie’s ed.) of Athenian 
Tragedy, where the lyric choruses ap- 
proach the Doric dialect,—the more im- 
passioned parts being distinguished by 
the predominance of Doric, and the 
calmer by the use of Attic. The 
language of the Apocalypse, in fact, is 
more akin to the Hebrew than to the 
Greek ; and while the Fourth Gospel 
proceeds in propositions of the usual 
historical and narrative character, the 
Apocalypse is occupied with Visions and 
imagery corresponding to the Hebrew 
diction of the Old Test., especially to 
its prophetic and sacred forms of 
speech!:—Thus we find in the Apoc. 
for “‘Jerusalem” only the form ‘Iepov 
cadyp? (ndvy), which is always used 
in the LXX. version of the Canonical 
Books; while in St. John’s Gospel, as 
in St. Matthew's (with one exception,— 
Matt. xxiii. 37), and St. Mark’s, the 
Greek and civil form, “‘IepoodAvpa, alone 
is found. And yet, as Bishop Lightfoot 
observes (Cont. Rev., May 1875, p. 
860), the Apocalypse, “after all allow- 
ance made for solecisims, shows a very 
considerable command of the Greek 
vocabulary, and (what is more impor- 
tant) a familiarity with the intricacies 
of the very intricate syntax of this 


language.” 


1 E. g. the Hebrew words, Adaddon, ch. ix, 
11; Har-Magedon, ch. xvi. 16; Amen, Halle 
lujah, ch. xix. I, 3, 4, 6 ;—such phrases as, 
‘*He that hath the key of David,” ‘‘ the 
root and offspring of David,” ‘‘the Lion of 
the tribe of Judah” (ch. iii. 7; v. 55 xxii 
16) ;—the names of the Twelve Tribes of 
Israel, ch. v. 5; xxi. 13. The Apocalypse ‘‘ does 
not, indeed, mention any one of the Hebrew 
Prophets by name. It knows nothing of Isaiah, 
or Daniel, or Zechariah, as individuals. But 
nearly in every line it breathes their spirit, and 
almost utters their words.’—Bishop Words- 
worth, Jztr. to the Book of Rev. p. 150. 

? Grimm notes: ‘‘ Hzc forma constanter ap. 
LXX. ; in N. T. ubi in ipso nomine tanquam 
sancto vis quedam reponitur, ut Gal. iv. 24, 
26; Heb. xii. 22; Ap. ili, 12; xxi. 2, 10; co 

0S. ¢. Apion, i, 223 ita in ” compellationibus 

t. xxiii. 37 ; Le. xiii. 34. Promiscue utraque 
forma usurpatur in apocryphis V. T., in Luce et 
Pauli scriptis.” 


456 


When this Hebrew colouring is 
urged as an objection, it is not diffi- 
cult to point out that here also the 
Apocalypse resembles the Fourth Gos- 

1, It is pretty generally admitted 
bY modern critics that the style of the 

ospel of St. John is that of a born Jew, 
and certainly not that of an educated 
Greek :—the result is given below in the 
words of Mr. Sanday.! A few illus- 
trations may be added here :—In Rey. 
ix. 11 we read “his name in Hebrew is 
Abaddon” (6voya aitd “EBpaicri "ABad- 
dev) followed, after the manner of the 
Fourth Gospel, by the addition of the 
Greek equivalent for the Hebrew term, 
—see John i. 38, 42; lv. 25; ix. 73 xi. 
16; xx. 16, 24; xxi. 2. In the case of 
Rev. ill. 14— ‘the Amen, the faithful 
and true Witness” (6 “Any, 6 pdprus 6 
motos Kal 6 dAnfivos)—one may note 
the formula of assurance, peculiar to St. 
John’s Gospel, and used only by our 
Lord, “ Verily, verily, I say unto you,” 


1 The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel, p. 28: 
** Representatives of such different schoois as 
Luthardt, Ewald, Wittichen, and Keim, all 
speak to the same effect..... ‘The ianguage 
of the book,’ says Keim (i. 116, 117), ‘is a re- 
conciliation of the parties (Jew and Greek) in 
itself, so marvellously does it combine the 
facility and address of genuine Greek with the 
childlike simplicity, the figurativeness, yes, and 
the gaucherie (Unbeholfenheit) of Hebrew.’ 

. Ewald expresses himself similarly (pp. 44-47). 
It is Hebrew in a Greek dress—easily worn. 
The Greek has been learnt somewhat late in 
life, and has been fitted on to a framework of 
Hebrew. Luthardt (pp. 61, 65) describes this 
by a different metaphor: he says that ‘a soul 
of Hebrew lives in it.’ ‘ The imagery and modes 
of thought in the Fourth Gospel are rooted in 
the Old Testament, and have grown up out of 
the prophecy of the Old Testament.’ M. Wit- 
tichen . . .. has gone carefully into this part 
of the subject ; and gives a list of expressions 
which betray a specifically Hebrew origin’— 
(Zu. Foh. 5-7)." E. g.:— 

‘* Hebraistic words and phrases: cxavdarlCew 
(xvi. 1), yeveo@ar Oavdrou (viii. 52), payeiv 7d 
mdoxa (xviii. 28), SpwORvar ex THs ys (xii. 32), 
évrevbev al evrevdey (xix. 18), opayl(ey, 
‘approve’ (iii. 23), onueia wal répata (iv. 48), 

&pxwy tov Kécpou (xii. 19), &gws va (i. 27), 
mwepimareiv trop. (villi, 12). Figures of speech: 
the woman in travail, xvi. 21 (cf. Iasi. xxi. 3, 
Hos. xiii. 13); living water, iv. 10 (cf. Ecclus. 
xv. 3, Baruch iii. 12); the lamp, Adxvos, v. 35 
(2 Sam. xxi. 17, Ecclus. xlviii. 1).  Speczal 
Theological terms: Bacirela Geod (iii. 3), dpyh 
and xplois (iii. 18, 36), dicaoodvn (xvi. 8), 
ayidfew (xvii. 19). ’—See Sanday, /. ¢., p. 289. 


INTRODUCTION. 


(Aphy, dpnv, \éyo Suiv). Compare the 
Hebrew idioms, John i. 12, 18; vi. 393 
vii. 38, with “he that overcometh to 
him will I give” (6 vixév dé0w aird), 
Rev. ii. 26; ili 12, 21; vi. 8 As in 
Rev. i. 6 (BactAcia tepets), a substantive 
in apposition supplies the place of an 
adjective,—so in John xii. 3. The verb 
commonly precedes its subject:—e. 
“saith he that holdeth” (Aéyet 6 xparayv), 
Rev. ii. 1 (cf. vv. 8, 12, 18; iii 1, &c.)5 
a usage frequent in the Gospel,—dze 
xpiOn 6 “Iwavvys, John i. 26 (cf. vy. 50, 
Bp lies 3 vl 7, Soa 

(2) It is further objected that ‘The 
Author of the Apocalypse and the 
Author of the Fourth Gospel, differ in 
their use of the LXX.’ :— 

On the contrary, a striking parallel 
may be noted. Both writers follow 
the LXX.,—although both sometimes 
abandon this Version in order to ap- 
proach more nearly to the Hebrew text 
Thus, in Rev. ii. 27 (cf ch. xix. 15)—- 
‘He shall rule them... . as the vessels 
of the potter are broken to shivers.” 
(romavel aitods .... Os TA TKEUN TA KEpa- 
puxa ovvtpiBerar) —the variation is insig- 
nificant from the LXX. version of Ps. ii. 9 
(roipaveis aitovs .... ds okedos Kepaews 
ovTpives airovs)' and is owing to the 
nature of the context. 


1 So, too, comparing Rev. xv. 4, mdvta Ta 
€0vn ftovow Kal mpooxuynocovow, with Isai. 
Ixvi. 23, tet waoa capt Tod mpockuyjga. Com- 
pare John xv. 25, éulonoay, with Ps. xxxy. 19, 
of pucodytes, and John xix. 36, dcToww ov 
ovytpiBhioetat avtod, with Ex. xii. 46, daTotv ob 
curtplyere dr avtov. Cf., also, Rev. vi. 8, 
Ezek. xiv. 21 ;—Rev. x. 5, 6, Dan. xi. 7 ;— 
Rev. xviii. 23, Jer. vii. 34 ;—John ii. 17, Ps. 
Ixix. 10 ;—John vi. 31; Ps. lxxviii. 24: see p. 
455, note ?. 

At times the author of the Apocalypse shows 
himself independent of the LXX.: e.g. Rev. ii, 
17, Tov wdvva Tov Kexpuu“pevov,—Deut. viii. 3, 
7d udyva % ovk Hdecay oi marépes gov. Co 
also Rev. xiv. 8; xvi. 19; xviii. 3, with Jer. 
xxv. 15, 16; Isai. li. 17, 22. (Note the various 
reading of Rev. xviii. 3, wéwtwkay, as coms 
pared with 7d worhpiov ris wrdcews, Isai. li. 17). 
The same independent mode of citation is fol- 
lowed in the Gospel : cf. John vi. 45 with Isai. 
liv. 13 ;—John xii. 40 with Isai. vi. 10 ;—John 
xiii. 18 with Ps. xli. 10; &c. 

The most remarkable quotation of this class 
is that of Zech. xii. 10 in Rev. i. 7; John xix. 
37,—in both of which passages the xatwpxf- 
cayro of the LXX. is changed into é{exévrycap, 
and émiBAéweoOa into drrec@ar: see the note 
on Rev. i. 7. 


INTRODUCTION. 


The absence of direct quotations 
accounts for the fewness of the instances 
in which the Apocalypse, as in the case 
of Rev. i. 7, abandons the LXX in 
order to return to the Hebrew original. 
In the Gospel also such instances are rare. 


(c) ‘ Differences in language and 
manner afford another ground of ob- 
jection :— 


There are certain peculiarities charac- 
teristic of the Apocalypse, on the one 
hand, and of the Fourth Gospel and the 
First Epistle of St. John, on the other, 
which cannot fairly be taken into ac- 
count; inasmuch as such peculiarities 
result from the different subjects with 
which these writings are severally oc- 
cupied. Thus, the spiritual tone of 
the Gospel and Epistle is reflected 
in such phrases as to “be born anew,” 
or “from above”* (John iii. 3); while, 
for whatever reason, the Apocalypse has 
its own peculiar forms of words and 
phrases :—e.g. the form of the word 
“ Jerusalem” ? (see above, p. 455). Nor 
does the objectors standing argument 
prove any real diversity,—viz. that, in 
John i. 29, 36, where our Lord is styled 
the “Lamb,” we find one form (duvés), 
instead of the other form (dpviov) which 
alone is found in the Apocalypse. In 
the Gospel, John the Baptist twice em- 
ploys the former (duvds), because that 
form occurs in the LXX. version of Isai. 
lili. 7, to which he is referring ;—just as 
it (¢uves) is found in Acts viii. 32, and 
in 1 Pet. i. 19, where the same words of 
Isaiah are quoted or referred to. In 
these four places only does duvés appear 
in the New Test. On the other hand, 
in John xxi. 15, the latter form (dpviov) 
is employed by the Evangelist when 


* For example, elva: & tux (e. g. John xiv. 
10), —yerrn Piva éx tod @eov (I John iii. 9), 
pévew ev TG Gavdtry (1 John iii. 14),—«. T. A. 

? Compare also Wevdhs (Rev. li. 23 xxi. 8) for 
Yetorns (John viii. 44) ;—eis robs aidvas Tay 
aidvev (Rev. i. 18, &c,) [cf. the v. 2, eis Tos 
aidvas, ch. i. 6] for eis rv aiava (John vi. 
51, &c) ;x—ev tH “EAAQvURhT (Rev. ix. 11) for 
‘EAAnuoti (John xix. 20). Some divergences 
are merely apparent :—e.g., the case last 
quoted ; for in Rev. ix. 11; xvi. 16, we find 
‘ZBpaiorl in full agreement with John Nanas 
xix. 13, 17, 20. If in Rev. xxi. 6 we read rd 
#3wo THS Cwijs, and in John iv. 10 idwp Ca», 
nevertheless in John vi. 35 we read 6 &pros 
ris Cons. 


457 


himself recording a saying of Christ; 
and in this place only, and in the Apo- 
calypse, does this word (apviov) appear 
in the New Test. The result, therefcre, 
is that—while the Baptist borrows from 
the LXX. one form (dauvos)—the other 
form (dpviov) is the term which St. John 
himself uses in the Fourth Gospel to 
express “a lamb.” There is, accord- 
ingly, no divergence here, but perfect 
agreement : see the note on ch. v. 6. 

Leaving out of sight the nature of the 
different writings, Liicke (s. 670) further 
objects that words characteristic of St 
John’s manner, or of frequent occurrence 
in his Gospel and Epistles, occur but 
rarely in the Apocalypse. Thus, éyazay 
is found only in Rev. i. 5 ; iil. 9; xi 115 
XX. 9} and dyazn only in Rev. i. 4, 195— 
pevew only in Rev. xvi 10 ;— doveiy only 
in Rev. xiv. 18 ;—oiv, of such constant 
recurrence in the Fourth Gospel, only 
six times in the Apocalypse, viz., ch. L 
19; i. 5, 16; ill 3 (twice), 19. (As to 
the case of ovv, it may here be observed 
that, in the abrupt narrative of the Apo- 
calypse, there does not exist that close 
connexion of sentences which would 
admit of the frequent use of otv ; and oi», 
it is to be noted, is found only i in the 
first three chapters. Hengstenberg gives, 
as a parallel case, the use of re only 
eight times in St. Luke’s Gospel, while 
it occurs more than 160 times in the 
Acts). Again, it is objected that rucrés, 
which is found eight times in the Apo 
calypse, occurs only in John xx. 27; 
1 John i. 9; 3 John 5 ;—that ziomts, 
which is found four times in the Apo- 
calypse, occurs only in 1 John v. 4;— 
that while @cao6ar and Gewpety are fre- 
quently used in the Fourth Gospel, as 
well as in rt John i. 1; ill 17; lv. 12, 
14, Gewpety alone is used in the Apo- 
calypse, and there, only in Rev. xi. 11, 
12 (6pav, BAérey, cdov, continually em- 
ployed in the Gospel and Epistles, are 
the verbs which appear in the Apoca- 
lypse). 

Of a similar character are the follow- 
ing objections, also urged by Liicke 
among many of the same kind :— 

The phrase “to have part” (eo 
pépos) occurs, it is true, both in the 
Fourth Gospel and in the Apocalypse ; 
but in the former (John xiii. 8), it refers 


458 


to a person, and is followed by the pre- 
position “with” (erd),—while in the 
latter (ch. xx. 6; xxi. 8) it does not 
refer to a person, and is followed by “in” 
(). The Apocalypse has, no doubt, 

e phrase characteristic of the Fourth 
Gospel, “to keep the commandments 
of God” (rypety tas evroAas tod Deod) ; 
but, in Rev, xiv. 12, the words “and 
the faith of Jesus” (kai ryv ziotw “Iqcov) 
are added, which are not found in the 
Gospel. The name “Satan” (6 Saravas), 
which is found eight times in the Apo- 
calypse, occurs once only in the Gospel 
(John xiii. 27); but the Gospel never 
combines “ the Devil and Satan” (d:a- 
Bodos kai 6 Zaravas), as in Rey. xi. 9 ; 
xx. 2. [The verse Rev. xii. 9 suffi- 
ciently answers the question,—‘ Why 
do we not find in the Apocalypse the 
phrase “the Prince of this world” 
(6 ha Tov Kécpov Tovrov), John Xil. 
31]. 

It is difficult to understand why a 
hard and fast rule, such as this form of 
the objection points to, should be im- 
posed on any author; and why he 
should be expected to use the same 
word an equal number of times in his 
different writings. May there not also 
be, in all cases, valid reasons for his 
selection? When we are told for in- 
stance that, instead of xdéopos—so re- 
_peatedly used by St. John (e.g. Johni. 9; 
lil. 16), and which also appears in Rev. 
xi. 15; xiii. 8; xvii. 8—the Apocalypse 
more frequently employs ra é6vy, av 
vos (e.g. ch. ii. 26; xiv. 6: cf. John 
xi. 48-52; xviil. 35), the reason is, 
as Godet observes, “because, in the 
struggle which constitutes the object 
of that Vision, the nations are ‘the 
heathen’ who represent, in a concrete 
manner, the worldly principle.”—Ox Sz. 
John’s Gospel, i. p. 268. 

(d) Irregular constructions :— 

In the often quoted words, Rev. i 
4—“ Grace to you, and peace from Him 
which is and which was, and which is 
to come” (eipyvy ard 6 dy Kat 6 7H, 
Kat 6 épxomevos, Kal ad TOv éxta mvev- 
pdrwv, x. t A.)—the writer is certainly 
not ignorant that dao governs the geni- 
tive, and that jy is not a participle. 
The entire formula 6 dv x. 7.2, as 
Winer observes (4c. § 10, s. 64), is used 


INTRODUCIION. 


as an indeci{nable equivalent of the 
name Jehovah, Ayn. 

When Liicke writes (s. 670): “The 
regular construction of the neuter plural 
with the singular verb does not appear 
in the Apocalypse,” it is hard to under- 
stand his meaning. We read, no doubt, 
in Rev. i. 19, &@ elds, xal & cioiv,—as 
similarly in John xix. 31, va xareayoow 
aitav 7a oKxeAyn,—but we also have the 
construction which Liicke says is mof 
found, viz., in Rev. villi. 33 xiii 143 
xiv. 13; XX. 73 xxL 22 \(sce)Wmew 
§ 58, s. 456): cf. John ili. 19-21 ; ix. 3; 
x. 21; 1 John iii. 10, 12, When Ebrard, 
in reply to Liicke, adduced the text Rev. 
vill. 3 (€666y airG Gvpiduata oddd), 
Liicke’s answer is that €66@y is placed 
first, and that the nominative seems to 
be taken collectively. This construc 
tion, frequently recurs, with, at times, a 
transition, in the same passage, from the 
singular to the plural, and vice vers@: see 
Rey. i. 19 ; vili. 9 ; xvi. 14; John x. 4, 21, 
27; xix. 31. The verb in the plural is 
also used, as in the LXX.,—e.g. in Rev, 
xi. 18; xv. 43 xvii. 12; cf. Ps. Ixxxvi. 9 
Rev. iii. 2, and John x. 8, are also to be 
compared,—7a Aourd and 1a zpdéBara 
being explained of persons: see Moul- 
ton’s ed. of Winer, p. 646. 

Again, when different cases are put in 
apposition, as Rev. 1. 5, “from Jesus 
Christ the faithful witness (ard “Inood 
Xpucrod 6 paprus 6 rwrds), assuredly the 
rules of grammar are not unknown to the 
author, for he follows those rules else- 
where: he evidently does not err from 
ignorance, but he emancipates himself 
designedly from grammatical laws. By 
the side of the alleged solecisms, and, 
at times, as in the case of Rev. i. 4, ia 
the same verse, the correct grammatical 
construction, of which the writer is alleged 
to be ignorant, is found.' In every such 
case, the writer’s object is to place the 
accessory idea (cf. ch. xx. 2), in all its 
independence, in relation to the prin- 
cipal word (see Godet, zdid.). 

To this head belong mixed construc- 


1 E.g. if in ch. ii, 20, we meet with rip 
yuvaika % Aéyovca, we have in ch. i. 10, és 
odamryyos Aeyotons,—if in ch, iii. 12 we meet 
with tis Kowjs ‘Iep. 7 kataBalvouca, we have 
in ch. iii, 10 é« THs Soas Tot weiwoacuod THE 
peAAovons Epx. 


INTRODUCTION. 


thons:—e. g. Rev. iv. 4; v. 11; vii. 9; xiv. 
14; XVili. 12-14 (Winer points out that 
in ch, ii. 17 the just distinction between 
the cases depending on ddcw, first the 
genitive and then the accusative, is 
observed,—4 63, s. 511). Cf. Rev. xix. 
1, where the singular of a collective 
noun is combined with a plural (6xAou 
.... Aeyévrwv : similarly, John vi. 2 ; vil. 
49; xii. 9, 12) ;—see also ch. viii. 8, 9; 
ix. 18; xviii. 4. We find the subject 
suddenly changing from singular to 
plural (Rev. xiv. 10, 11) ; the nominative 
transformed into the accusative (ch. vil. 
g), and the accusative into the nomina- 
tive (ch. xx. 2,—see above); an ac- 
cumulation of genitives (ch. xvi. 19), 
&c., &c. The verb substantive also is 
often suppressed where we naturally look 
for it (e.g. & évesriov, Rev. i. 4; tis d£wos, 
Rev. v. 2; cf. Ivetua 6 @eds, John 
iv. 24). 

(e) Solecisms :— 

Of the solecisms of the Apoc., Winer 
(§ lix. 11) observes :—“ In some instances 
they are the result of design; in others 
they are to be referred to negligence (?) 
on the part of the writer. Considered 
from a Greek point of view, they may 
be explained as arising out of anacolu- 
thon, the mixture of two constructions, 
eonstructio ad sensum, variatio structure, 
&c. In this light they should always 
have been considered, and not ascribed 
to the ignorance of the writer, or even 
regarded as Hebraisms . . . . But with 
all the simplicity and the oriental tone 
of his language, the author knows well 
and observes well, the rules of the Greek 
syntax . Rey. ii. 20 should pro- 
bably be construed thus: ‘who giving 
herself out for a prophetess, teaches and 
seduces,’ &c. Rev. vil. g may be ex- 
plained as containing a mixture of two 
constructions: in using the nominative 
the writer had idov before his mind, 
but in using the accus. wepiBeBAnpEvovs, 
the verb <«idov, and thus he mixes to- 
gether the two constructions; cf. iv. 4; 
Judith x. 7. In Rev. v. 11 ff the word 
A€yortes is not construed with pupidocs, 
but (the words xai jv... . pup. being 
taken as a parenthesis) with ayye- 
Ao, as if the sentence had commenced 
with dwrvyy érjpav ayyeAo x. tT. A. : simi- 
lar examples are Thucyd. vii. 42, rots 


459 


Supaxovaios . . . . katdmAnéis oi ddiyn 
éyévero .... dpdvres- Achil. Tat. vi. 133 
Plat. Phedo, p. 81a. Elsewhere, Aéywv 
or Aéyortes (iV. I; Vl. 93 Xi. 15) stands 
in connexion with ¢wvy, dwvai, &c., be- 
cause the writer is thinking of the 
speakers themselves. We even find 
Aéywv used quite absolutely in xi. 1; 
xiv. 7; xix. 6—asin the LXX., where it 
corresponds to the Hebrew 7x5, Gen. 
XV. I; Xxli. 20; Jos. x. 17, &c.; even 
in Rey. v. 12 it might be so taken, 
More singular is the irregular apposi- 
tion in Rey. ili. 12 (where, however, # 
kataBaivovea, since it cannot well be 
taken as a mominativus tituli, inter- 
rupts the structure of the sentence as a 
significant parenthesis, as if for at» 
éorlv 7 xataB.); and also in Rey. xiv. 
12 (cf. i. 5), where there is a sudden 
transition to a new sentence, somewhat 
as in James ii. 8. In Rev. viii. g also, 
and in ix. 14; xvi. 3, it is probably by 
Gesign that the apposition is interposed 
in an independent form: see also xx. 2, 
In Rey. xxi. 11 ff. the structure changes 
repeatediy: first we find xaraGaivoveay 
in regular agreement with rv zoAw 
of ver. 10; then is inserted an inde 
pendent sentence, 6 ¢woryjp x. 7 A.3 
ver. 12 comes back to zéAts, but the 
attributive commences a new sentence, 
exouva k. T.A..... Ind 5 ff. 76 dyaravre 
x. Tt A. is connected with aire 4 dééa 

x. tT A. ; but instead of writing xal zou 
cavrt xk. 7. A., the writer interposes the 
thought in the form of an independent 
sentence ” (Moulton’s transl., p. 672). 

On this passage Dr. S. Davidson thus 
comments: “ This language is apolo- 
getic. to the extent of substantial incor- 
rectness .... After all endeavours to 
find analogies to the linguistic pecu- 
liarities and departures from good Greek 
usage in the [Apocalypse], either in the 
New Test. or classical writers, anomalies 
of such a nature and in such number 
present themselves, as separate the au- 
thor widely from the Evangelist.”— 
Introd. to the N. T., 1868, voL i p 
341. 

Such a comment as this of Dr.S. David- 
son has called for the discussion with 
which the present section is occupied. 

(f) The style of the Apocalypse :— 

In point of style, the Book of the Reve- 


460 


lation is marked by those parallelisms 
full of Oriental majesty which belong to 
the grandeur of the prophetic language. 
Examples of the similarity of the Apoca- 
lypse in this respect to the Fourth 
Gospel are not far to seek :—compare, 
e.g., “Her sins have reached even unto 
heaven, and God hath remembered her 
iniquities” (Rev. xviii. 5) with “The 
light shineth in darkness, and the dark- 
ness comprehended it not,’—John i. 5 
(cf. also “The world passeth away, 
and the lust thereof: but he that doeth 
the will of God abideth for ever,’— 
1 John ii. 17). We may also compare the 
rhythmical recurrence of phrases in such 
passages as Rev. xx. 13; John i. 10; 
1 John ii. 13. When the writer’s object 
is strongly to intensify a thought, an 
affirmation is followed by a negation, 
e.g. Rev. iii. 3, 16, 18 (cf. xvi. 15); x. 4; 
xi 2; Johni. 3; 1 John i. 5:—at times 
the negation precedes, eg. Rev. iil. 
§; 1 John ii. 18. Antithetical parallels 
are connected by aAAa, Rev. ii. 9; ix. 5; 
657-5. XVI 2 ocx, -67;) Joke iieGt; 
v. 22; and passim. We find the repeti- 
tion of the verb in the second member 
of a phrase, Rev. ii. 6, 17; xvi. 18; 
John i. 3 ;—+the reproduction of entire 
phrases, Rev. ili. 21; John xv. to;— 
the frequent repetition of a substan- 
tive in the same context, Rev. i. 12 
(cf. ch. xiii, 12); John xviii. 36, in 
order to add force to a thought.) Ex- 
planatory notes are inserted,—Rev. iv. 
Brive Ob xRt Sarg: Olbneiie zee tveners 
VIL. (395 Xxi-23)3' 1 ‘Johnai.) 22, o-The 
thought is at times rendered more clear 
by an explanatory phrase,—Rev. xii. 9; 
xx. 2; Johni.12. The frequent repeti- 
tion of the article? between the substantive 


1 So also, waptupla and waptupeiv (Rev. i. 2; 
ohn y. 32) ;—@s and gwrifew (Rev. xxii. 5; 
ohn i. 9);—8lxaos and dicaoctvn (Rev. xxii. 
11; 1 John ii. 29; iii. 7) are employed in the 

same phrase. Cf. wer’ adrov Kal avrds wer’ euoi, 
Rev. iii. 20, with John xvii. 23 ; 1 John iii. 24. 

2 E.g. 6 paéprus 5 mords, Rev. i. 53 Thy 
a&ydanv thy mpérny, Rev. ii. 43 Tod Oavdrov 
fou devrépov, Rev. ii. 11; Thy poudalay thy 
Blorouov Rev. ii. 12; 6 deomérns 6 Gyos, Rev. 
Vi. 10:—1d Gs Td GAnOwvdv, John i. 9; TH 
muepa Ty TpitTn, John ii. 1 ; Td O€Anua 7d eudy, 
John v. 30; 6 xaipbs 5 euds, John vii. 6; 6 
mony 6 xadds, John x. II ; 7 &mmedos 7 GANdwh, 
John xv. 1 5 7 evToAh 4 wadaid, I John ii. 7 ; 
Ths adeApas THS exAEKTHs, 2 John 13. 


INTRODUCTION. 


and the adjective is, in like manner, a 
marked characteristic of St. Johu. 
Greecisms, also, usual in the Fourth 
Gospel and scarcely to be expected in 
the Apoc. are nevertheless found there:— 
e.g. the attraction of the relative pronoun 
by the preceding substantive, Rev. xviii 
6; John vii. 39 ; 1 John iii. 24.1 

' As an instance of the inverse attraction, cf 
Rev. v. 8, af ciow ai mpocevxal ; 1 John ii. 8, 
& éoriy GAnbés. Compare, too, the instances of 
irregular apposition, Rev. xvii. 8 (of karomoovres 
. « Gy ov yéyp. 7d bvoua . . BrexdvTwy Td 
Onp.), and I John ii. 25 (n éxayy. hv abrds 
ernyy.. » . « Thy (why) : see Winer, § 59, s. 469. 
As examples of the double negation may be ad- 
duced Rev. xviii. 11, 14; John iii. 27; xv. 5; 
xix. 41 ; I Johni. 5. 

In further illustration of this subject :— 

Compare the elliptical phrases, «lov @pdvous 
kal éxd@icav, Rev. xx. 4; and fSara woAA& Fy 
exei, kal mapeylvovro, John iii, 23 ;—the frequent 
combination of Aéyew and Aadei, Rev. iv. 13 
x. 8; xvii. 1; xxi. 9; John viii. 12; xiv. 10; 
xvi. 18 ;—the connexion of ¢wvh with Bpovrh, 
Rev. iv. 5; vi. 1; xiv. 2; &c.; John xii. 29, 
30 ;—of pas with mepimareiv, Rev. xxi. 243 
John xii. 35 ;—the titles of reverence, pdvos 
dawos, Rev. xv. 4; udvos GAnbwés, John xvii. 3; 
motos kal GdnOivés, Rev. xix. II; motds 
S{xaios, 1 John i. 9 ;—the constant use of the 
historic present, Rev. v. 5; vi. 16; xi. 5; xii 
2, 4; &c.; John vili. 14 ; ix. 13; xv. 27; I 
John iii. 8; &c.:—to which instances of simi- 
larity may be added, Rev. ii. 27, &s Kaye 
elAnpa mapa tod marpés mov, and John x. 18, 
TalTyy Thy évToAhv edaBoy rapa Tov marpds mov. 

The direct discourse is introduced by érs:-— 
Rev. iii, 17; xviii. 7; John i. 20, 32; &c.; 
I John iv, 20. Cf. rodro yes Sri, Rev. ii. 6, 
with év tovtw 671, John xvi. 30; 1 John ii. 3. 

We find awd and é« used in the same phrase 
in a common sense in Rey. iii. 12; ix. 18 ; xvi. 
17; xxi. 2; Johni. 45; xi. 1 ;—the idiomatic 
use of dé to signify distance, a use confined to 
Rev. xiv. 20; John xi. 18; xxi. 8 (Winer, 
s. 491, exemplifies the regular construction by 
Luke xxiv. 13) ;—of ék to denote part of a whole, 
Rey. ii. 10; Vv. 9; Xi- 9; John xvi. 57 = 4 
John 4 ;—of emf, with a dative, in the sense of 
concerning, Rev. x. 11; John xii. 16; the 
pleonastic ¢{w with verbs compounded with éx, 
Rev. iii. 12 ; [xi. 2]; John ix. 34; xix. 5 ;—and 
the pleonastic (?) oftws, Rev. ii. 15; iii. 5, 163 
John iv. 6 ; xiii. 25 ;—the characteristic use of 
fa, (1) in the absence of S#ws which is found 
once only (John xi. 57) in the writings of St, 
John ;—(2) followed by the indicative future, 
eg. maxdpio .... twa tora, Rev. xxii. 14 
(cf. ch. vi. 4, If3 vill. 3; xiv. 13); John 
xv. 8; xvii. 2 ;—(3) to express the gerund in 
dum (a New Test. usage, nowhere so frequent 
as in St. John’s writings), e.g. od xpelay Exes Tow 
nAlov ovde THs eA. Iva palywow, Rev. xxi. 23; 
bre GwéoretAay of "Iovd.. . . . iva epwrhcwow, 
John i. 19 ;—(4) in Rev. xiii. 13, tva nal wip 
row (=&ore woieiv, in the sense of advo ut), we 


INTRODUCTION. 461 


§ 8. The Text of the Apocalypse. 


As the English Version of 1611 is the 
basis of the present Commentary, it 
is necessary to point out, from the be- 
ginning, the peculiar position which 
“the Authorized Translation” of the 


expec: Sore, which occurs in St. John’s writ- 
ings, as Bengel points out, only in John iii. 16, 
but St. John’s constant use of iva is adhered to 
[here Winer notes: ‘‘ In the faulty style of the 
Apoc. iva occurs once (ch. xiii. 13), as it seems 
for Sore, és, after an adjective which includes 
the idea of intensity,—‘ magna miracula,’ 2. ¢., 
‘tam magna ut’ &c.”—s. 409. Winer does not 
consider 1 John i. 9 (De Wette, Schott) an 
analogous case] ;—(5) the use of iva after moteiy, 
@g. Tojow avtovs iva itovow, Rev. iii. 9 ; xiii. 
12, 16; John xi. 37 (elsewhere, in this sense, 
we have the infinitive, Mark vii. 37 ; Luke v. 34). 
The phrases toeiv adnGeray, Wevdos, yvduny, 
émOuulas, kpiow, méAcpuoy, are found in Rev. xi. 
73 xvii. 17; xxii. 15 ; John iii. 21; v. 27; viii. 
44; 1 John i. 6 ;—we also find yew avaravowy, 
ywvounv, mépos, brouovhy, in place of the more 
usual verbs derived from the substantives, see 
Rey. ii. 3; iv. 8; xvii. 13; xx. 6; cf. John 
xiii. 29 ; xvi. 22; I Johni. 3, 8. Again Aadei 
petd tivos, which occurs in Rey. i. 12; iv. 1; 
x. 8; xvii. I; xxi. 9, 15 ; John iv. 27 (twice) ; 
ix. 37; xiv. 30, is found elsewhere in the New 
Test. only in Mark vi. 50; Eph.iv. 25. The 
hrase bvoua alte (eg. 6 Odvatos, “ABaddav) 
bee. vi. 8; ix. II, is used John i. 6; iii. 1; 
Xviii, 10: elsewhere we read @ (or 0%), dvoua, 
or dvduati Seiva 7} Seiva, or dvduari. Kadovmevos, 
cf Matt. xxvii. 32; Luke i. 26, 273; xix. 2. 
The verb mpockvvety takes an accusative, as well 
as the usual dative, in Rev. ix. 20; xiii. 8, 12, 
[15]5 xiv. 9, 11; xx. 4; John iv. 22, 23, 24 ;— 
elsewhere in the New Test. the accusative occurs 
only in Matt. 4, 10; Luke iv. 8 (compare for 
both texts Deut. vi. 13), and in Luke xxiv. 52. 
The phrase xew thy paptupiay, Rev. vi. 9; 
xii. 17; xix. 10; John y. 36; 1 John v. Io, is 
found elsewhere only in 1 Tim. iii. 7 (cf. the 
frequent use of paprupeiv, and of maprupla, in 
all St. John’s writings). Observe also the com- 
bination of the terms paptupeiv, waptupla, udp- 
Tus, with GAn@ijs or aAn@ivds, or GANGera, Rey. 
iii, 14 ; John v. 32, 33; xix. 35 ; 3 John 12 :— 
*¢Can any one seriously deny,” writes Gebhardt 
(4 ¢, s. 377), ‘‘that the Evangelist and the 
author of the Apocalypse are here in striking 
agreement ; and that too in an expression which 
bears on its front—and notably in the Apocalypse 
—its strict applicability to the Logos-doctrine ?” 
Alford writes :—‘‘ I have observed the follow- 
ing [examples] which I have not seen elsewhere 
noticed, occurring ov/y in the three Books, or 
only in the peculiar sense: (1) ov dvvacGe Bac- 
ds &ptt, John xvi. 2; ov dbvp Bacrdoa ka- 
gots, Rey. ii. 2 ;—(2) kekomiaxas éx Tis ddoumo- 
, John iv. 6 ; ov xexorlaxes, Rev. ii. 3 ;—(3) 
GyyéAous ev Aeuxois, John xx. 12; mepiwarh- 
@ovow uer Euod ev Acucots, Rev. iii. 4 ;—(4) the 


Apocalypse holds with regard to that 
of the other Books of the New Testa- 
ment. 

The first printed edition of the Greek 
Testament formed the fifth volume of 
the great work published by Cardinal 
Ximenes—the Complutensian Polyglott, 


verb xetuat used of mere position, John ii. 6 ; xix. 
29 ; xx. 5, 6; xxi. 9; Rev. iv. 2 only ;—(5) dvoua 
ait@ [see above] ;—(6) compare Rev. iii. 18 
with I John ii. 20, 27 as to the xpfoua and its 
effects.” —Prolgg., p. 228. 

Turning, in conclusion, to single words :— 

&AnOuwés, is found ¢ez times in the Apoc. (e. ge 
ch. ili. 7), ze times in the Fourth Gospel (e.g, 
i. 9), four times in I John (e.g. v. 20). It occurs. 
elsewhere in the N. T. only in Luke xvi. 113 
1 Thess. i. 9 ; Heb. viii. 2; ix. 14, 243 x. 22. 

Gmaptl (or am &pt.), Rev. xiv. 13; John xiii, 
19; xiv. 7, is found only in Matt. xxiii. 39 
XXvi. 29, 64. 

pa is not found in the Apoc., or in the othe. 
writings of St. John. 

Bpovry found fez times in the Apoc. (e.g. ch, 
iv. 5) occurs elsewhere only in John xii. 29, and 
in the explanation of St. John’s surname “ Boas 
nerges,” Mark iii. 17. 

daiuwy, found in each of the Synoptists, is not 
employed by St. John, who uses daiudri0v,—e.g, 
Rey. ix. 20; John vii. 20. In Rev. xvi. 143. 
XVill. 2, dafuwy is a false reading. 

€Bpatorl, Rey. ix. 11; xvi. 16; John v. 23 
xix. 13, 17, 20; xx. 16, is not found elsewhere 
in the N. T. . 

exkevtety occurs only in John xix. 37; Rev. 
i. 7 (see the note 27 /oc.). 

eAeeiv, EXeos, do not occur in the Apocalypse 
(but see éAcewds, ch. iii. 17), nor in any of St, 
John’s writings, except 2 John 3 (2Acos). 

kataBalyev is always connected with éx in the 
Apoc., and the writings of St. John. Elsewhere 
(except in Matt. xvii. 9 ; xxviii. 2), with amd. 

pdvva is referred to in Rev. ii. 17; John vi. 
31, 49 ; elsewhere only in Heb. ix. 4. 

ev does not occur in the Apoc., or the 
Epistles of St. John. It is found but eight 
times in the Fourth Gospel. This, together 
with the rareness of particles so frequent in 
Greek writings, is a feature eommon to the 
Apocalypse and the other Joannean writings, 

éxAos, continually used in the plural else 
where, is so used only in Rey. xvii. 15 ; John: 
vii. 12, 

dys is found in the New Test. only in Rev. i. 
16; John vii. 243 xi. 44. 

mopoupeos is found only in Rev. xvii. 4; xviii 
16 ; John xix. 2, 5. 

oxnvovy is found only in Rey. vii, 15 ; xii. 123 
xiii. 6 ; xxi. 3; Johni. 14. 

opdtrewv, found eight times in the Apoc 
(e.g. ch. v. 6), occurs elsewhere only in 1 John 
ll. 12, 

odpaylCew is used absolutely, in the active, 
only in Rev. xx, 3 ; John iii. 33. 

golut is found only in Rey. vii. 9; ,chm 
xii. 13. 


402 


so called from the place where it ap- 
peared, Complutum, or Alcala, in Spain. 
This volume is dated January to, 1514. 
The entire work was completed during 
the summer of 1517'; but was not pub- 
lished until March 22, 1520, when Pope 
Leo X. granted his licence. 

Not until the year 1522, however, the 
date of his third edition, did the Com- 
plutensian Bible come into the hands 
of Erasmus, who, at the request of 
the famous printer Frobenius of Basle, 
had undertaken to edit the text of the 
New Testament.? The first edition 
of Erasmus appeared, with a translation 
and notes, in March 1516, and was the 
first printed Greek ‘Testament which 
was actually given to the world. From 
the second edition of 1519, Luther made 
his translation. For the text of the 
Apocalypse Erasmus possessed but one 
cursive manuscript, lent to him by 
Reuchlin, together with a few (five) 
readings supplied by Laurentius Valla, 
of which the source is now unknown. 
This manuscript, known among the cur- 
sive codices of the Apocalypse by the 
figure “1,” was long supposed to be 
lost; but has been discovered by De- 
litzsch, in the Library of Mayhingen, 
in Bavaria. The cursive “1” presents 
traces of having been copied from a more 
ancient Uncial, and its date is placed by 
Delitzsch in the twelfth or even in the 
eleventh century ;—by Tregelles in the 
twelfth? The sacred text is here mixed 


‘ “Novum Test. Greece et Latine in acad. 
Cumplutensi noviter impressum.”— Complut. 
1514. ‘‘De mandato et sumptibus R. in 
Christo P. et D. D. F. Franc, Ximenii de 
Cisneros, tit. S. Balbine SS. R. E. Presb. Card. 
Archiep. Toletani. Industria et solertia hon. 
viri Arnaldi Guil. de Brocario, artis impressorie 
[sic] magistri, A.D. MDXVIL., mensis Julii die 
decimo.” —Coloph. ad part. iv. 

2 On this edition of Erasmus see ‘‘ Hand- 
schriftliche Funde” von F. Delitzsch, 1°* Heft, 
Leipzig, 1861 ; 2** Heft, ‘‘nebst einer Abhand- 
lung von S. P. Tregelles,” 1862. Seealso Mr. W. 
Kelly’s ed. of the Text of the Revelation, 1860, 
Introd. ; and Dr. Scrivener’s ‘‘ Introduction to 
the Crit. of the N. T.,” 2nd ed. pp. 245, 380. 

® Erasmus himself writes: ‘‘Quoniam Greecis 
nunquam magnopere placuit liber Apocalypseos, 
rarus habetur apud illos. Itaque quum cupere- 
mus nihil abesse nostre editioni, egre extor- 
simus ab inclyto viro J. Capnione ([#.¢., Reuchlin] 
vetustissimum codicem, commentarios habentem 
imhocopus. Ex eo contextus verba describenda 


INTRODUCTION. 


up with the commentary of Andreas, 
Bishop of Czsarea in Cappadocia (cre, 
A.D. 500). Hence, one source of the 
errors committed by Erasmus, or rather 
by the person whom he employed to 
transcribe the manuscript ; for, although 
it is generally notified in the margin 
where each portion of the text or 
of the commentary begins, nevertheless 
both are, at times, so intermingled 
that the manuscript itself does not 
enable a copyist, unfamiliar with the 
Greek text,—as most persons were in 
the days of Erasmus,—to separate them, 
For example, in Rev. xxi. 24 the copy- 
ist has imported into the text the words 
of the commentary, viz., “of them which 
are saved” ; and so they still appear in 
the Authorized Version. Again, owing 
to this cause, Erasmus omitted, from his 
first three editions, ch, xxi. 26,—a verse 
which is also omitted in all the original 
editions of Luther’ translation (De- 
litzsch, 4 ¢, Ss. 51): see, too, the note 
on Rey. iii 15, among the various 
readings of ch. iii! Further, the manu- 
script is mutilated at the end,—the 
text of the Apocalypse closing with 
the word Aaveid, ch. xxii. 16, a page 
being lost. The rest of this chapter, 
from 6 dornp to the end, Erasmus re- 
translated into Greek from the Vulgate: 
and, although acquainted with the Com- 
plutensian text, in none of his later 
editions (he published five in all, viz., in 
1516, 1519, 1522, 1527, 1535) did he 
replace his own Greek version of this 
passage by the genuine words of St 
John.* Erasmus has also supplied from 
the Vulgate words which do not exist 
in the text of his manuscript. Thus, in 
ch. xiv. 5, he added, from the Latin 


curavimus” (Of., ed. Lugd. Bat., 1706, t. ix, 
p. 246). On ch. ii. 2 he writes: ‘‘In Apoc. 
non suppetebat nobis nisi unicum exemplar, sed 
vetustissimum, quod nobis exhibuit eximius ille 
litterarum heros Yoannes Reuchlinus.” And 
on ch. iii. 7, he adds: ‘‘ Ne quis contemnat 
nostrum [exemplar], tantze vetustatis erat ut 
Apostolorum zetate scriptum videri posset.” 

See also the varia /ectio on ch. xvii. 3. 

2 After the word Aavefd there follow six 
Greek words of the commentary of Andreas, 
which was doubtless continued on the lost 
Erasmus writes: ‘‘Quanquam in calce hujus 
libri nonnulla verba reperi apud nostros, qu 
aberant in Greecis exemplaribus, ea tamen ea 
Latinis adjecimus.”—Amott., ed. Ima, 1516, 


INTRODUCTION. 


“ante thronum Dei”—a clause which 
even in the Vulgate is not genuine 
(Delitzsch, s. 39)—the words évwmov 
tod Opovov tod @cod: and these words are 
represented to this day in the Authorized 
Version (‘“‘ before the throne of God”), as 
well as in Luther's translation. He has 
elsewhere altered the text of his manu- 
script so as to make it conform to his 
own text of the Vulgate:—in ch. xv. 
3, codex 1 reads “the King of the 
nations” (6 Bacreds rav evar); but 
Erasmus substituted for “ nations ” 
(é6vav), “saints” (déyiwv), in order to 
conform to the reading of his copy of the 
Vulgate, “sanctorum,”—which is itself 
a corruption of the best supported read- 
ing, “szculorum,” “the ages” (av 
aiwvwv), the abbreviations of “ szeculo- 
rum” and “sanctorum” being easily 
interchanged. The Authorized Version 
and Luther’s translation still render here 
“thou King of Saints:”) see the vv. 4. 
of ch. xv. 

To these sources of error must be 
added the mistakes of the copyist when 
transcribing the manuscript. Of such 
mistakes one instance 7—one, too, which 
has misled many a commentator—‘‘and 
yet is” (xairep éoriv), for “and shall 


1 «© Some portions,” writes Dr. Scrivener, 
“of his [Erasmus’s] self-made version, which 
are found (however some editors may speak 
vaguely) iz no one known Greek manuscript 
whatever, still cleave to our received text.” —/.c., 
p. 382. 

7 Instead of the true reading, ‘‘when they 
behold the Beast, how that he was, and is not, 
and shall come,” the A.V. has, ‘‘ when they 
Sehold the Beast that was, and is not, and yet 
S.” Here Bossuet, understanding by the Beast 
Rome under Diocletian (‘‘ Rome paienne avec 
son idolatrie”), concludes that because the 
Beast exists, for the moment, only in its sixth 
**Head,” and because the seventh ‘‘ Head” 
gontinues but ‘‘a little while” (see Rev. xvii. 
10), this is expressed in ver. 8 by the words 
‘fis not, and yet is” (‘‘quoiqu’elle soit’); 
—St. John thus describing the ‘‘ languid” con- 
dition in which the Beast now appeared to him 
(‘‘ pour faire entendre a Saint Jean que dans la 
langueur ot elle lui paroissoit . “ il la pouvoit 
regarder comme n’étant plus”). Vitringa 
(p. 767) applies this erroneous reading to the 
parallel between the old Roman Empire and 
the Papacy: ‘‘ Fuit nempe et xox est, quatenus 
vere antiquum illud Imperium Paganum de- 
structum fuit ; sed est famen, quia ex destructo 
ilo Vetere natum est Romanum Imperium 
Mysticum, in quo omnia antiqui Imperii 
&£iéuara digito demonstrari possunt.” 


463 


come” (kal zapéorat), ch. xvii. 8, is per- 
petuated to the present day both in our 
Authorized Version and in Luther's 
translation. Such also is the strange 
form édadideoovew in ch. xvii. 13 (still 
represented in our Authorized Version 
by the future “shai give),” although 
the future &éddéocw is found only in 
Homer. This error originated thus: 
—Codex 1 gives diacw, written in red 
ink, corrected by writing 46 above in 
black ink, so that ddcacw—the true 
reading—might result; and the copyist 
seems to have mixed up these three 
elements, although the manuscript has 
no trace of w or ov (Delitzsch, s. 43). 
The text of Erasmus has exercised 
an unfortunate influence on the subse- 
quent translations, and on the subsequent 
interpretation of the Apocalypse. This is 
due to the fact that from his first edition— 
described by himself as “ precipitatum 
verius quam editum”—numerous false 
readings have passed over into the third 
edition of Robert Stephens (A.D. 1550), 
and thence into the Elzevir edition of 
1624, the so-called TZextus Receptus. 
Wetstein! affirms that R. Stephens had 
only two manuscripts of the Apocalypse, 
and these imperfectly collated. Ste- 
phens also followed the Complutensian 
text; for which the editor, adds Wetstein, 
had but one manuscript of the Apoca- 
lypse. The third edition of Stephens 
(A.D. 1550) was the basis both of the 
editions of Beza (Geneva, 1559, 1565, 
1582. 1589, 1598,—see Scrivener, 7. ¢., p. 
390), and of the Zextus Receptus. Beza’s 
edition of 1589? (or 1598) was taken as 
the basis of our Authorized Version, by 
the Translators of 1611: and thus the 
English Version of the Apocalypse re- 
presents a Greek text which does not 
rest upon the same authority as that of 
the other Books of the New Testament.® 
E. g. in ch. xvi. 5, the conjectural reading 
of Beza’s last three editions (écdyevos for 
6ovos, which rests on no authority what- 
ever), is still represented in the words of 
the Authorized Version—“ and shalt be.” 


1 Prolegg. in Apocalyps. N. T., vol. ii. p. 741. 

2 See Zhe English Bible, by John Eadie, 
D.D., 1876, vol. ii. p. 211. 

3 Lectio recepta Apocalypseos que ab Eras- 
mianis profluxit, admodum infirmo nititur tibi- 
cine.”— Wetstein, Z.c. 


404 


Many manuscripts of the Apocalypse, 
however, have been collated since 1611 ; 
and yet,—neither here nor elsewhere 
should it be forgotten when estimating 
the effect of criticism,—all the skill which, 
since then, has been brought to bear 
upon the sacred text has not added to, 
nor has it taken from, one article of the 
Faith as expressed in the single codex 
of Erasmus.! 

Until a comparatively recent date but 
three Uncial manuscripts of the Apoca- 
lypse were known :—the Codex Alexan- 
drinus, A, of Cent. v.; the Codex 
Ephremi,? C, of Cent. v.; and the 
Codex Vaticanus, No. 2066, formerly 
numbered 105 in the Library of the 
Basilian Monks in Rome, and of a date 
about the end of Cent. viii. From the 
time that Wetstein employed this last 
Uncial in place of the cursive known 
as g1 among the cursive texts of the 
Apocalypse, and which had previously 
supplied the lost portions of the great 
Codex Vaticanus, B, No. 1209 (ascribed 
to the middle of Cent. iv., and which 
breaks off at Heb. ix. 14; see Scrivener, 
/. ¢., p. 96),—this Uncial also has been 
designated B.? 

To these three Uncials are now to be 
added the Codex Sinaiticus, x, of about 
the middle of Cent. iv., and the Codex 
Porphyrianus, P, both of which MSS. 
Tischendorf had the good fortune to 
bring to light. P is a palimpsest which 
was brought to St. Petersburg in 1862 
by Porphyry, Bishop of Uspensk. It was 
printed at Leipzig, in 1869, by Tischen- 
dorf, in the sixth volume of his ‘“‘ Monu- 
menta sacra inedita.” He places its 
date in Cent. viii. or ix., and estimates 
its value perhaps too highly (“Codex 


' In his reply to ‘‘ A late Discourse of Free- 
thinking,” by Collins, Richard Bentley (‘‘ Phi- 
leleutherus Lipsiensis’’) wrote: ‘* Make your 
30,000 [various lections] as many more, . . All 
the better to a knowing and serious reader, 

. . . Even put them into the hands of a knave 
or a fool; and yet with the most sinistrous and 
absurd choice he shall not extinguish the light 
of any one chapter.”—7th ed., p. 113. 

2 C contains Rev. i. 2-iii. 19 ; v. 14—-vii. 145 
vii. I7-Vviii. 4; ix. 17-x. 10; xi. 3-xvi. 13 5 xvili. 
2-xix. 5.—Scrivener, /.c., p. 109. 

3 Tregelles reserving the letter B for the great 
Vatican Uncial, called this manuscript first L 
(N. T., part iv. p. iii.) ; amd subsequently Q 
(N. T. part vi. p. I). 


INTRODUCTION. 


Porphyrianus textum Apocalypseos pree 
bet tam egregium ut principalibus codi 
cibus qui ztate ipsum longe antecedunt 
vix posthabendus videtur.” — Prolegg., 
p. 1): he considers it to represent the 
text used by Andreas. If this be so, the 
fact will, perhaps, account for the fre 
quent coincidences between P and the 
cursive 1, on which the text of Erasmus 
is founded." 

In addition to these five Uncials, 
Dr. Scrivener has enumerated 105 cur 
sive manuscripts of the Apocalypse :— 
see his “ Introd.,” 2¢, p. 249; and he 
has appended to his transcript of the 
Codex Augiensis a careful collation of 
thirteen of these cursives. 


§ 9. The modern conception of “ Apoka- 
Dptik.” 


The Revelation of St. John and the 
Book of Daniel have been classified in 
modern times apart from the other Books 
of Scripture, as constituting a distinct 
species of literature styled “ Apokalyp- 
tik.”?  Liicke defines ‘‘ Apokalyptik” 
to be “ The sum and substance of the 
revelations, as well of the Old as of 
the New Testament, respecting the end 
of all things” (“ Der Inbegriff der 
eschatologischen Apokalypsen so des 
alten wie des neuen Testaments),”— 
s. 25. This kind of literature, we are 
told, created by the prophets of the Old 
Test., has been continued after them by 
more than one Apocryphal writer: e.g. 
by the authors of the Fourth Book of 
Esdras and the Book of Henoch. 

The term “ Apokalyptik” has been 
formed from the word with which the 
Book ot the Revelation begins, ’Azoxd- 
Avis, *AzroxaAvyus, moreover, has been 


1 E.g, Gyarhoavti, Rev. i. 5; &yxpicov, ch. 
iii. 18; ds &vOpwmos, ch. iv. 7; dws, ch. vi. 
13 om. 8An, ch. vi. 12 5 &yyéAov, ch, viii, 13 > 
&c. P is defective in Rev. xvi. 13-21; xx. I- 
Q 3 xxii. 7-21. 

2 Diisterdieck justly inverts the conclusion of 
modern critics (e.g. Hilgenfeld, Dre Sid. Apoka- 
Zyptik, s. 8, ff.), and derives both the name and: 
the very idea of the so-called ‘‘ Apocalyptic 
Literature” from the Apocalypse of St. John: 
‘* Die johanneische Apok. ist das Normalmass, 
nach welchem der Begriff des Apokalyptischer 
innerhalb und ausserhalb des Kanons bestimmt 
werden muss.” —Zind., S. 35+ 


INTRODUCTION. 


distinguished from zpodyreia. ‘“‘ Reve- 
lation” implies both a Divine ‘‘ pro- 
phecy” and a human activity; a dis- 
tinction inferred from Dan. ii. 22,23 and 
Rey. i. 1, 2, where God reveals His secret 
counsels, and the human prophet com- 
municates them to the world (see on 
Rev. i. 1). “ Prophecy” remains strictly 
within the limits of its fundamental idea ; 
“Apocalypse” goes into concrete details, 
symbolizes and allegorizes. An Apoca- 
lypse and a Prophecy are thus regarded 
as two distinct species of the same genus, 
according as the objective “revelation” 
or the subjective “ prophetic” communi- 
cation becomes more prominent; and 
'1Co xiv. 6 is adduced as conferring on 
this distinction the authority of St. Paul 
(see Auberlen, Zhe Prophecies of Daniel 
and the Revelations of St. John, viewed 
in their mutual Relation, Engl. transl., 
p- 80). The earlier prophets, it is 
further said, bring out the particular 
situation of the people of God at a given 
time into the light of prophecy; the 
Apostles also disclose only certain things 
relating to the future, as the wants of 
their readers may require :—but the Book 
of Daniel and the Apocalypse have the 
more general aim of giving light to the 
Church of God in those times when there 
is no revelation ; the former illumining the 
darkness which prevailed from the Cap- 
tivity until the destruction of Jerusalem by 
the Romans; the ater guiding the Church 
from the destruction of Jerusalem until 
the Second Coming of Christ. And thus 
Jewish “ Apokalyptik” relates to the 
first Advent of Messiah, and Christian 
“ Apokalyptik” to His Second Advent 
(Liicke, s. 224). 

Outside the Canon of Scripture there 
exist at least the remains of a rather 
extensive literature, likewise styled “Apo- 
kalyptik” by those critics who would 
bring down the great Revelations of 
Daniel and St. John to the'level of such 
spurious and apocryphal compositions. 
The publication by Archbishop Laurence, 
in 1819-1821, from the Athiopic, of the 
““Ascensio Isaiz,” the “‘ Book of Henoch,” 
and the ‘Fourth Book of Esdras,” 
gave an impulse to the study of this 
class of writings, whether Jewish or 
Christian. From the nature of the case, 
the names of the reputed authors. and the 


New Test—Vou. IV. 


465 


titles, of the different elements of “ Apoca- 
lyptic” literature were taken from Scrip- 
ture. Ezekiel (i. 1) “saw visions of 
God ;” St. Peter ‘‘in a trance saw avision” 
(Acts xi 5); St. Paul “knew a man” 
who “was caught up into Paradise” (2 
Cor. xii. 4):—and hence the titles épacis, 
évaBarixov, avaBacrs, avadnys, &c. It 
is an interesting task, no doubt, and 
from an apologetic point of view not 
unimportant, to exhibit the doctrine 
concerning the Messiah as it was held 
among the Jews in the centuries before 
Christ came, and at the time of His 
coming. This has been done, to some 
extent, by Mr. Drummond in his work 
entitled Zhe Jewish Messiah. In this 
sense, ‘‘ Apokalyptik” possesses a Cer- 
tain value:—but, as has been just 
observed, this is not the purpose for 
which modern critics have given promi- 
nence to works of this kind,! 

To the class of Jewish “ Apokalyptik” 
belong :— 

Portions of the Sibylline Oracles (see 
Note E on Rev. ii. 20) ;— 

The Book of Henoch (Jude 14). Of 
this Liicke ascribes chapters 1-35 and 
71-105 to the age of the Maccabees; 
and ch. 37-70 to the time of Herod the 
Great (s. 142) :—many critics, however, 
(e. g. Hilgenfeld, /éd. Apok., s. 181) 
appeal to its Messianic references in 
order to prove that the book has been 
largely interpolated by Christian hands, 
To this supposition the objection has 
been opposed, ‘ Would not a Christian 
have spoken more clearly of Christ’? 
(Schiirer, JV. 7. Zeit-gesch., 1874, S. 535): 
“Tf a Christian really undertook to make 
Enoch the vehicle of his Apocalyptic 
thoughts, how is it that he did not point, 
as clearly as is done, for instance, in the 
‘Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs’ 
(e. g. Levi, § 4), to the rejected, and 
crucified, and risen Christ?” (Drum- 
mond, /. 4, p. 61) ;— 

The Apocalypse (or “AvdAyjyis) of 
Moses (Origen, De Princ., iii.2). Hilgen- 

1 Modern Jewish writers are naturarly not 
disposed to bring forward testimony to the 
Messianic expectations of their people at the 
time when the Lord came. Thus Jost remarks : 
‘< Jedenfalls sind alle diese Erscheinungen ohne 
Bedeutung fiir die jiidische Religions-geschi- 
Pe des Fudenth, und seiner Secten, 
ll. S. 216. 


GG 


466 


feld has published the Latin text, in his 
“Nov. Test. extr. Can.,” fase. i., p. 99. 
Ewald (Gétting. gel. Anzeig., 1862) 
assumes that the Greek text, now lost, 
had a Hebrew original, and he places 
its date shortly after the death of Herod 
the Great ;!— 

The Apocalypse (or dpacis, or ava- 
Barixov) of Isaiah; referred to by Origen, 
Hom. 1. in Esai., c. 5: see Epiphan., 
Her. xl. 2; lxvii. 3 ;— 

The Fourth Book of Esdras (which 
Liicke places before the birth of Christ, 
—s. 209). St. Jerome has styled this 
work the fourth book of Ezra, taking 
Nehemiah as the second, and the Greek 
“Eodpas of the Apocrypha as the shird. 
This fourth book (which we possess 
only in its Latin version,—Liicke, s. 146) 
is extant neither in Hebrew nor in 
Greek. A Greek original is quoted by 
Clemens Al. in Strom. iii. 16 ; and refer- 
ences are also found to 4 Esdr. v. 5, in 
the epistle of Barnabas, c. xii. ; and to 
ch. ii. 16, in the first epistle of Clemens 
Rom., c. 1. (cf. Ezek. xxxvil. 12, 13) ;— 

The Apocalypse of Baruch (placed, 
in the Stichometria of Nicephorus and in 
the Synopsis S.S. ascribed to St. Atha- 
nasius, among the Apocryphal writings 
of the Old Test.,—see Credner Zur 
Gesch. des Kanons, ss. 121, 145) was 
first made known in modern times 
’ through a Latin translation, in 1866, 
by A. M. Ceriani.2 The Syriac text was 
subsequently published by Ceriani in 
1871 (/. ¢., t. v. 2), from a manuscript 
ascribed by Cureton to Cent. vi. Ceriani 
(Pref., p. 1) assigns this Apocalypse to a 
place among the most ancient writings 
of its class, chiefly owing to its close 
affinity to 4 Esdras. He also points out 
(p. 80) the almost exact resemblance of 
ch, 29 to the chiliastic passage quoted 
from Papias by St. Ireneus (Adv. 
Her. v. 33). Papias must plainly have 
borrowed from the ‘‘ Apocalypse of Ba- 
ruch,” or both must have borrowed from 


A.D. 6; 4¢., after the attempt of Judas the 
Gaulonite, who led the revolution against the 
taxation under Quirinus.— Ewald, Gesch. des V. 
dsr., B.v. 8. 73. 

3 “‘Olim de Greco in Syriacum, et nunc de 
Syriaco in Latinum translatum,” edidit A. M. 
Ceriani, Monumenta sacra et profanda., t. i. fasc. 
2, Mediolani, 1866, pp. 73-98. 


INTRODUCTION. 


an earlier writer. Hilgenfeld (Mess. 
Judaor., s. \xii.) refers the composition 
of this work to A.D. 72. “There can be 
no doubt,” writes Mr. Drummond (2. 4, 
p. 125), “that it was written by a non- 
Christian Jew. Though it is rich in 
Messianic passages, I have not observed 
a single expression which betrays a 
Christian hand ;”— 

To the class of Jewish “ Apokalyptik” 
Liicke (s. 232) refers the Apocalypse of 
Adam, proceeding from the Gnostics; 
and that of Abraham, proceeding from 
the Sethites, a sect of the Ophites: see 
Epiphan., Her. xxvi. 8; xxxix. 5. 

To Christian Apocalyptic literature 
belong :-— 

The Shepherd of Hermas (Rom, 
xvi, 14; Orig. Hom. 25 in Lue. xii. 58). 
Dorner considers that this work “ must 
be dated prior to Montanism” (On the 
Person of Christ,—Engl. tr., i. p. 382) ;— 

The Testaments of the twelve Pa- 
triarchs, This work Liicke (s. 334) 
ascribes to a Jewish-Christian of the 
second century ; and Dr. Gibbings (Zhe 
Sibylline Oracles, p. 65, Dublin 1878) 
also regards it as a Christian composition 
of the beginning of Cent. ii. ;— 

The Apocalypse of Peter (see the 
‘*Muratorian Fragment,” c. 10; Hilgen- 
feld, /.c., iv. s. 74) j— 

The Apocalypse, or "AvaBarixov, of 
Paul (St. Augustine, Zract. in Johann. 
98; Sozomen., H. Z£., vii. 19) ;— 

A spurious “ Apocalypse of John” first 
mentioned in the Scholia to the Gram- 
mar of Dionysius Thrax, Cent. ix.; and 
now published by Tischendorf, Cod, 
Apocr. NV. T., p. 79 ;— 

The Apocalypse of Cerinthus (Euseb, 
7, E. iii. 28) : see above, § 5, p. 439 ;— 

An Apocalypse of Thomas, and an 
Apocalypse of Stephen (enumerated in 
the Decretum of Gelasius, 1™ Pars, 
Dist. xv. 3, af. Corp. Jur. Can., ed, 
Richter, t. L p. 34; see Credner, Gesch. 
des Kanons, s. 219). 

Dorner (/.c, i. 408) thinks that Bar- 
nabas and Papias, alone among the 
Fathers, properly represent “ Apoka- 
lyptik.” 

On this subject see also Schenkel, 
Bibel-Lexicon, art. Apokalypsis ; Smith’s 
Dict. of Christian Biogr.; Hilgenfeld, 
Die Jiid. Apokalypttk, 1857, and Messias 


INTRODUCTION. 


Judaorum, 1869; Renan, L’Antechrist, 
p- 358, note; J. Drummond, Zhe Jewish 
Messiah, 1877. 

There is yet another alleged charac- 
teristic of Apocalyptic literature, which 
comes nearer to the subject of the pre- 
sent section, but which is certainly not 
to be restricted to the Book of Daniel 
or to the Revelation :—In prophecy, we 
are told, the Spirit of God finds His 
immediate expression in words; but in 
“Apokalyptik” human language dis- 
appears, for here are “ unspeakable 
words, which it is not lawful for a man 
to utter,” 2 Cor. xii. 4. The Apoca- 
lyptic writer beholds in Vision the 
unseen and the future; but he beholds 
them ‘embodied in Plastic symbolic 
Shapes, as in a dream; only that these 
images are not the children of his own 
fancy, but the product of Divine revela- 
tion adapting itself essentially to our 
human horizon. . . . The form peculiar 
to Apocalyptic prophecy is the sym- 
bolic. . . . As the subjective form of 
Apocalyptic prophecy is the Vision, the 
corresponding objective form is the sym- 
bolic.” —Auberlen, Z. ¢., pp. 83, 85.1 It is 
evident, however, that the employment 
of symbols is not “peculiar to Apoca- 
lyptic prophecy,” defined as it is by the 
class of writers here referred to. Auber- 
len, no doubt, acknowledges this, al- 
though but partially. He admits that 
“ Apokalyptik” “did not appear without 
being prepared for by the earlier pro- 
phets, and only reached its full develop- 
ment in Daniel, who exerted, in this 
formal respect also, an influence on 
Zechariah, as is evident from the first six 
chapters of that prophet” (Ac, p. go). 
This admission, however, gives a very 
incomplete idea of the symbolism of the 
other prophets. Zechariah’s use of 
symbols is by no means confined to his 
first six chapters:—see ch. xi, and 
especially vv. 10-14; ch. xi. 7, and 
compare vy. 8, 9, with Ezek. v. 12. 
Compare also Zech. iii. 8 with Isaiah iv. 
2; Jer. xxili. 5; xxxiii. 15; Zech. x. 10 
with Isai. xi. 11, 16; Hos. xi. 11 (see 


1 The.intervention of Angels is also alleged 
to be another feature peculiar to ‘* Apoka- 
lyptik” ; but cf. Gen. xvi. 7; Num. xxii. 22; 
udges xiii. 3; 2 Kingsi.3; Zech. i. 11 ; Matt. 
1 20; Lukei. 11; Acts viii. 26, &c. 


467 


Pusey, Zhe Min. Proph., Introd. to 
Zechariah, p. 504). Jeremiah is through- 
out symbolical,—e.g. Jer. i. 11, 123 xiii 
2-II; xviii. 1-6; xxv. 15; XXVil 2: 
and so are Ezekiel and others,—e.g. Ezek. 
i; li. 9; li 1-3; iv. 1; &c., &c.; Hos 
lil. ; Joel ii. ; &c. 

Renan fully concedes this fact, and so 
far differs from other writers of his 
school. ‘ The form of ‘ Apocalypse,’” 
he observes, “adopted by the author [of 
the Revelation] was not new in Israel, 
Ezekiel had already inaugurated a con- 
siderable change in the old prophetic 
style, and one may in a certain sense 
regard him as the creator of the Apoca- 
Lyptic method.” —L Antechyist, p. 357-1 

Nor yet is the New Test.—apart from 
the Apocalypse—without its own sym- 
bolical element, as, e.g., in Acts xxl. 113 
and especially in the Fourth Gospel, a 
fact which constitutes a fresh proof of 
the similarity between it and the Revela- 
tion. Thus we have the following sym- 
bols of which the meaning is not ob- 
scure,—Light, John i. 4,8; xii. 46 ;—the 
Lamb, 1. 29, 36 ;—the Temple, i. 19 ;— 
the brazen Serpent, ii. 14 ;— living Water, 
iv. LO-15; vil. 37-39 ;—Manna, Vi. 31; 
—the healing the blind man, ix. 39 ;—the 
Shepherd and the door, x. 1-16 ;—wash- 
ing the disciples’ feet, xiii. ;—the Vine, 


1 Renan thus expands his theory as to Apo- 
calyptic literature :—For the simple allegorical 
acts which accompanied preaching Ezekiel 
substituted Visions ; z.¢., “a complicated sym- 
bolism, where the abstract idea was represented 
by means of chimerical beings, conceived with- 
out any reference to reality. Zechariah continued 
to proceed in the same way. .. . . The author 
of the Book of Daniel, in fine, by the extra- 
ordinary popularity which he gained, fixed defini- 
tively the rules of this method..... Hencefor- 
ward, to every critical situation of the people of 
Israel, corresponded an Apocalypse. .... I 
was inevitable that the reign of Nero and the 
siege of Jerusalem should have their apocalyptic 
protest ; as at a later period, the severities of 
Domitian, of Adrian, of Septimius Severus, of 
Decius, and the Gothic invasion in 250, provoked 
their own.”—70., p. 359. To the same effect 
Max Krenkel (‘‘ Der Ap. Fohannes”): ‘‘Tn the 
near relationship between the old prophecy and 
‘ Apokalyptik,’ it is certainly hard to say what 
belongs to the one, and what to the other. 
Ezekiel and Zechariah, commonly reckoned 
among the Prophets, may with equal right be 
claimed for ‘ Apokalyptik,’ in so far as they 
chiefly busy themselves with the future, and 
avail themselves largely of Visions.”—s. 49. 


GG? 


408 


xv. 1;—the prophecy to St. Peter, xxi. 
18. 
In the Apocalypse, on the other 
hand, the symbolism is confessedly dark 
and complex,—a mysterious hieroglyphic 
which has too often been interpreted 
arbitrarily and rashly. The entire Book, 
as the following analysis will more fully 
show, is to be understood throughout 
in a symbolical sense. Its figurative 
language has manifestly two forms,—it 
consists (1) Of ideal symbols or the 
images of material things; (2) Of sym- 
bolical numbers. 


§ 10. Ldeal Symbols! or the Images of 
Material Things. 


Let the Apocalypse itself be here its 
own interpreter; and the question as to 
the character and import of its announce- 
ments will thus receive its chief answer 
—(a) from the intimations of the Book 
itself; (b) from the interpretations sup- 
plied by other Books of Scripture:— 

(a) The intimations given by the 
Apocalypse itself :— 

Ch. i. 8. “Iam the Alpha and the 
Omega.” = 

“Tam the First and the Last,” ver. 17: 
—see also ch. xxi. 63; xxii. 13, “the 
Beginning and the End.” 

- 4, Ver. 12, “Seven golden Candle- 
sticks” (cf. ch. ii. 1, 5) ; ver. 16, “Seven 
Stars”? (cf. ch. il, 13 ii. 1). = 


1 «A symbolical alphabetical Dictionary ” is 
prefixed by Daubuz to his commentary :—see 
the ed. of P. Lancaster, 1730, pp. 23-143. 

2 The star (6 &4o7np) has amongst all nations 
been employed as the symbol of Imperial do- 
minion and splendour: ‘‘Ecce Dionzi pro- 
cessit Czesaris astrum.”—Virg. Zc/. ix. 47 ; 
**Micat inter omnes Julium Sidus.”—Hor, Od. 
I, xii. 47; “Eomepos ds xdAAtoros ev ovpavg 
lorarat aorhp.—Z/. xxii. 317. 

Compare the title of the false Messiah in 
the reign of Hadrian, Bar-cochab or ‘‘son of a 
star ;” see the noteon Num, xxiv. 17, and below 
on Rev. vi. 13; viii. 10; ix. 1; xii. I, 4 (cf. Dan. 
villi. 10). In Isai. xiv. 12, the bearer of the 
World-power, the king of Babylon, on account 
of his glorious dominion, is named ‘‘ Lucifer, 
Son of the Morning,”—the bright morning 
star which shines as a monarch in the starry 
heavens: see the note i Joc. Hence ‘‘the 
Morning Star” (6 dorhp 5 mpwivds) in Rev. 
ii, 28; xxii. 16. Cf. Ecclus. 1 6; 2 Pet. 
L Ig. 


INTRODUCTION. 


“The Seven Stars are the Angels of 
the Seven Churches; and the Seven 
Candlesticks are Seven Churches.” —ver, 
20. 
», Wer. 18. “ The Keys of death and of 
hell” (Hades). = 

“The Key of the pit of the Abyss. And 
he opened the pit of the Abyss,” &c.; ch. 
ix. 1, 2; cf. ch. xx. 1. The Xe is the 
symbol of authority :—see on ch. iii. 7. 

Ch, ii. 10. “ Ten days.” = 

A comparatively short time;—as is 
shown by the use of the expressions, 
“one day”; “one hour,” ch. xviii. 8, 10. 

» Ver. 11. “The Second Death” (see 
also ch, xx. 6).= 

To have “ part in the lake that burneth 
with fire and brimstone; which is the 
Second Death.”—ch. xxi. 8; and s0, 
“ This is the Second Death, even the lake 
of fire.” —ch., Xx. 14. 

,, Ver. 15. “‘ The doctrine of the Nico- 
laitans” (cf. ver. 6). = 

“The doctrine of Balaam,” ver. 14. 
Balaam—‘ the destroyer of the people’ 


(from ya and ny)—is equivalent to Nico- 
las (NixéAaos, from vay tov Aaov). This 
Grecizing of Hebrew words we again 
find in the instances of Apollyon and 
Abaddon, ch. ix. 11 ;—of “the Devil” 
and Satan, ch. xii. 9 ;—of vat and aya, 
ch, i. 7: see Ziillig zx loc, i. s. 303. 

» Ver. 28. “ The morning Star.” = 
Christ: “I am the root and the off 
spring of David, the bright, the morning 
Star.”—ch. xxil, 16. See note ? above. 

Ch. iii, 12. “The new Jerusalem” 
(see also ch, xxi. 2). = 

“The Bride, the Wife of the Lamb, 

. the Holy City Jerusalem.”—ch. 
xxi. 9, 10. (Note the contrasted symbol, 
the “great Harlot,’—ch. xvii. 1. = 
Babylon, the World-city, ch. xvii. 5, 18). 

[Ch. iv. 4. The ‘“ Four-and-Twenty 
Elders,” see below under class (b)}. 

Ch. iv. 5. ‘Seven lamps of fire burning 
before the throne.” = 

“The Seven Spirits of God.”—Jb.: see 
also ch. i. 43 iii, 1; cf. Zech. iv. 2. 

Ch, v. 6. “Seven eyes.” = 

“The Seven Spirits of God."—Ib.: 
cf. Zech, iii. 9; iv. Io. 

» Ver. 8. “Incense.” = 

“« The Prayers of the Saints.” —J), : cf. 
ch. viii. 3; Lev. xvi. 12, 13; Ps. cxli. 2; 
Isai. vi. 4: Luke i. 9, 10; Acts x. 4. 


. 


INTRODUCTION. 


Ch. vi. 2. “A white Horse, and He 
that sat thereon.” = 

“A white Horse, and He that sat 
thereon, called Faithful and True.... 
and His name is called “he Word of 
God.”—ch. xix. II, 13. 

» Ver. 8. “A pale Horse: and he that 
sat upon him.” = 

“ His name was Death.” —J0. 

Ch. ix. 3. The “Locusts” are ex- 
plained to be symbolical ; they are not 
Literal \ocusts :—‘‘ They have over them 
as King the Angel of the Abyss,” Abad- 
don, Apollyon.—ver. 11. 

Ch. x. 3, 4. “The Seven Thunders 
uttered their voices. .. . . And [heard 
a voice from heaven saying, Seal up ¢he 
things which the Seven Thunders wttered, 
and write them not:”—cf. ch. xiv. 2. 

Ch. xi. 3. The ‘‘ Two Witnesses.” = 
“ The two Olive trees, and the two Candle- 
sticks.” —ver. 4; they are also “ Zwo Pro- 
phets.”—ver. 10. 

» Ver. 8 “ The Great City, which 
spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, 
where also their Lord was crucified.” 

Ch. xii. 3. “A great red Dragon” 
“ The great Dragon” (ver. 9). = 

“The old Serpent, he that is called the 
Devil, and Satan.” —Ver. 9 ; ch. Xx. 2, 7. 
Cf. Isai. xxvii. 1; Ezek. xxix. 3 

Ch. xiii. 11, The second “ Beast.” = 

“The False Prophet,’ ch. xvi. 13; 
xix. 20; xx. 10. Cf. 1 John iv. 1-3 

@heexive' 8)“ Wine.” 

An image implying the concentration 
of “wrath,” —ch. xvi. 19: cf. Jer. xxv. 15— 
18. On ‘‘ the Wine-CwJ,” see ch. xiv. Io ; 
Xvii. 4; xvili. 6. Cf. ch. xv. 73 xvi. 1,— 
“The Seven Vials of the wrath of God.” 

Also an image implying the extreme 
of spiritual “ fornication ;” “The wine 
of her “fornication,” —ch. xvii. 2; xviii. 3. 

» Ver, 20. “The Wine-press.” = 

“The great Wine-press of the wrath of 
God.”—ver. 19;” “of the frerceness of the 
wrath of Almighty God.”—ch, xix. 15. 

Ch. xvi. 13. “And I saw coming out 
of the mouth of the Dragon, and out of 
the mouth of the Beast, and out of the 
mouth of the False Prophet, three un- 
clean spirits, as it were Frogs.” = 

“They are Spirits of Devils.” —Ver. 14. 

Ch. xvii. 1. ‘‘ The great Harlot.” = 

“ The great City, which reigneth over 
the kings of the earth.”—Ver. 18. 


409 


» Ver. 1. She “sitteth upon many 
Waters.” = 

‘“The Waters .... where the Harlot 
sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and 
nations, and tongues.”—ver. 15 (cf. ch. 
xib Fs, '16)- 

» Ver. 3. “A scarlet-coloured Beast 

. having Seven Heads and Ten 
Horns,” = 

“The Seven Heads are Seven moun- 
tains, on which the woman sitteth: and 
they are Seven Kings” (vv. 9, 10) :— 
“The Ten Horns that thou sawest are 
Ten Kings.” —ver. 12. 

» Ver (5. Lhe Harlots “Name.”= 

“ Babylon the great, the mother of the 
harlots and of the abominations of the 
earth."—/b. Cf. ch. xiv. 8; xvi. 19, 
XViil. 2. 

Ch. xviii. 21. “ A mighty Angel tock 
up a stone as it were a great millstone, 
and cast it into the sea.” = 

‘Thus with violence shall Babylon, . 
the great City, be cast down, and shall be 
found no more at all.” —/é. 

Ch, xix. 8. “ The fine Linen.” = 

“ The righteous acts of the Saints.” Io. 
CE ch. i. 45 Vi. FES Vil. 6) 24 

» Ver. 9. “The Marriage Supper of 
the Lamb.” = 

“If any man hear my voice and open 
the door, I will come in to him, and 
will sup with him, and he with me.”—ch. 
ill, 20, 


ie Ver 17. “The great Supper of 
God.” = 
“An Angel. ..cried.. . to all the 


birds that fly in mid-heaven, Come... 
that ye may eat the flesh of kings,” &c.— 
VV. 17, 18; cf. ver. 21. 

Ch. xx. 8. “Gog and Magog.” = 

“The LVations which are in the four 
corners of the earth.” —Ib, 


(b) The interpretations supplied by 
other Books of Scripture :— 

Ch. i. 4. “The Seven Spirits which 
are before His throne” (cf. ch. iii 1). = 

The Holy Ghost, Sevenfold in His 
operations, Isai. xi. 2; 1 Cor. xi 4 
See also under division (a), on ch. iv. 5; 
v. 6. 

» Ver. 16, Out of His mouth pro 


470 


ceeded a sharp two-edged Sword” (sée 
also ch. ii. 12, 16; xix. 15).= 

“He hath made my mouth like a sharp 
Sword,’”—Isai. xlix. 2 (and so Isai. 
xi. 4; Hos. vi. 5). See Eph. vi. 17; 
2 Thess. ii. 8; Heb. iv. r2. 

Ch. it 7. “To eat of the Tree of 
Life” (see also ch. xxii. 2, 14). = 

Immortality: “ Lest he take also of 
the Tree of Life, and eat, and dive for 
ever.” —Gen. ill. 22; see on Rey. xxii. 2. 

» Ver. 17. “The hidden Manna,” = 
“And Moses said, Take a pot, and put 
an omer full of Manna therein, and /ay 
it up before the Lord.” —Ex. xvi. 33 ; ““The 
Ark of the Covenant wherein was a 
golden pot holding the Manna.”—Heb. 
ix. 4; ‘ Your fathers did eat the Manna 
in the wilderness, and they died. This 
is the Bread which cometh down out of 
heaven, that a man may eat thereof, 
and not die.”—John vi. 49, 50; cf. 1 
Cor. x. 3. 

3 Ver, 20. ‘ Jezebel.” = 

The symbol of zdo/atry, 1 Kings xviii. 
19; she is also the symbol of adultery 
and witchcraft 2 Kings ix. 22, 30 (cf. 
Jer. iv. 30; Ezek. xxii. 40). 

Ch. i. 4. “ Garments” undefiled, and 
lefiled (see also, under division (a), on 
ch. xi. 8) 

Righteousness and unrighteousness, 
Zech. iii. 3-5 (cf. Gal. iii, 27; Eph. iv. 
24; Col. i. 10; Jude 23). 

a, MEE: 5a. TherBook of Life” (see 
the note on this verse). = 

“ Blot me, I pray Thee, out of Zhy 
Book which Thou hast written.”—Ex,. 
Xxxil. 32; “Let them be blotted out 
of the Book of the Living, and not be 
written with the righteous.”’—Ps. xix. 
28; ‘‘Thy people shall be delivered, 
every one that shall be found written in 
the Book.” - Dan. xii. 1 ; “‘ Whose names 
are in the Book of Life.”—Phil iv. 3. 
Cf. Luke x. 20. 

Gh oives ls 
heaven.” = 

“This is the Gate of heaven.” —Gen. 
XXViil. 17. 

» Wer. 4. The “ Four -and - twenty 
Elders.” = 

The Zwelve Patriarchs, and the Twelve 
Apostles (see ch. xxi. 12, 14),—Matt. 
xix. 28; Luke xxii. 30. 

Ch. v. 1. The Sealed Book. = 


“A Door opened in 


INTRODUCTION. 


“The Vision of all is become unto you 
as the words of a Book that is sealed, 
which men deliver to one that is learned, 
saying, Read this I pray thee: and he 
saith, J cannot; for it ts sealed.”—Isai. 
xxix. 11. 

» Ver. 6. “A Lamb standing as 
though it had been slain.” 

Christ : “He is brought as a Lamb to 
the slaughter,” Isai. lili. 7; “‘ He seeth 
JEsUs coming unto him, and saith, Be- 
hold, ¢he Lamb of God.” —John i. 29, 36 3 
Acts viii. 32; 1 Pet. i. 19. 

» 9) “* Having Seven Horns.” = 

Having the symbol of universal Do- 
minion :—“ He shall give strength unto 
His King, and exalt the Horn of His 
anointed.”—-1 Sam. ii. 10; cf. Deut 
Xxxiiil. 17; 1 Kings xxii, 11. (On the 
number Seven, see below, p. 475). 

Ch. vi. 1-8. The Four Horses, = 

“The four Spirits of the heavens.”— 
Zech. vi. 1-8 ;—cf. Zech.i. 8-10. “ These 
are they whom the Lord hath sent to 
walk to and fro through the earth.” 

» Vv. 5, 6. “ He had a balance in his 
hand, and IJ heard as it were a voice.... 
saying, A Measure of Wheat for a 
penny,” &c. = 

Scarcity :—“ And when I have droken 
the staff of your Bread . . . they shall 
deliver you your Bread again by weight; 
and ye shall eat, and not be satisfied.” — 
Ley. xxvi. 26 ;—* Thy Meat which thou 
shalt eat shall be by weight.”—Ezek. iv 
10, 16, 17 ;—cf. v. 16. 

Ch. vii. 1. “ The four Winds.” = 

The Divine Judgments :—“Upon Elam 
will I bring the four Winds... and I 
will set my throne in Elam, and wi// 
destroy,” &c.—Jer. xlix. 36, 38. Cf. 
Zech. vi. 5, where “ The four spirits (or 
Winds) of the heavens” are personified 
(see above on Rey. vi. 1-8). 

» Vv. 1=3. “ The:-Sea:”’= 

The JVations: “The Lord bringeth 
upon them the Waters of the river, strong 
and many, even the King of Assyria and 
all his glory. Isai. viii. 7 ;—“ Upon the 
earth distress of /Vations, with perplexity ; 
the Sea, and the waves roaring,” Luke 
xxi. 25; (cf. Dan. vii. 2, “The four 
winds of heaven strove upon the great 
Sea).” See ch. xvii. 1, 15. 

go Metuls: Trees thiviltg 7)F= 

Kings, great men: —« This is the word 


INTRODUCTION. 


that the Lord hath spoken concerning 
{Sennacherib]. . . . I will cut down she 
tall cedar Trees thereof, and the choice jir 
Trees thereof,” &c.; 2 Kings xix. 21-23 
(cf. Isai. x. 18, » 19) 5 —“The Tree that 
thou sawest .. . i is thou, O hing,” 
Dan. iv. 20-22. Cf. Zech. xi. 2. 

Ch. viii. 7. Grass. = 

Subjects :—“ The Grass withereth, the 
flower fadeth. . . . surely the People is 
Grass.” —Isai. xl. 7. 

» Ver. 8. “A great Mountain” (ch. 
xvii. 9; TO). = 

A Kingdom, a seat of Empire:—“ I will 
render unto Babylon, &c..... Behold, 
I am against thee, O destroying Moun- 
tain,” Jer. li. 24, 25 ;—cf. Dan. ii 34, 45; 
Zech. iv. 7. 

» Wer. 11. “ Wormwood.” = 

Bitterness, the distress and trouble 
resulting from sin :— Lest there should 
be among you a root that beareth gall 
and Wormwood.”—Deut. xxix. 18; cf. 
Acts viii. 23 ; Heb. xii. 15. 

Ch. ix. 3. Locusts. = 

Gods destroying Army:— The Lo- 
cust... My great Army. Joel i fe ee 
see vv. 2-11. 

Ch. x. 9. “ Take [the little Book] and 
eat it up.” = 

“He caused me 7% eat that roll [of a 
Book,—see Ezek. ii. 9] . . . . Moreover 
He said unto me, Son of man, all my 
words that I shall speak unto thee vecezve 
in thine heart.” —Ezek. iil. 2, 10. 

Ch. xi. 1, 2. “And there was given me 
a reed like unto a rod: and one said, 
Rise, and measure the Temple.... 
And the court which is without the 
Temple leave out, and measure it not” 
(cf. ch. xxi. 15-17). = 

“ Behold there was a man... . with 
a line of flax in his hand, and a measur- 
ing reed. . . . He measured it by the 
four sides . . . . fo make a separation be- 
tween the Sanctuary and the profane 
place.” Ezek. xl. 3—xlii. 20. Cf. Zech. 
Tis, Fy, 2: 

», Ver. 4. “ The two Olive Trees and 
the two Candlesticks.” = 

“What are these two Olive Trees upon 
the right side of the Candlestick and upon 
the left side thereof? . . . . Then said 
he, These are the two anointed ones, that 
stand by the Lord of the whole earth.”— 
Zech. iv. 11,14. Cf. Rom. xi. 17, 24, 


471 


where the “Olive Tree” signifies the 
people of God ; and Rev. i. 20, where a 
“ Candlestick ” signifies a Church. 

Ch. xii. 1. ‘A Woman clothed with 
the sun, and the moon under her feet, 
and upon her head a crown of Twelve 
Stars.” = 

She is invested with authority -—“ Be 
hold the sun and the moon and the 
eleven stars made obeisance to me.” —Gen. 
XXXVIL. 9. 

Ch. xiii. 1. “I saw a Beast coming 
up out of the sea, having Ten Horns 
and Seven Heads,” = 

(See Dan. vii. 3-7) :—‘‘ These great 
beasts, which are four, are four Kings ;... 
The fourth beast shail be the fourth 
Kingdom upon earth; .... And the 
Ten Horns out of this kingdom are Zen 
Kings.” —Dan, vii. 17, 23, 24. 

Ch. xiv. 14-19. To “send forth the 


Sickle”; “to reap the Harvest of the 
earth”; to “gather the Clusters of the 
Vine.” = 


To sit in judgment ; to be rife for judg- 
ment :—‘ There will I sé¢ to judge all the 
heathen round about. ut ye in the 
Sickle for the Harvest is ripe: come get 
you down, for the Press is full, the fats 
overflow ; for their wickedness is great,” — 
Joel ut: 42, 52." .CE Tsai. xx1.,0, 40’; jer. 
Vi 5,11. 33- 

», Ver. 20. “The Winepress was trod- 
den.” = 

Wrath, Judgment :—‘1 have trodden 
the Winepress.... I will tread them zm 
mine anger.... for the Day of Vengeance 
is in mine heart.”—Isai. lxiil. 3, 4. 

Ch. xv. 7, The Vials (see on ch. vi. 1; 
vill. 2, the Seals, the Trumpets). = 

The Divine judgments : cf. the Plagues 
of Egypt,—Ex. vii.—xil. 

Ch. xvi. 16. “‘ Armageddon.” = 

The scene of great Mourning -—“In 
that day shall there be a great Mourning 
in Jerusalem, as the Mourning of Hadad- 
rimmon in the valley of Megiddon.”— 
Zech. xii. II. 

Wer, 21. “Great Pail.” 

“The indignation of AE aneer 
With scattering, and tempest, and Hail- 
stones.” Isai. xxx. 30 ;—“ Jam against 
you, saith the Lord God.... and ye, 
O great Hailstones, shall fall.”—Ezek. 
xii. 8, 11. 


Ch. xvii. 2. “‘ Fornication.” = 


472 


Faithlessness to God :—“ How is the 
Faithful city become an Harlot/” Isai. 
i. 21 ;—cf. Jer. ii. 20; iii. 2, 63 Ezek. 
xvi. 15; Hos. ii. 5; Nah. iii. 4; &c 

Ch, xx. 2. “A Thousand Years.” = 

The symbol of the duration of time, 
as God regards it:—“ A thousand years 
in thy sight are dut as Yesterday when it 
is past, and as a watch in the night.”— 
Ps. xc. 4 ;—“‘ One Day is with the Lord 
as a thousand years, and a thousand 
years as one Day.”—2 Pet. ii. 8. See 
the note on ch. xx. 2. 

Ch. xxi. 2,9. “The Bride, the Wife 
of the Lamb.” = 

The Church :—“Thy Maker is shy 
Husband; the Lord of Hosts is His 
name.” Isai. liv. 5 ;—‘‘ He hath clothed 
Me... as @ bridegroom decketh him- 
self with ornaments, and as a bride 
adorneth herself with her jewels.” xi. 10; 
—“He that hath the Bride is the Bride- 
groom.” John iii. 29 ;—“A man shall 
leave his father and mother and shall 
be joined unto his wife, and they two 
shall be one flesh. This is a great 
mystery: but I speak concerning Christ 
and the Church.” —Eph. v. 31, 32. 

» Wer. 7. “The Fountain of the 
water of Life ;"—“‘A River of water of 
Life.” ch. xxii. 1 (cf. ver. 17). = 

The grace of Christ :-—“ With joy shall 
ye draw water out of the Wells of Salva- 
tion.” Isai. xii. 3 ;—‘ Ho, every one that 
- thirsteth, come ye 40 the waters.”—lv. 1; 
“Whosoever drinketh of the water that 
I shall give him, shad] never thirst.”— 
John iv. 14; ‘“ Rivers of living water. 
... This spake He of the Spirit, which 
they that believe on Him should receive.” — 
John vii. 38, 39. 

Ch. xxii. 2. “ The leaves of the Tree 
were for the Healing of the nations.” = 

“The fruit thereof shall be for meat, 
and the leaf thereof for Medicine.”—Ezek. 
xlvii. 12. 





The xumerical symbolism of the Apo- 
calypse in like manner receives its only 
just illustration from the other Books 
of Scripture. See § 11. 


§ 11. Symbolical Numbers. 


Rationalists represent this aspect of 
symbolism as follows :—As the writers of 


INTRODUCTION, 


“ Apokalyptik” strive to excite the curi- 
osity of their readers by mysterious hints, 
and to test their acuteness by enigmatical 
words, so, with them, Numbers gain a 
special significance, and often find an 
artificial and allusive application. Certain 
Times also are fixed, even to the day and 
hour ; and that which the writer does not 
venture to commit to words, he entrusts to 
the more ambiguous, and therefore less 
treacherous symbolism of Numbers’ (see 
Krenkel, Z¢., s. 47). 

Nothing can be more superficial, when 
the question is examined generally— 
nothing more incorrect, when the sym- 
bolism of Scripture is the subject, than 
such a theory. Among every ancient 
people, especially in the East—in India, 
China, Chaldza, Egypt; in Greece, long 
before Pythagoras—we find importance 
attached to numbers; and this, too, 
in connexion with religious worship. 
This instinctive apprehension of the 
heathen world involves a profound truth, 
Number and Proportion are essential 
and necessary attributes of the Kosmos: 
and Gop, as a God of order,! has ar- 
ranged each several province of Creation 
—even to the minutest particular “the 
very hairs of your head are ali num- 
bered,” Matt. x. 30)—according to defi- 
nite numerical relations (Ps. cxlvii. 4; 
Isai. xl. 26; Ecclus. xvi. 26, 27).2 Not 


! Wisdem xi. 21,—7dyta pwérpp kal dpiOug 
kal orabu@ diétate. Cf. also the P 
saying,—ra Tay apiOuav octoxeia Tay byTer 
oroxeia mavtwy. Aristot.. Met. i. 5. 

* This position may te illustrated by the 
results of Science. Nature, in not a few of her 
provinces, works according to strict numerical 
laws., E.g. in— 

CRYSTALLOGRAPHY :—A few instances may 
be given of the forms which minerals generally 
assume : (2). Minerals which crystallize as Hexae 
hedrons (whose faces are six squares), or Octahe- 
drons (whose faces are eight equilateral triangles) 
—Fluor spar, Alum, Sea-salt, Magnetic Iron- 
ore, Diamond, Garmet, Ruby Copper, &c. ; (4). 
Minerals which crystallize as right square Prisms, 
or in Octahedrons (whose faces are Isosceles 
Triangles) — Hyacinth, Tinstone, &c.; (ce). 
Minerals which crystallize as six-sided Prisms, 
or as Hexagonal Dodecahedrons (whose faces 
are Isosceles Triangles)—Beryl, Quartz, Corun 
dum, Tourmaline, &c. ; (d). Minerals which 
crystallize in four-sided Prisms with a Rhombic 
base, or in Octahedrons (whose faces are equal 
and similar Scalene Triangles) —Sulphur, Arra- 
gonite, Nitre, &c. ; not to mention other classes. 

CHEMISTRY :—Although the “atoms” of 


INTRODUCTION. 


only where the thought transcends the 
limits of man’s understanding (e. g. Gen. 
xiii. 16; Jer. xxiii. 22; Rev. vii g), but 
also in the province of human freedom 
(e.g. Job xiv. 16; Ps. lvi. 8), all has 
been divinely disposed according to 
rumber and proportion, order and de- 
sign: and should such dispositions not 
admit of being computed by human 
faculties, or should God reveal them 


elementary matter have very different weights 
which are not always represented by integer 
Numbers, when we take the ‘‘atoms” as units 
combination takes place between them in pro- 
portions which are represented ovly by integers. 
‘Thus, the molecule of 


Hydrochloric acid contains 2 elementary atoms 
(1 of Hydrogen and 1 of Chlorine) ; 

Water, 3 el. at. (2 of Hydrogen and 1 of 
Oxygen) ; 

Ammonia, 4 el. at. (1 of Nitrogen and 3 of 
Hydrogen); 

Nitric Acid, 5 el. at. (1 of Hydrogen, 1 of 
Nitrogen, and 3 of Oxygen) ; 

Sulphurous Acid, 6 el. at. (2 of Hydrogen, 1 of 
Sulphur, and 3 of Oxygen) ; 

Sulphuric Acid, 7 el. at. (2 of Hydrogen, 1 
Sulphur, and 4 of Oxygen) ; 

Phosphoric Acid, 8 el. at. (3 of Hydrogen, 1 
of Phosphorus, and 4 of Oxygen) ; 

Alcohol, 9 el. at. (2 of Carbon, 6 of Hydrogen, 
and 1 of Oxygen) ; 

Nitrous Ether, 10 el. at. (2 of Carbon, 5 of 
Hydrogen, 1 of Nitrogen, and 2 of Oxygen). 


(This information as to Crystallography and 
Chemistry has been kindly supplied by Pro- 
fessors Apjohn and Emerson Reynolds.) 

ZooLocy.—In his Lecons sur la Physio- 
Jogie (t. ix., Paris, 1870), M. H. Milne-Ed- 
wards writes :— 

“La limite extréme du séjour du jeune Ani- 
mal dans l’intérieur de l’ceuf parait étre fixée 
d’une maniére presque invariable pour chaque 
espéce zoologique.”—p. 589. 

The following are a few of the results given 
at p. 445:—The duration of incubation is 12 
days for humming-birds ; 31 days for the pea- 
cock ; 42 days for the swan. 

The duration of gestation among the Mam- 
malia is, about 3 weeks for the mouse; 34 
weeks for the marmot (Fr. “‘ soushe ;” Arctomys 
cttillus) ; 4 weeks for the hare; 7 weeks for the 
hedgehog ; 14 weeks for the lion; 21 weeks 
for the sheep, &c. 

PHyYsIOLOGY.—Dr. Carpenter observes that 
there are marked differences in the functional 
operations of Organic life ‘‘ which mark out the 
whole term of life into the various ‘ Ages’ 
which are commonly recognized as seven, namely 
—Infancy, Childhood, Youth, Adolescence, 
Manhood, Decline, and Senility. For Physio- 
logical pur~ses, however,” may be used “the 
three great periods of Growth and Development, 
of Matucity, and of Decline.”—Princ. of human 
Physiology, 7th ed., p. 961. 


473 


in mystery,—they are nevertheless 
capable of being represented not only 
by means of ideal types and symbols; 
but also by numerical relations. 

The conception of the sanctity and 
symbolical dignity of numbers may 
probably have passed over to the Israel- 
ites from their heathen neighbours :? at 
all events, it is certain that this universal 
sentiment is reflected from the pages of 
the Old Testament. What could be 
more natural, indeed, than that the 
writers of either the Old or the New 
Testament should employ numbers as 
they were employed by their contem- 
poraries? Numbers, like words, are but 
the signs of ideas; and if we can ascer- 
tain the idea corresponding to a par- 
ticular sign, we have the meaning of that 
sign. It is this underlying idea alone 
en which the numerical symbolism of 
Scripture depends. The Pantheism of 
the religions of Nature, it is true, had 
attached to numbers, in addition to their 
speculative value, a further meaning. 
The real relations which are stamped on 
the material Kosmos were sought after ; 
and, in the effort to trace out the laws 
of the Universe, everything sublunary 
was supposed to be guided by the mo- 
tions of the heavenly bodies. “ Though 
the Universe,” writes Professor Archer- 
Butler, “displayed the geometry of its 
constructor or animator, yet Nature was 
eminently defined, by the Pythagoreans, 
as the piunois tov apiOuev (Aristot. 
Metaph. i. 6)”.—Lectures on the Hist. 
of Antient Philosophy, vol. i., p. 336.2 


! The elaborate theory of Bahr (‘‘ Symbolik des 
Mosaischen Cultus”) to this effect, was, at one 
time, opposed by Hengstenberg (‘‘ Die Gesch. 
Bileams,” 1842, s. 70 ff.) ; but this opposition 
was subsequently modified in his ‘‘ Batrage” 
(see B. iii. ss. 311, 605, 646). His criticism was 
replied to by Kurtz, ‘‘ Stud. u. Kritiken,” 1844, 
s. 330. Bahr has, no doubt, carried his theory 
to too great | 

2 <* Having discovered that the changes of 
sound were indissolubly connected with changes 
of length and tension, Pythagoras reversed the 
Proposition, and asserted that sound — that 
which is essentially ‘ harmony ’—perpetually 
waited on proportion ; and that as the heavens 
themselves were ordered in consonance with 
number, they must move amid their own eternal 
harmony, a harmony to which the soul of man 
from familiarity (owing to its past transmigra- 
tions) had become deaf and irresponsive.”—+. ¢., 
p- 341. ‘‘ Pythagoras ad harmoniam canere 


474 


The influence thus ascribed to the 
heavenly bodies led immediately to 
star-worship ; and it was only after 
eliminating every such conception that 
numerical symbolism was employed in 
the Bible. Had the principles of the 
Sabzean worship lingered in the mind of 
the Israelite, he would have seen in the 
Seven-branched Candlestick only an 
image of the planetary heaven; or in 
the number of the Twelve Tribes, but a 
type of the signs of the Zodiac:' but 
this error, above all others, was de- 
nounced by Moses who appointed death 
as the punishment for apostasy to this 
form of false worship (cf. Deut. iv. 19 ; 
xvii. 3-5). This abuse, therefore, being 
guarded against, the speculative value 
which the heathen attached to Num- 
bers while it serves to illustrate this 
species of symbolism as found in the 
Bible, could in no way oppose the use 
by the Sacred Writers of a figurative 
mode of speech recognized by all an- 
cient peoples.” 


(a). NUMBERS TAKEN SIMPLY. 


The number THREE :*— 
Among the heathen, if at all civilized, 
every type and image of Deity, all 


mundum existimat.”—Cic., De Mat. Deor. iii. 
II, 27. 

' Bahr observes that there is but one pro- 
bable trace of any reference to the signs of the 
Zodiac in the entire Old Test., viz.—in the 
ny (A. V. ‘* Planets ;” Marg., ‘‘ twelve signs 
ot constellations ;’ LXX. tots watoupde) of 2 
Kings xxiii. 5 (cf. Job xxxviii. 32), where it is 
specified as an instance of the idolatry from which 
Josiah cleansed the Sanctuary (/c., i. s. 206). 

2? Mede observes: ‘‘ The Scriptures use no 
numbers zzdefinitely [#.e., symbolically] but such 
as the use of speech in the language of the 
people had made sucl:.”—p. 597. He instances 
7 and 10; 7 times, and 10 times; ALpriads of 
myriads ; Sexcenti by the Latins: xfAror xtArakes 
by the Greeks. 

* The number Two is the ‘‘signature” of 
testimony—of truth—of certainty. (Deut. xvii. 
6; xix. 15: John viii. 17). There were ‘wo 
Tables of Zestimony, Ex. xxxii. 15 ;—the 
Apostles and the Seventy were sent forth *‘ wo 
and /wo,” Mark vi. 7; Luke x. 1 ;—there are 
“two Witnesses,” Rev. xi. 3;—‘‘ two olive- 
trees,” Zech. iv.3. The repetition ofa revelation 
is the assurance of its truth,—e.g. Gen. xli. 32; 
Judges vi. 39; I Kings xi. 9. And thus 7wo 
symbolizes God’s witnesses and martyrs through- 
out all time. 


INTRODUCTION. 


that stands in immediate relation to 
It,—all, in short, in which the Divine 
completes itself, has the stamp of Zhree, 
This idea almost forces itself on the 
mind when man contemplates Creation : 
there are ¢hree dimensions of Space ;— 
Time is past, present, future ;—the Uni- 
verse offers to the view, Sky, arth, and 
Sea ;—hence arose the proverb, tpiy6a 82 
mavta dédacrat (Bahr, 42, s. 143). It 
is but natural, indeed, that the essential 
character of the Triune GOD, as He has 
revealed Himself, should be impressed 
upon His works. And so, in the record 
of Revelation Zhree is the numerical 
“signature” of the Divine Being, and of 
all that stands in any real relation to 
God :'—e.g. three Angels appeared to 
Abraham, Gen. xviii. 2 ; the benediction 
is three-fold, in Num. vi. 24-26 (cf. “My 
Name,” ver. 27); Balaam’s blessing 
is also ‘¢hree-fold, Num. xxiv. 10; 
each year God’s people must appear 
before Him ¢hree times, Ex. xxiil. 14, 17 ; 
Deut. xvi. 16; above all, there is the 
Ter Sanctus,—the ‘‘ Holy, Holy, Holy,” 
of Isai. vi. 3. 

Christ performs ¢#vee miracles of 
raising from the dead (Matt. ix. 18; 
Luke vii. 12; John xi.) ; He “4ree times 
announces that He will rise from the 
dead on the third day (Matt. xvi, 21; 
xvii. 23; xx. 19); He is “ the Way, and 
the Truth, and the Life (John xiv. 6); 
He is Prophet, Priest, and King. 

The Number Four :— 

The number Z%ree being the “ signa- 
ture” of God, of the Creator; Four is 
the “sigs wture” of Nature, of the cre- 
ated, of the world :—not of the world 
as “without form and void,” but as a 
Kéojos, as the revelation of God so far 
as Nature can reveal Him. Among the 
heathen, Four is the number of the ele 
ments and of the regions of the earth, 





' Leyrer (in Herzog’s Real Encyclop., art. 
Zahlen bei den Hebr.) disputes the conclusion 
that Zhree is strictly the ‘‘ signature” of God; 
it rather, he considers, when applied to God, 
symbolizes the conception of Zi/e. In the his- 
tory of Creation, he argues, 7%ree is involved in 
the Seven, as the number describing a gradual 
development of Life, when, in the first Triad of 
the Hexaemeron, the lower order (or kingdom 
of plants), and, in the second Triad, the highest 
order of organic Life (man) is attained (Gen. i. 
II-13, 26-31). 


INTRODUCTION. 


It is the holy number of the Pythago- 
reans—the sacred TZefractys, or divine 
Quaternio, by which they swore. In 
Scripture Four appears first in Gen. ii. 
10, where the river of Eden parts into 
four heads, ‘‘compassing” on all sides 
the lands of the earth: and thus we 
read of “ the four corners? of the earth” 
(Isai. xi. 12; Ezek. vii. 2); or, as it is 
expressed in Ps. cvii. 3, “He gathered 
them out of the lands, from the east, 
and from the west, from the north, and 
from the south” (cf. Luke xiii. 29) ;—we 
also read of “the four winds of the 
heaven” in Dan. vii. 2; Zech. ii. 6 (cf. 
Ezek. xxxvii. 9; Matt. xxiv. 31) ;—and 
of the four constellations (Job xxxviil. 
31, 32). This is also the language of 
Rey. vil. 1; xx. 8. For the Hebrew, the 
world was the manitestation of the Divine 
creative power (Ps. xix.) ; and the num- 
ber Four, which denoted the form of the 
world, was the “‘signature” of the world 
as that scene which “ declared the glory 
ot God.” The Living Beings who are the 
symbols in heaven of the Divine glory 
which Creation reveals—who are the ideal 
representatives of Creation (see on Rev. 
iv. 6)—appear, in Ezek. i., fowy in num- 
ber, with four faces, four wings, four 
wheels (cf. Ezek. x. 9), four sides. See 
also St. Peter’s Vision, Acts x. 11, 12; 
xi. 5, 6, where living Creation is sym- 
bolized. When the enumeration of the 
world’s inhabitants is meant to be ex- 
haustive, that enumeration is of four 
classes,—e. g. “every tribe and tongue, 
and people and nation” (Rev. v. 9). The 
old Creation had fallen from God ; the 
new Creation was hereafter to be His 
Kosmos, in the essential meaning of the 
word ; and towards this restoration the 
Jewish Theocracy was the first step: 
“In thy seed shall all the nations of the 
earth be blessed” (Gen. xxii. 18). From 
such considerations, leaving aside all 
material notions, is to be derived the 
religious significance of this number. 
Thus there were four ingredients in 
the sacred incense, and four in the 
sacred oil (Ex. xxx. 23, 24, 34) ;—the 
two Altars are “,our-square,” and had 


1In Hebrew MNP, NiDI3,—LXX. kxpa, 
yovlat, mrépvyes, Job xxxvii. 2; Ps. xix. 7; 
Isai. xlili. 5, 6; Jer. xlix. 36. 


475 


each four horns (Ex. xxvii. ; xxx.) 
And so in the Apocalypse the New Jeru- 
salem ‘lieth four-square,” ch. xxi. 16. 
Many other instances from Scripture 
are given by Bahr, and in Herzog, /. cz, 

The number Z/rvee—the “ signature” 
of the Divine ; and the number /our— 
the “signature” of Creation, are com- 
bined in numerical symbolism both by 
addition and multiplication: 4 + 3=7; 
4 X 3=12;—e.g. the Zhree and the 
four of the Seven-branched Candlestick ; 
and the Four rows of Three in the Twelve 
stones of the Breastplate (Ex. xxv. 31- 
373 XXvill, 17-21). 

The number SEVEN :— 

This number is employed to present, 
in the language of symbolism, the fol- 
lowing relations :—(a) As 3 and 4 make 
one number in 7, Seven is the note 
of union between Gop and the world, 
and, therefere, signifies union and har- 
mony; (4) As the conceptions of Gcp 
and the world are the conditions of 
every religion, so all systems which aim 
at union with God must include them. 
Being the symbol of this union, Sevev is, 
in general, the ‘‘number” of religion ; 
(c) The end of religion being union with 
God, the number (Seven) which signifies 
this, is the necessary “signature” of 
Salvation, Blessing, Peace, Perfection. 

With the heathen, Seven had almost 
exclusive reference to natural relations : 
the seven planets ;—the seven colours in 
the rainbow ;—the seven tones in music ; 
—the seven strings of the lyre of Helios ; 
—the seven reeds in the pipe of Pan, the 
personified ALL. On man, pre-eminently 
as the world in miniature,—the Mikro- 
kosm,— Seven was stamped. Solon and 
Hippocrates defined the seven ages of 
man (Philo, De Opific. Mundt, 1. p. 25). 
According to the. Indian doctrine, “‘ man 
is the representative of the great Seven- 
stringed World-lyre ;” the “symbol of 
Kosmic harmony ;” the “ makro-kosmic 
Heptachord” (v. Bohlen, Das alte Indien, 
il. 247). The Chinese distinguished 
seven material souls in man, together 
with ¢hree spiritual souls (Ritter, Asien, 
i. 199), The Egyptians worshipped 
the seven planets (Diodor. Sic., ii. 30) ; 
and Herodotus tells of their seve castes. 
There were also the sacred “ Heptads” 
of Greece and Rome; and hence, the 


476 


significance attached to Rome’s seven 
hills. Cicero styles Seven “rerum om- 
nium fere nodus” (Somn. Scip. 5,—see 
De Republica, vi.). In the Pythagorean 
doctrine of numbers, seven is the number 
of a xaipos;! in accordance with the 
seven sacred divisions of “me, which all 
nations seem to have recognized.2_ In 
the Oriental division of time into seven 
days, the Indians and Chaldzans gave 
to each day the name of one of the 
seven planets, as representing the har- 
mony of the world. 

In place of all such material relations, 
the ethical and religious significance 
of Seven was alone recognized by the 
Hebrews. The Bible begins, in the 
Book of Genesis, with a Seven; and ends, 
in the Apocalypse, with a series of 
Sevens. The symbolical value of this 
number is not to be sought for, with 
Winer (Real WW. B., B. ii. s. 715), in 
the ideas attached by the ancients to the 
seven planets; nor, with Bahr (/. ¢, i. 
192), in the harmony of the seven tones 
and colours; nor, with Philo (De Opijic. 
Mundi, i. p. 21), in numerical combina- 
tions ;* but in the seven days during 
which Creation arose from chaos (mn 
4n3)) and was pronounced to be ‘‘very 
good” (4) 31%) -—when God “ rested on 
the seventh day from all His work which 


1 Alexander Aphrod. on Aristot. Met., i. 5, 
4, writes: ‘Quem ordinem numerus septem 
obtineret, hunc in mundo assignabant tempesti- 
vitati, utique quoniam hunc numerum tem- 
pestivitatem esse censebant” (af. Herzog, 4. ¢., 
&. 365). 

* Ideler (Chronol., i. 1783 ii. 473) traces the 
universal division of time into periods of seven 
days, to the phases of the moon, or the dura- 
tiom of each of the four divisions of the lunar 
month of twenty-eight days. See a remarkable 
passage on the sacred character of the seventh 
day among the Greeks, in Clemens Al., Strom. 
v.14. Aulus Gellius (iii. 10) gives an account 
of a work by M. Varro (B.C. 116) on the virtues 
of the number seve, which, after the Greeks, he 
called a Hebdomad. Varro writes of the “‘sep- 
tem triones quas wAeiddas Greeci vocant ;” of the 
phases of the Moon completed ‘“‘ quater septenis 
diebus ;—and he adds ‘‘se quoque jam duode- 
imam annorum hebdomadam ingressum esse.” 

* See the treatise of Victorinus, De Fabrica 
Mundi, ap. Cave, Hist. Liter., t. i. p. 148. 

* Philo gives the following examples :— 
3+4=7; 1+2+4=7; in the two geo- 
metrical series I, 2, 4, 8, &c., I, 3, 9, 27, 
&c., the seventh term in each—as in every 
geometrical series beginning with wxzty —is at 
once a square and a cule. 


INTRODUCTION. 


He had made” (Gen. ii. 2); when He 
blessed it, and sanctified it as a day ot 
rest for the Creation also (cf. Prov. ix. 
1).1_ And thus the sacred Seven is the 
“signature” of perfection,—the type ot 
all development in the history of the 
creature, especially of the human race 
as it struggles to rise out of imperfec- 
tion and unrest and sin, to the state of 
perfection and rest and holiness, through 
the redemptive operation of God. If 
in this symbolical number we can look 
backwards to the work of the first 
creation of the world; we can also look 
forward to the New Creation,—to “the 
sabbath rest” (caBBaricpos, Heb. iv. 9) 
of the people of God. Of this progress? 
Israel is the type,—by its origin, its 
preparatory discipline, its deliverance 
from Egypt, its organization through the 
Law; and in this progress the numerical 
symbol Seven is of never-ceasing recur- 
rence. The very existence of the 
Jewish nation rested on its Covenant- 
union with God; and of this the ‘* bow 
in the cloud” (Gen. ix. 13), with its 
seven colours, was the Divinely appointed 
“token.” The sign and pledge of this 
Covenant was the Sabbath (naw; com- 
pare yaw, seven: “God blessed the 
seventh day and sanctified it,” Gen. ii 
3; Ezek. xx. 12 ;—the resemblance ot 
the two words, however, seems to be 
merely accidental) : see Ex. xxxi. 12-17 ; 
Neh. ix. 14. With reference to this 
sacred number— Seven, or Seven multi- 
plied by Seven—all the legal festivals 
were ordered. Seven was the number 

1 Mr. R. Proctor (Contemp. Rev., March. 
1875) would derive the origin of the Jewish 
Sabbath ‘‘from an Egyptian, and primarily 
from a Chaldzan source.” —p. 611. 

SS on? 

n € ant reparation oO - 

Danity for the New Temps and perfected 
Kingdom of God.—See Leyrer, 4 ¢ 

* The great Festivals lasted seven days :—the 
Passover (Ex. xii. 15), the Feast of Weeks (Ex. 
xxxiv. 22), the Feast of Tabernacles (Deut. 
xvi. 13). Pentecost was seven weeks after the 
Passover (Lev. xxiii. 15, 16) ; each seventh 
was ‘‘a sabbath of rest unto the land” Fb 
xxv. 4) ; and the Jubilee year was the year after 
““ seven times seven years” (Lev xxv. 8-11). 
The Great Day of Atonement fell m the seventh 
month (Lev. xvi. 29, 30), as did the Feasts of 
Trumpets and of Tabernacles (Num. xxix. I, 
12. And thus, the 7th day is a Sabbath; the 
7th week a Pentecost ; the 7th year a Sab- 
batical year; the 7th Sabbatical year a Jubilee. 


INTRODUCTION. 


of sacrifice’ (Num, xxiii, 1, 14, 29; 
2 Chron. xxix. 21; Job xlii. 8). Judicial 
acts, whether of mercy or of punishment, 
involved the sacred number: e.g. the 
punishment of Cain (Gen. iv. 15, 24) ;— 
the seven years of plenty and of famine 
in Egypt (Gen. xli. 29, 30). Cf. the use 
of Seven in Josh. vi. 4—the compassing 
of Jericho; in 2 Kings v. 1o—the heal- 
ing of Naaman;? in Dan. iv. 163—the 
“ seven times” of Nebuchadnezzar; &c. 
Again, the words signifying an oath, 
and 70 swear, are derived from Seven: 
e.g. Beer-sheba, signifies “The well of 
the oath,” Gen. xxi. 28-31 ;—God for- 
gets not His Covenant (m3) which He 
had sworn (yaw3), Deut. iv. 313 vill. 
18.¢ 

Seven is also used as a sacred number 
in the New Test. :—e. g. the seven Beati- 
tudes ; the seven petitions in the Lord’s 
Prayer ; the seven Parables in Matt. xiii; 
the miracle of the seven loaves; ‘the seven 
words” from the Cross; the seven dis- 
ciples in John xxi. 2 (cf. the 7 x 10 
disciples, Luke x. 1) ; the sevex Deacons ; 
the seven ‘‘Charismata” in Rom. xii. 
6-8 ; the seven characters of ‘“‘ wisdom” 
in James iii. 17; the seven “ virtues” in 
2 Peter i. 5-7. 

In the Apocalypse, the prominence of 
the number Sevez is as remarkable as it 


4 In the Feast of Tabernacles (Num. xxix. 
13-34), the whole idea of sacrifice was ordered 
according to Seven :— during the seven days were 
sacrificed, of goats, 7 ; of rams, 7 x 2; of lambs, 
7X7%xX2; of bullocks, 7x 5 x 2,—seven bullocks 
being offered on the seventh day (see Mr. White, 
Symbolic Numbers, p. 57). One may add the 
seven elements of the sacrifice,—the bullock, the 
tam, the goat, the dove ; corn, wine, and oil. 

® “Go and wash in Jordan seven times, and 
thy flesh,” &c. This is an instance of Sever, as 
the note of purzication. The first hint of this 
is given in the number of ‘‘clean beasts ” taken 
into the Ark by Noah, Gen. vii. 2, 3: cf. Lev. 
xiv. 51. 

* “Tn Babylonia the number Sevex had a 
character quite sacramental.”—See the notes on 
Dan. iv. 16, 32, 34. 

4 To this brief enumeration may be added 
the adjuncts of the Sanctuary and its service :— 
the seven branches of the Candlestick, and its 
seven lamps (Ex. xxv. 31-37) ;—Solomon’s 
Temple was seven years in building, 1 Kings 
vi. 38. The length of each curtain of the Taber- 
nacle was 7 x 4 cubits (Ex. xxvi. 2) ;—the num- 
ber of the pillars of the Tabernacle court was 
(Say x 2 (Ex. xxvii. 10-15) : see Philo, De 

Moss, iii, 1. 


477 


is unquestionable. (i). There are the 
cases in which the numerical symbol is 
exhibited, but not expressed :—such are 
the doxologies of ch. v. 12; vii. 12 ; the 
enumeration of the dwellers on the 
earth, ch. vi. 15; the enumeration of 
God’s enemies, ch. xix. 18.1 (ii) There 
are the far more numerous instances in 
which the numerical symbol is indicated 
expressly :—in ch. i., the seven Spirits, 
the seven Churches, the seven Candle- 
sticks, the seven Angels, the seven Stars ; 
elsewhere, the Seals, the Trumpets, the 
Vials, the Thunders, the Lamps of fire, the 
horns and eyes of the Lamb, and so 
throughout the Book.? 

It should also be added here that the 
half of Seven (34 x 2 = 7) was taken 
among the Jews as the symbol of times 
of tribulation: e.g. the period of famine 
and of Israel’s oppression in the days of 
Elijah—a period so expressly specified by 
Christ in Luke iv. 25 (cf. James v. 17) ; 
and this “broken number” —this half 
of Seven—is a symbol of great signifi- 
cance from Rev. xi. to Rev. xiii.: see 
Wetstein’s note on Rev. xi. 2. A con- 
dition of things is thus symbolically re- 
presented in which the Church suffers 
oppression from the World-power, and 
seems to be abandoned by God,—a con- 
dition the duration of which is shortened 
“for the elect’s sake” (Matt. xxiv. 22). 
“A time and times and the dividing of 
time” (Dan. vii. 25; xii. 7 ; Rev. xii. 14), 
or this period of three years and a half 
according to the usual interpretation, is 
the prophetic duration of the deliverance 


1 It is to be noted that as the symbol of the 
Lamb, and the possession of a throne, are asso- 
ciated with Antichrist—the ‘‘simia Dei’ (Rev. 
xili, 2, 11); so the number Sevez is taken in 
connexion with what is evil, e.g. Luke viii. 2; 
xi. 26. The seven heads of the Dragon and the: 
Beast (Rev. xii. 3; xiii. 1) are the hellish anti- 
type of, and contrast to, the seven Spirits of 
God,—the seven eyes and horns of the Lamb: 
cf. the seven nations of Canaan, Deut. vii. 13. 
Acts xiii. 19, 

? Note that in Amos i. 3 seve is resolved into 
its elements ¢hree and four. The purification on 
the seventh day was useless, if that on the third 
day did not precede, see Num. xix. II, I2, 
Compare the seven night- Visions of Zech. i.—vi. ; 
the three of ch. iii. being Visions of general, 
and the four of ch. iii.—vi., of special import. 
This resolution into ¢hree and four, and more 
usually into four and three, marks the Apoca- 
lypse :—see the remarks introductory to ch. ii. 


478 


of the saints into the powerot their oppres- 
sors. In Rey. xi. 2, 3, the period of 42 
months (=1260 days;=“a time, and 
times, and half a time,” ch. xii. 14)" 
is the period during which the Holy City 
is trodden down, and the Witnesses are 
persecuted (cf. “three days and a half” 
ch. xi. 9). This “broken number” 
—‘*Septenarius truncus””—may also be 
taken to be the “signature” of the 
broken Covenant; or may, perhaps, 
denote a period when God’s Covenant 
of mercy is hidden from view, though 
the glory to be hoped for is still in store, 
—a glory which is fully developed in the 
sacred Seven. 

Further, if ove be subtracted from 
Seven, we get Six, a deficient number,— 
the half, also, of Zzwe/ve,—and thus the 
“signature” of non-perfection: in Ex. 
XXViii. 10, the two S#xes make up the 
perfect Zwelve. The source of the idea 
is to be sought for in the sx days of 
Creation, as days of work ; and thus Szx 
is also the “signature” of human labour. 
The command to ‘“ work” on the ‘‘ sz 
days” is given seven times,—viz. Ex, xx. 
© 3/RxieD Gg SEK AG!) XKKWI2E jOCXK: 
2; Lev. xxiii. 3; Deut. v. 13; and thus 
man follows the Divine exemplar, for 
not until the seventh day did God rest 
‘from all His work which He had made,” 
Gen. ii. 2. This number is also a 
symbol of Auman rule and power, for 
on the sixth day God conferred on man 
his dominion over animated Creation, 
Gen. i. 28. After the pause which, in 
each case, precedes the last Seal, and 
the last Trumpet, the judgments which 
fall on the world and which are com- 
plete in the number 6, are fulfilled in the 
7, when “the kingdom of the world is 
become the kingdom of our Lord, and 
of His Christ” (Rev. xi. 15). Accor- 
dingly, “ Szx is the number of the world 
given over to judgment” (Auberlen, Z ¢., 
p. 267). In Rev. xiii. 18, the threefold 
appearance of six in higher orders 
(666 = 6+60-+600) indicates that the 
Beast “can only rise to greater ripeness 
for judgment.”— 74., p. 268. 


1 Mr. C. Maitland suggests that this variety 
of expression is intended ‘‘to make us more 
abundantly certain of the accuracy of the fulfil- 
ment.”— The Apost. School of Proph. Interpr., 
p. 27. See note’, p. 474. 


INTRODUCTION. 


The number TweELve denotes, not by 
addition as Seven, but by multiplication, 
the combination of the “ signature” of 
God, and the “signature” of the 
world (3 X 4) :— 

According to the material conceptions 
of the heathen, 7iwe/ve was the regulating 
number of the Universe, both in space 
and time. There are 12 chief Stars— 
12 signs of the Zodiac in the path of the 
sun ; 12 months in the year; 12 hours in 
the day. Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, 
had 12 chief deities; there were 12 
Titans ; 12 labours of Hercules, &c. In 
Scripture, however, rejecting all material 
references, as Seven, by reason of its 
components 3 and 4, is the Covenant- 
number,—so, by analogy, Zwelve is not 
indeed, the number of the Covenant 
itself as Seven is, but of the Covenant- 
people in whose midst Gop dwells, and 
with whom He has entered into Cove- 
nant-relations. Thedivision into Zwelve 
Tribes fixes the relation of the Israelites, 
as God’s elect people, to this symbolical 
number. That thiSrelation was divinely 
fixed we learn from such passages as 
Ex. xxiv. 4; XXvili. 213 Josh. iv. 1-95 
1 Kings xviii. 31; Ezra vi. 17. That 
the relation was not accidental,—that it 
did not spring from the mere fact that 
Jacob had twelve sons,! is clear from the 
incorporation of the Tribes of Ephraim 
and Manasses in place of their father 
Joseph, which would have disturbed the 
number Zzwelve had not Levi been 
specially separated among the other 
Tribes (Num. 1. 47; i. 33). That this 
explanation is just, we learr from the 
Divinely appointed arrangement of the 
Camp of Israel (Num. ii.) ; where the 
Tabernacle in which God dwelt was in 
the midst (ver. 2), with ¢iree Tribes en- 
camped on each of the four sides (vv. 
3-31). Jerusalem—the Holy City which 
replaced the Camp in the wilderness 
—was built, as Josephus describes it 
(B. J., v. 4. 2), on four hills, with ¢hree 

1 The fact that Nahor (Gen. xxii. 21—24) and 
Ishmael (Gen. xvii. 20; xxv. 16) had each 
twelve sons, has led Leyrer (/. ¢c.) to conclude 
that 77ve/ve is not the “ signature” of the people 
of God, but generally of a people (cf. Gen. xxi. 
13); the predominant and permanent reference 
to Israel causing this number to be symbolical 


of the Church, as the assemblage of God’s 
chosen people, 


INTRODUCTION. 


gates on each side ; just as we read of 
the New Jerusalem in Rev. xxi. 13. 
And thus the number Zwelve was the 
“signature” of Israel as God's elect 
people with God in their midst: while 
the perpetuation of this number as that 
of the Apostles of Christ, and this selec- 
tion of it (Matt. xix. 28) to mark out the 
Christian Church also as the Covenant- 
people with whom God shall ever dwell,— 
fixes Tzwe/ve as the “signature” of the 
collective body of the Redeemed. 

For the symbolic use of Zzwe/ve in the 
New Test., see the ‘we/ve thrones of the 
Twelve Apostles, Matt. xix. 28; Actsi. 26; 
the swe/ve legions of Angels, Matt. xxvi. 
53; the ¢we/ve baskets full of fragments in 
the miracle of the loaves, Matt. xiv. 20 :— 
in the Apocalypse, the Woman with “a 
crown of fwe/ve Stars,’ ch. xii. I; OF, 
referring to the New Jerusalem, the 
Twelve Angels at the ‘welve gates on 
which were the names “of the Zwelve 
Tribes of Israel,” and the fwe/ve founda- 
tions, on which were “ the names of the 
Twelve Apostles of the Lamb,” ch. xxi. 
12, 14 ;—in fine, the *‘ we/ve manner of 
fruits” of the Tree of Life (in connexion 
with the /we/ve months) ch. xxii. 2. 

The introduction of Zwelve as a factor 
of other numbers is also significant :— 

12 X 2,—The courses of the priests, 
1 Chron. xxiv. 1-19 (cf. 2 Chron. vill 
143 xxxl. 2; Luke? 8). In the Apoca- 
lypse the “Four and twenty Elders,” 
with their thrones, ch. iv. 4. 

12 x 4,—The “ forty and eight cities ” 
of the Levites, Num. xxxv. 7. 

12 x 8,—The offering of ‘‘ ninety and 
six rams,” Ezra vill. 35. 

12 X to (and the derivatives of 12 
multiplied by the derivatives of 10),— 
e.g. The 120 priests, 2 Chron. v. 12 ; the 
120 disciples, Acts 1. 15. 

12 X Io X Io X Io (= 12,000),— 
The length and breadth of the City, 
Rey. xxi. 16. 

12 X 12,—The wall of the City was 
“‘an hundred and forty and four cubits,” 
Rey. xxl. 17. 

Eee TO (X10. 3C' x6 {= 
144,000 or 12,000 from each of the 
Twelve Tribes), —The sealed of Rev. vii. 
4; see also ch. xiv. I. 

The number TEN :— 

As the numerical system of all nations 


479 


consists of deads, and the number Za 
represents the entire system, it is the 
natural symbol of perfection and com- 
pleteness. The Pythagoreans gave to 
Ten the name of Kosmos,—transferring 
to it the name properly belonging tc 
their Zétractys; for, as Four is the 
number of the Universe which compre- 
hends all relations, so Four involves Zz, 
inasmuch as I + 2 + 3 +4=TI0,orthe 
great terpaxrus (see Suidas, s. v. ape60s). 
As 4 follows 3, so also 10 follows 3 x 3.3 
Ten is, therefore, the “ signature” of the 
perfected xécpos, and they claim for it— 
as the perfectly explicit A/onas and Te 
tractys—everything that embraces what 
is odd and even, what is evil and good, 
Hence they regarded Zen as the sym- 
bolical representative of absolute per- 
fection and complete development. And 
thus Zen symbolizes, not God and the 
world—like 3 and 4, but that peculiar 
quality of completeness and _perfec- 
tion which belongs to both. From 
such speculations Spencer derives the 
universal custom of setting apart a 
Tenth of all to God (De Legg. Hebr. 
ili, 1),—a symbolical conception which 
may be noticed so early as the time of 
Abraham, who gave Melchizedek “ tithes 
of all” (Gen. xiv. 20); and which 
was divinely ratified in the Law (see 
Lev. xxvii. 30; Num. xvill. 21, 24). 
Though but a ¢enth, the ttthewas given in 
token that the whole was the Lord’s. 
Hence, too, “ the words of the Covenant, 
the Zen Commandments ” (Ex. xxxiv. 28) 
gave the complete summary of the Law, 
and were the condition of Israel’s 
existence as a people.? 

1 Philolaus, the first expounder of the system 
of Pythagoras (see Ritter and Preller, Ast. 
Phil., p. 58), disputed as to the proportions and 
virtues of numbers,—‘‘ maxime de numero de- 
Marlo, quo Omines NumMeros aque omnes nume- 
rorum virtutes contineri putabant.”—/. ¢., p. 
61. ‘*Quaternarium numerum quasi compen- 
dium et originem denarii esse docebant, quia si 
addendo conjungas unum, duo, tria, quatuor, 
efficiuntur decem. Cf. Vit. Pythag. ap. Phot. 
Bibl. p. 712... .. Inde juramentum illud Pytha- 
gore per tetractyn. Cf. Lucian., pro /apsu inter 
salut. 5.”—i. c., p. 62. 

2 Delitzsch (see Herzog, /c., art. Zahklen, 
s. 379) would trace the symbolical value of Zen 
to a different source :—‘‘ Reading between the 
lines” of the express division into Seven, of 
the work of Creation, he discerns Ze ‘‘ acts,” 
or ‘‘creative words,” of God (viz., Gen. i. 1, 


480 


In the Bible, accordingly, as the 
“signature” of a complete and per- 
fect whole, Zen appears, at times, by 
itself ; at times, in connexion with other 
symbolical numbers :—e.g. in the de- 
tails of the Tabernacle. The Tabernacle 
consisted of /em curtains, forming a 
covering, in surface forty cubits by 
twenty-eight (t.e.,10 X 4 by7 x 4), and 
of which the “loops” and ‘“taches” 
were fifty (or 10 X 5); its length being 
ro X 3 cubits (Ex. xxvi. 1; xxxvi. 8- 
18). The length of its court was 10 X 
Io cubits, by 10 x 5 (Ex. xxvii. 18). 
The Holy of Holies was a cube, each edge 
being of “en cubits (see on Rev. xxi. 16). 
Other applications are frequent. Noah, 
the head of the senth generation! of 
mankind, was a type (Gen. v. 29) of the 
future universal Redemption; and that 
the ¢enth generation signifies “ for ever,” 
we learn from Deut. xxiii. 3, as explained 
by Neh. xiii. 1. The ¢en Egyptian plagues 
symbolized the complete outpouring of 
Divine wrath ;—to which stands in con- 
trasted parallel the “tribulation of ten 
days” (Rev. ii. 10), caused by the world 
to the Church. The ¢z horns of the 
fourth Beast represented ¢en kings, and 
symbolized perfect power (Dan. vii. 7, 
24).2 In order to intensify the idea, 


3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20, 24, 26, 29) through which 
the Kosmos reached its completion, as a whole, 
during the seven days: so that the ‘seven 
’ days” represent, in succession, the progress of 
time during which God’s word and work com- 
pleted the world ; and the ‘‘ 7¢z words” repre- 
sent in systematic perfection the simg/e parts 
and aspects of the Kosmos, when a// the parts 
of it have become complete. By this conside- 
ration of the relation of Zen to the Kosmos, 
Delitzsch accounts for the position of Zé# in 
the system of numbers among all peoples, and 
under every form of culture. Be this however, 
as it may, the symbolical importance of the 
number 7¢z is beyond question. 

1 Leyrer notes that the formula ‘‘these are 
the generations” occurs /en times in the Book 
of Genesis: viz. (I) Heaven and Earth,—ii. 4; 
(2) Adam,—v. 1 ; (3) Noah,—vi. 9; (4) Noah’s 
gons,—x. I; (5) Shem,—xi. 10; (6) Terah,— 
xi. 27; (7) Ishmael,—xxy. 12; (8) Isaac,—xxv. 
19; (9) Esau,—xxxvi. I, (10) Jacob,—xxxvii. 2. 

2 Leyrer (7. ¢.) adds, that the instruments 
which give praise to God have the “‘signature” 
of 7en,—e.g. the ‘ten strings,” Ps. xxxiii. 2; 
xcii. 3 ; cxliv. 9 : and he refers to the Pythagorean 
World-lyre, with its ## strings, and the /en- 
voiced music of the spheres,—see Cicero, De 
Republica, vi. (Somn. Scip. 4); Meursius, De 
Denar. Pythag., ap. Greevii Thesaur. Grace, t. ix. 


INTRODUCTION. 


the powers of Zen are frequently em- 
ployed singly or in combination with 
other symbolical numbers :—e.g. “a ¢hou- 
sand (10%) generations ” (1 Chron. xvi. 155 
Ps. cv. 8); and again, to express indefinite 
time, “a thousand years in thy sight are 
but as yesterday,” (Ps. xc. 4; 2 Pet. iii. 8). 
Also combined with other numbers :— 
e.g. the captivity in Babylon for seventy 
(10 X 7) years (Jer. xxv. 11);—theseventy 
“sevens” (10 X 77) of Daniel (ix. 24);—in 
Elijah’s days the seven thousand (10* x 7) 
in Israel who did not bow the knee to 
Baal (1 Kings xix. 18; Rom. xi. 4) ;—in 
the Apocalypse the 12,000 (109 x 4 X 3) 
from each of the Twelve Tribes (= 10° 
127 = 144,000), ch. vii. 4; xiv. 1 ;—the 
“thousand and six hundred furlongs” 
(10? x 47), ch. xiv. 20, Compare also 
ch. v. 11, “ten thousand times ten thou- 
sand, and thousands of thousands”— 
a countless number ;—ch. ix. 16, “two 
hundred thousand thousand;’—and, 
above all, ch. xx., the “ Thousand years.” 

The number Five :— 

To the number Ze is related Five, 
which thus represents one-half of the 
“ signature” of perfection. In this light, 
it symbolizes in Scripture a relative im- 
perfection. Thus, he that sins through 
ignorance in holy things ‘shall make 
amends,” “and shall add the jth part 
[= a double ¢enth] thereto,” Lev. v. 16; 
cf. vi. 5; xxii. 14. In the New Test, 
the five foolish virgins are placed beside 
the five who were wise, Matt. xxv. In 
the Revelation the locusts have power 
but for ve months (ch. ix. 5,10); and in 
ch. xvii. 10, five of the “seven kings” 
are fallen. 


- 


(b) NUMBERS APPLIED TO TIME. 


I. The system of Tichonius (AD 
390) — 

From a very early period the chrono 
logical as well as the numerical state- 
ments of the Apocalypse have exercised 
the ingenuity of commentators. Among 
the “Seven Rules”? of Tichonius, 
which were intended by their author to 
solve the difficulties of Scripture, the 


1“ De sepiem Regulis,” ap. M. Bibl. Patrum, 
ed. De La Bigne, t. vi. p. 49, &c. These 
*¢ Rules” were taken by Beda as the foundation 
of his interpretation of the Apocalypse. 


INTRODUCTION. 


Sifth is headed De Temporibus. “The 
legitimate numbers” Tichonius takes to 
be 7, 10, 12, and their multiples,3— 
@.g. 70, 700,0or7 X 7,or1Ic X10, By 
this means either ferfection is signified, or 
the whole is inferred from its part :—thus 
the Seven Churches (Rev. i.) denote 
perfection; and in like manner the 
number 7ez,—e. g. 1 Sam. xxix. 5; Dan. 
vii. 10; Matt. xviii. 22. For the number 
Twelve, see above, p. 478. 

In cases where “me. is concerned, 
the “tribulation of fez days” signifies 
‘down to the very end’ (“significat usque 
in finem”) ;—the five months” (Rev. 1x. 
5) denote five years ;— “the hour and 
day and month and year” (Rev. ix. 15) 
denote three years and a half. Some- 
times “a day” is put for a hundred 
days, wd thus the “1260 days” (Rev. xi. 
3; xi. 6) represent 350 years :—so 
also the “42 months” (ver. 2). “A 
time, and times, and half a time” (Rev. 
xii, 14) are either 34 or 350 years; and 
in like manner ove day is sometimes a 
hundred years, as it is written concerning 
the Church, “after three days and a 
half” (Rev. xi. 9, 11).? 

In modern times, however, the “ Year- 
day theory” is that which has gained 
the highest popularity. 

II. The “ Year-day” theory :— 

Among the questions relating to sym- 
bolical numbers, none possesses such 
importance as the question of the “ Year- 
day” theory. This theory is thus de- 
fined by Mr. Birks: In the predictions of 
Daniel and St. John “ which relate to the 
general history of the Church between 
the time of the prophet and the Second 
Advent .... each day represents a 
natural year, as in the Vision of Ezekiel, 


1 “Ex legitimis numeris sunt sepfenarius, 
Genarius, duodenarius, Idem est autem nu- 
merus et cum multiplicatur: ut septuaginta vel 
septingenti ; vel toties in se, ut septies septem, 
aut decies deni.”—/. ¢., p. 61. 

2 “* Aliquando dies denario numero centum 
dies sunt, sicut in Apocalypse, Dies mille du- 
centi sexaginta. Nam millies ducenties sexagies 
centeni, centum viginti sex millia des sunt, qui 
sunt avi trecenti quinquaginta, mensibus tri- 
ginta dierum . . . ‘‘ Tempus” aut annus est, 
aut centum anni; sicut ¢empus et tempora et 
dimidiun temporis, quod est aut tres anni et 
dimidius, aut 350. Iterum unus dies aliquando 
centum anni sunt: sicut de Ecclesia scriptum 
est post lres ies el dimidium” (Rev. xi. 9, 11). 


New Test.—Vou. IV. 


481 


[iv. 4-6]; a month denotes 30, and a 
time 360 years."— First Elements of 
Sacred Prophecy, p. 311.3 

The passages in the Apocalypse to 
which Mr. Birks applies this theory are 
the following :—ch. ii. 10 (“ten days”) 3 
ch. ix. 5, 10 (“five months”); ch. ix, 
15 (“the hour, and day, and month, 
and year”); ch. xi. 2, 3 (“42 months,” 
and “1260 days”); ch xi. g 2 
“three days and a half”); ch. xii. 6 
“1260 days”); ch. xii. 14 (“a time, 
and times, and half a time”); ch. xiii. § 
(“42 months”), It will be observed that 
this writer excludes from the applica- 
tion of the “ Year-day” theory, ch. viii. 
1 (“half an hour”); ch. xvii. 12 (“ one 
hour”) ; ch. xviii. 8 (“ one day”); and, 
chief of all, the “ Thousand Years” of 
ch. xx. Indeed Mr. Birks regards it as 
the merit of his definition that it excludes 
the Millennium, and thus, he considers, 
avoids the objection that, according to 
the “ Year-day ” theory, the Millennium 
would continue for 360,000 years (/. ¢, 
PP. 313-322). Sede JF 

The objections to this principle of 
interpretation which at once offer them- 
selves, are neither few nor unimportant. 
If Numbers are symbolical at all, we 
cannot play fast and loose with their 
figurative meaning: we cannot apply, at 
our pleasure, the “ Year-day” theory to 
some prophetical numbers, and _ arbi- 
trarily exclude others ;—and yet almost 
all writers seem to shrink from apply- 
ing this theory to the Millennium.* 
Christ has told us that it was not even 


1 “The mystical exposition of the 1260 days 
as years was first published about A.D. 1200.” 

. ‘* From the time of Osiander (1544), and the 
Centuriators, it has been generally received and 
retained in the Protestant Churches.”—/Z ¢, 
p- 19. The Abbot Joachim (circ. A.D. 1190), 
“completely anticipated the day-year theory.”— 
Todd, Zhe Prophecies relating to Antichrist, 
Pp: 457. Joachim’s words are: ‘* Accepto haud 
dubie die pro anno, et 1260 diebus pro totidem 
annis.”—z6. p. 458 

2 Anton Driessen, however, (editt. in 
sacram Apoc., 1717) has not shrunk from this 
conclusion. Taking a year to be equal to 360 
days, he counts in the Apocalypse from the 
first Christian Pentecost, seven equal periods of 
360 years, down to Rey. xx.; and he makes 
the 1000 years (beginning in the year 2695) to 
be the eighth and last period of God’s kinge 
dom on earth,—this Millennium being equal to 
360,000 years :—so Liicke reports, 5. 1033. 


482 


for Apostles “to know the times or 
the seasons which the Father hath put 
in His own power”; nevertheless the 
advocates of the “ Year-day” theory 
place the exact interval of 1260 years 
between some point of time variously 
and arbitrarily fixed upon, and the goal 
of Apocalyptic prediction, — whether 
that goal be the Lord’s Second Advent, 
or some subordinate event in history.' 
Further still :—by aid of the “ Year-day” 
theory, writers who, above all others, 
seek to spiritualize the Apocalypse, are 
unconsciously led to give what is really 
a literal interpretation to passages which 
they imagine they are expounding sym- 
bolically. In Num. xiv. 34, and Ezek. 
iv. 6, when it is expressly said that years 
are represented by days, or conversely, 
this is simply a literal statement of a fact, 
—a statement as literal as when Jeremiah 
(xxv. 11) predicts plainly that the cap- 
tivity in Babylon will last for seventy 
years. If, therefore, an expositor as- 
sumes that a prophetical day always 
means a natural year, and, consequently, 
that 42 months, or 1260 days must repre- 
sent 1260 natural years, he, so far, 
places himself in the ranks of those who 
interpret the Apocalypse literally. If 
the Second Advent, moreover, be the goal 
fixed upon, one can easily perceive how 
greatly the knowledge of the preceding 
period of 1260 years must interfere with 
that attitude of expectation which the 
Church should ever maintain. Nor can 
such objections, even if they stood alone, 
be removed by the statement of Mr. 
Birks (2 ¢, p. 410) that the meaning 


! Thus Junius counts the 1260 years from 
Christ’s Resurrection, A.D. 34, to A.D. 1294. 

Mede (p. 600) would count the 42 months of 
**the Antichristian Apostasy” from some year 
between 365 and 455. He inclines to the year 
376, when the Emperor Gratian, who renounced 
the title ‘‘ Pontifex Maximus,” began to reign. 

Cressener from A.D. 427 to A.D. 1687, the eve 
of the decline of the Turkish power. 

According to Elliott, the primary epoch of 
the Beast’s 1260 days was Justinian’s decree, 
A.D. 530; and the grimary ending the Fren 
Revolution, A.D. 1790. The secondary begin- 
ning was the decree of Phocas, A.D. 606 ; and 
the secondary ending the year 1866 (vol. iii. 
Pp. 296-302, 396-410). 

Faber counts from A.D. 604 to A.D. 1864 
(Sacr. Cal., B. I. ch. 7, p. 132). Tyso (p. 79) 
go a list of 47 writers who give different 


INTRODUCTION. 


of the symbol was concealed for twelve 
or fifteen, or even eighteen i 
until the “ Year-day” theory was devi 

by expositors ; for, when closely exa- 
mined, this theory has no real support 
from the analogy of Scripture. 

The passages which are appealed to 
in proof of this theory, and which ex- 
plain its meaning, are as follows a4 
“ After the number of the days in whi 
ye searched the land, even forty days, 
each day for a year, shall ye bear your 
iniquities, even forty years” (Num. xiv. 
34) ; (2) “‘ Lie thou upon thy left side, 
and lay the iniquity of the house of Israel 
upon it: according to the number of the 
days that thou shalt lie upon it thou 
shalt bear their iniquity. For I have 
laid upon thee the years of their iniquity, 
according to the number of the days, 
390 days: . . And when thou hast 
accomplished them lie again on thy right 
side, and thou shalt bear the iniquity of 
the house of Judah forty days: I have 
appointed thee each day for a year” 
(Ezek. iv. 4-6). To these passages wri- 
ters add, as their grand confirmation, (3) 
the prediction of the “‘seventy weeks” in 
Dan. ix. 24-27 ;! which according to 
the established interpretation, indicates 
“seventy weeks of years,” or 490 years, 
—‘ each day for a year.” 

As to the two passages Num. xiv. 34, 


1 « What are the ‘weeks’? Are they weeks 
of days,—or weeks of years,—lunar years of 
days, or Babylonian years of 360 days, —or ju’ 
periods of 50 years,—or are they mystical and 
symbolical numbers? Critics of acknowledged 
piety and ability adopt, on this point, the most 
opposite views.”"—Axcursus on Dan. ix, 24-27, 
p. 305. ‘‘It is a question,” writes Mr. G. S. 
Faber, ‘‘whether the ‘seventy weeks’ [of 
Daniel ix.] are composed of solar years [of 365 
days] or of lunar years ; and if of the x 
whether each year contains 354 days or 360 
days.” Dissert. on Dan. ix, p. xi. Ev gy 
on Rev. xi., Brightman takes the 1260 days 
(the months ‘‘ being neither Asmar nor Fuhan, 
but Zgyftian, each consisting of 30 days"—~ 
p- 287) to be 1242 Julian years, from Con- 
stantine’s accession A.D. 304, to A.D. 1546, the 
year when the Council of Trent assembled (cf 
Note C on ch. ii. 10). R. Fleming also re- 
duces the 1260 days (or 3} years) to Julian 
years (34 Julian years = 1278 days ; and, there- 
fore 1260 prophetical days = 1242 Julian years). 
He counts from ‘‘ the decree of Phocas,” A.D 
606, and thus obtains for the close of the 
Apocalyptic 3} years (1242 + 606) the year 1848 
(see Note B on ch. xi. 2). 


INTRODUCTION. 


Ezek. iv. 4-6, it is not easy to see what 
support can be found in them for the 
“ Vear-day” theory. In neither of them 
does a “day” stand for a “year”; in 
both a day is simply @ day, and a year is 
@ year, in the plain, literal sense of the 
words. The “forty years” of Israel’s 
wandering in the wilderness were the 
punishment for “forty days’” unbelief: 
—Ezekiel, lying on his side for 430 
(39° + 40) days, bore the national ini- 
quity of 430 years. How can it be 
inferred from either of these passages 
that the word “day” in prophecy a/ways 
signifies a year? In the passage from 
Ezekiel the whole significance lies not in 
the words “day” and “ year,” but in the 
symbolic action publicly performed ; and 
the argument based upon it, in proof of 
the “ Year-day” theory, “confounds the 
allegory of action with the metaphors of 
speech.” * In the previous verse (Ezek. 
iv. 3) “‘an iron pan” (marg. flat plate) 
symbolizes the wa// of Jerusalem ; and 
Bishop Horsley argues that we might 
with equal reason (and by the same 
analogy) conclude that the word iron- 
plate symbolizes the wa// of a city in 
Lev. ii. 5; 1 Chron. xxiii. 29, as infer, 
because a day represents a year in Num. 
xiv. 34, that the 1260 days of Rev. xi. 
3 must be interpreted to mean 1260 
years (.c., p. 723).? 

The argument from the “ seventy 
weeks” of Daniel (ix. 24-27) is still 
less conclusive. The usual translation— 
“seventy weeks,” instead of the literal 
rendering “ seventy sevens ”—has contri- 
buted not a little to the misconception 
here. Expositors supply in this passage, 
not weeks of days, or months, or jubilees, 

1 See Bishop Horsley, British Magazine, Supp. 
1833, vol. iv. p. 725, quoted by Dr. S. R. 
Maitland, 7ze.Twelve hundred and sixty days, 
ee Dr. Maitland (7. p. 107) also quotes 

agenseil: ‘* Alter locus, Ezech. iv. 6, zeque 
nihil probat, ibi enim tantum propheta super 
latus dextrum et sinistrum tot dies cubare 
jubetur, quot annos Deus domus Israelis et 
domus Judz peccata tacitus pertulerat. Hic 
ergo vox dies ad annum significandum physice, 
ut ita loquar, adhibetur, non grammatice: 
exstatque locus plane similis, Num. xiv.” —7Z¢/a 
ign. Satane (Mantissa de LXX. Hebdom., 

1). 
Ps tthe reply of Mr. Birks (2 ¢. p. 348) that it 
is not said that ‘‘¢hree hundred iron plates” 


tepresent ‘‘ thee hundred walls,” does not appear 
conclusive, 


483 


but of years,—i.e, “seventy sevens [of 
years|.” That the simple rendering, 
“seventy sevens,” is the correct significa- 
tion follows from the usage of Scripture, 
When we ourselves use the word “ week,” 
we mean exclusively a week of days; 
and we calculate time by weeks, reduce 
ing days to weeks, weeks to months, and 
months to years, ‘This, however, was 
not the custom of the writers of Scrip- 
ture. As the Jews were not in the habit 
of counting time by weeks, they did not 
express the period of seven days by any 
one word ; writing in full ‘seven days” 
(e.g. Num. xxix. 12, shibath yamim, 
DD’ nyaw,—érra yuepas), or “a seven 
(or sevens) of days” (Dan. x. 2, shabuim 
yamim, OD Dyaw,—éEBdouddas nyepav, 
cf. Ezek. xlv. 21)1:—cf. “a month of 
days,’ Gen. xxix. 14; “three years of 
days,’ Amos iv. 4. The important fact, 
however, is that the word shadua (y)aw) 
properly signifies not “a week (ot 
days),” or ‘‘a week (of years),” but 
strictly “@ seven,’—just as the French 
language has the phrase we septaine; 
and, similarly, as we say, a dozen. Whe- 
ther shabua denotes “a seven (of days),” 
or ‘‘a seven (of years),” or ‘‘a seven (of 
some other period of time),” is to be 
determined by the context alone;? and 


- Three exceptions to this rule are given by 
Dr. S. R. Maitland (see his Azrst and Second 
Enquiries as to the Prophetic periods of Daniel 
and St. Fohn) :—(1) In Lev. xii. 5, the duration 
of ‘two weeks” (shebuaim) is prescribed; (2) 
In Gen. xxix. 18, 20, Jacob serves Laban ‘seven 
years” (sheba shanim) ; and in ver. 27 we read 
‘Fulfil her week” (shabua zoth,—ra €Bdoua 
tavTns), which commentators usually take to be 
‘6a week of days”—‘‘the seven days of the 
[marriage] feast ” (Judges xiv. 12): so that 
Jacob married Leah and Rachel within eight 
days. Josephus, however, understood that Jacob 
served seven years (%AAns éwraetlas—A nit. i. 19, 
7) for Rachel also; (3) ‘‘ The feast of weeks” 
(Aag shabuoth), or feast of the ‘‘first fruits of 
wheat harvest”’ (Ex. xxiii. 16; xxxiv. 22; Num, 
XXviii. 26; Deut. xvi. 9, 10, 16; Jer. v. 24), as 
the feast of Pentecost was also called (Lev. 
xxiii. I5-21),—was fixed by counting seven 
weeks (as we count) from a given time: see 
Tobit ii. 1, # éorw ayla éBdouddor. 

2 “Hofmann and Kliefoth” writes Keil (on 
Dan. ix. 24), “‘arein the right when they remark 
that shabuim does not necessarily mean years 
weeks, but an intentionally indefinite designation 
of a period of time measured by the number 
seven, whose chronological duration must be de- 
termined on other grounds.” See also Dr. M. 
Stuart’s Comm. on the Apoc., vol. ii. p. 462 


HH 2 


484 


this usage is followed by the Misnic 
writers.? 

In Dan. ix. 24 the context seems to 
point to the interpretation of “seventy 
sevens” (shabuim shibim), viz. “seventy 
sevens (of years).”? In ver. 2 Daniel 
quotes Jeremiah’s prediction of the ac- 
complishment of “seventy years [shibim 
shanah| in the desolations of Jerusalem.” 
This period Daniel intensifies by multi- 
plying seventy by seven in ver. 24. He 
leaves the measure of time indefinite ; 
but his previous reference to Jeremiah 
seems to indicate that “sevens (of 
years),” not “weeks (of days),” are to be 
understood throughout the entire passage, 
vv. 24-27. On the other hand, when 
Daniel does not leave the measure of 
time indefinite, but intends to express a 
week in our sense of the word, he writes 
in full “a seven of days,’—see Dan. x. 
2, 3, ‘‘three sevens of days” (sheloshah 
shabuim yamim): cf. Havernick in Joc.8 
On the reference in Dan. ix. 2 to Jere- 
miah, compare the remarkable passage, 
2 Chron. xxxvi. 21.4 

It is to be noted that when one space 
of time in Scripture typifies another 
space of time, both spaces of time are 
equal :—e. g. “‘ The three days and three 
nights” in Jonah i. 17, and “the three 
days and three nights” of the entomb- 
ment of Christ,—Matt. xii. 40. When 
the exact time differs, it is stated ex- 
pressly as in the case of the days in 
Num. xiv. 34; Ezek. iv. 4-9. 

Again, when we are told by Mr. Faber 
(Dissert. on Dan. ix. : see note }, p. 482) 
that the 1260 days, the 42 months, and the 
34 dimes “must alike be equivalent to 


1 See Dr. Maitland, /. ¢.; and the references 
in Dr. A. M‘Caul’s reply to the ‘ Morning 
Watch.’ 

* On Dan. ix. 27, Irenzeus writes: ‘‘ Dimi- 
dium hebdomadis ¢ves sunt anni et menses sex.’ 
— Hear. v. 25, p. 323: 

® Grotius comments thus on Dan. ix. 24: 
“‘Septuaginta Hebdomades.”| Annorum. Ita 
enim mos erat loquendi, et manet apud Thal- 
mudicos. Ideo ubi de dierum hebdomade agitur, 
solet adjici dierum nomen. Ezek. xlv. 21; 
infra Dan. x. 2, 3, in Hebreo.” 

4 Cf. Lev. xxvi. 34, 35. It should be ncted 
that “a sabtath of years” was a legal phrase; 
see Lev. xxv. 4, 8, ‘‘seven sabbaths of years” 
(sheba shabbethoth shanim), or ‘‘seven times 
seven years,” the fiftieth year being ‘“‘a 
Jubilee.” 


INTRODUCTION. 


1260 years,” we are also to bear in 

that a year is taken to signify two different 
periods of time. When writers of this 
class thus speak of ‘ Jears of years,” — 
they really “mean ‘years’ (consisting 
of 360 mystical days) ‘of years’ (con- 
sisting of 365 natural days).”—S. R, 
Maitland, Second Enquiry, p. 83. See 
Mr. Elliott’s calculation referred to on 
ch. xi. 9.3 

The arguments of those who uphold 
the ‘‘Year-day” theory, in answer to 
Dr. S. R. Maitland and the other 
writers who adopt the “ Futurist” system 
of interpretation, or who take the num- 
bers of Scripture in their bare, literal 
sense,? do not apply to anything which 
has been stated here. 

III. “A Time, and Times, and half a 
Time” (Rev. xii. 14) — 

This symbolical period is borrowed 
from Dan. vii. 25% (“a time and times 
and the dividing of time”), and Dan. 
xii, 7 (“a time, times, and an half”). In 
the former place, which occurs in the 
Chaldee portion of Daniel, the Chaldee 
word iddan (j7y) is used; in the latter, 
which occurs in the Hebrew portion, the 
common Hebrew word moed (1yy0): 
and in both places the LXX. has xa:pés, 
as in Rev. xii. 14. These “ three anda 
half ¢imes” are the half of the “seven 
times” of Dan. iv. 16 (LXX. ver. 20). 


1 See, too, iz Joc., Elliott’s explanation of 
ch. ix. 15 (‘‘the hour, and day, and month, and 
year”). Robert Fleming, however, has noted 
this: ‘‘In order,” he observes ‘‘to understand 
the Prophetical years aright,” we must reduce 
them to Julian years; and thus he makes 
the 3} Prophetical years = 1278 Julian years, 
speaking “*ore rotundo :’—see above, p. 482, 
note ', and Note B on ch, xi. 2. 

2. g. Mr. Edward Irving reckoned the 1260 
aay s from Jan. 14, 1832, to July 14, 1835. As 
cf Preterist,” Mr. F. D. Maurice underst 
ic 42 months ae ‘“We commonly 
reckon a period of about four years between the 
commencement of the Jewish rebellion, . .. 
and the termination of the war by Titus.”— 

Lectures on the Apoc., p. 190. 
8 Bas Dan. vii. 12, “for a season and time 3” 
hrase which it is rather too great literalism 
toi identify with ‘‘ the mes and seasons” of Dan, 
ii, 21,—see the note on Dan. vii. 12. 

* The Chaldee word iddan, found only in 
Daniel, is used for #me either indefinitely (e.g. 
Dan. ii. 8, iii. 5, &c.), or to express a definite 

period of time, as in Dan. iv. 16 (Heb. iv. 13), 
Wand let seven Ames pass over him” (shibah 
iddanin, éwrd xaspol, and so in vv. 23, 25, 32). 


INTRODUCTION. 


The majority of the older! as well as of 
the more recent interpreters take a “‘ zie” 
to represent a year: the text itself, how- 
ever, does not fix any period—years, 
months, weeks, days. The Jews, in the 
age of Justin Martyr,? considered “a 
time” in Daniel to represent a@ century. 
Scaliger (A.D. 1540) has followed them ; 
and assumes that Scripture makes @ 
time to signify “annum magnum s@cu- 
larem:” and he makes the 3% “mes 
the period which elapsed between the 
rise of the Albigenses and the Reforma- 
tion, “car un temps ou jour en T Ecriture 
signifie cent ans”* (quoted by S. R. 
Maitland, Second Enguiry, p. 34, from 
“ Scaligerana, prima,” p. 39). ‘ The sup- 
position,” notes Keil (on Dan. vii. 25), 
“that in Dan. iv. 16 the ‘seven ‘times’ 
represent ‘seven years,’ neither is, nor 
can be proved. As regards the “me 
and “#mes in Dan. xii. 7, and the periods 
named in Rev. xii. 14, it is very ques- 
tionable whether the weeks and the days 
represent the ordinary weeks of the 
year, and days of the week, and whether 
these periods of time are to be taken 
chronologically.” At all events, probable 
though it may be that the three anda 
half ¢imes typify three and a half years, 
this result cannot be relied upon as @ 
certainty by the interpreter of prophecy. 

IV. Bengel’s chronological system* 
affords an illustration of the arbitrary 
methods according to which commenta- 
tors have dealt with the Apocalyptic 
numbers :— 

Bengel first assumes that “ the number 
(666) of the Beast,” Rev. xiii. 18, deno- 
minates years.5 These, for 666 is “the 


' E.g. St. Augustine writes : “ Tempus quippe, 
et tempora, et dimidium temporis, annum unum 
esse, et duos, et dimidium.”—De Civ. Dei, xx. 23. 

4 Justin says to Trypho:—dpeis ayvootvtes 
wdcov xpdvov Siaxatéexew méAdel, AAO TryetoGe. 
toy yap Kaipby Exardy ern eknyeiobe A€-yerOat.— 
Dial., c. 32. 

* On this Vitringa observes: ‘‘ Magno tamen 
mercarer, loca adscripta esse, que Scaliger 
respexerit, ubi Azzos in Verbo Dei pro Secu/a- 
rebus sumi dixit.’—p. 464. 

See his Zrlarte Offentarung, Einl. § 35- 
$2; Burk’s Memoir of the Life, &c. of F. A. 
Sengel, Engl. transl., London, 1837. 

® One of his reasons is that the zeuter form of 
the numeral in ‘‘the best Greek codices” (P, 
Andr., and some cursives read éfaxdéo1a,—see 
the list of readings prefixed to ch. xiii.), and its 


485 


number of a man,” are common years; 
and this number of years he identifies 
with the 42 months of the Beast, Rev. 
xiii. 5.1 Accordingly one prophetic month 
= 15$common years ; and one prophetic 
day = (nearly) halfa natural year. Again 
he compares 666 with the 1000 years of 
Rev. xx.; and infers the proportion 
3.223: ggg88$ years : 666888 years. 
The wnt in each of these denominations 
(or 1113) he further assumes to be “a 
half time” (Rev. xii. 14) ; and, therefore, 
“a@ time” (xaipds) = 222% Common years ; 
and “a time, times, and half a time” 
= 777% years. “A short time” (Rev. 
Xli. 12—6Atyos Katpds) = 8888 years.? 
A Chronus (xpévos) he makes to be five 
times = 11114 years ; and a Non-Chronus 
(xpdvos ovdxért, Rev. x. 6) a period greater 
than 999§, and less than rr11} years. 
An on (see Rev. xiv. 6, ‘‘an eternal 
Gospel” — eiayyéAvov aidviov) = two 
Chroni, = 22222 years: and so on? 


masculine form in the Vulgate (sexcenti) direct 
us to the word years (rn, or avi) as the noun 
to be understood before 666. 

Bengel (s. 467) says that for some centuries 
before the Reformation the number 666 was 
taken to represent so many years :—in Cent. xv. 
by Antonius of Florence ;—in Cent. xiv. by 
Nicolas de Lyra ;—in Cent. xiii. (A.D. 1250) by 
Pope Innocent III. (af. Baron.) who counted 
from the rise of Mohammed 666 years until A.D. 
1288. 

1 Bengel also makes the 42 months, and the 
1260 days of Rev. xi. 2, 3, to be common 
months, and common days. In ch. xi. 9, the 
3% days are likewise common days; and so, 
too, in ch. ii. 10, the ‘‘ten days” are not 
fs propueneal ” but zatural days. 

“*The difficulty that ‘a short time’ (ch, 
xii. 12) should denote the long space of 888% 
years, is explained by considering that our 
computation is by half-times (viz. 111). Now 
the ancients used to reckon no less than seven to 
the completion of a “me (xa:pés); hence four 
times (or 2223 X 4) might easily be denominated 
‘a short time,’ dAlyos kapds.”—see Burk, 4. ¢., 
p. 291. 

* E.g. a prophetical 4ourv = 8 common days}; 
a day = half a common year + 14 days (nearly) 
= 196 common days; a month = 1533 years = 
15 years + 318 days or 5797} days; a year = 
196 common years ++ 117 days +13 hours, 
Accordingly he makes the five months of Rev. ix. 
5 =79} common years ; the ‘‘ Zour, and day, and 
month, and year” of ch. ix. 15 = (8 + 196) days 
+ (15 years + 318 days) + (196 years + 117 
days) = 211 years + 639 days = 2123 years. 
The 1260 days of ch. xiii. 5 he takes to be less 
than the 3} times of Rev. xii. 14, and considers 
them = 677 years. (The common year Bengel 
took to be, 365 days, 5h., 49m., 12s.). 


486 


The point of time which has deter- 
mined all his calculations, Bengel arrived 
at as follows :—The duration of the world 
from the Creation to the Last Judgment 
he assumes to be seven Chroni, or 77773 
years. The Dionysian era begins from 
AM. 3942; and hence 7778—3942 
(= 3836) is the sum total of the New 
Testament times. Bengel also interprets 
Rev. xx. so as to understand /wo periods 
of 1000 years, or fwo Millenniums ; 
subtracting, therefore, 2000 from 3836, 
he obtained the year 1836 as the date 
from which the jst Millennium begins, 
during which Satan is bound.? 

This entire scheme may be judged by 
Bengel’s own words :—“ Should the year 
1836 pass without bringing remarkable 
changes, there must be some great error 
in my system.”—Burk, 4 4, p. 300. 


From what has been said in these 
latter sections it seems to follow of 
necessity that the Apocalypse must be 
understood throughout in a symbolical 
sense. “As all language abounds in 
metaphor and other materials of imagery, 
imagery itself may form the ground of 
a descriptive language. The forms of it 
may become intelligible terms ; and the 
combination of them may be equivalent 
to a narrative of description..... In 
certain points the [Apocalypse] furnishes 
a key to its own sense, by a posi- 
tive interpretation given... . [Its] pro- 
phecies therefore come before us as a 
fair document of prediction, as much as 
others expressed in the more obvious 
and direct language of civil and historic 
description, modified, as the prophetic 
style usually is, by a tropical character.” 
—Davison, On Prophecy, 31d ed., p. 439. 

In the case of no part of Scripture 
however, has the maxim of St. Irenzeus 
(Contr. Her., iv. 26, p. 262), “ Every 
prophecy is an enigma before its ac- 
complishment,” been more completely 
forgotten. The symbolical interpreta- 
tion of this Book has, from the earliest 


1 John Wesley has adopted Bengel’s nume- 
rical results. Writing on Rev. xii. 14 (see Note 
A ob that verse) he says, ‘‘ The time, times, 
and an half are from 1058 to 1836”; see his 

rates on the New Test., Halifax, 1869. 


INTRODUCTION. 


times, been carried to an extravagant 
excess, and to the most inconsistent con 
clusions. The literature of the subject 
affords melancholy evidence of the fact. 
Examples, more than enough, have 
been given in the preceding discussion ; 
and in further illustration, it may suffice 
to add here the two following :—Stars 
signify, Doctores Eeclesie (Arethas on 
ch. vi. 13), Heretici (Beda, on ch. viii. 
10), Bishops (Stern, on ch. viii. 10), 
Jews (Bohmer on ch. vi. 13). The Earth 
(ch. x. 2) signifies, Asta (Bengel), 
Europe (Launoi), the righteous (Aretius), 
the Jews (Alcasar), the part of the earth 
which is Christian (Vitringa). In the 
course of the Commentary abundant in- 
stances will be given. 


§ 12. Zhe Interpretation of the Apocalypse. 


It has been attempted, in the course of 
the following Commentary, to give some 
account of the different systems of inter- 
pretation which, from the earliest times, 
have been adopted by those who have 
professed to explain the mystery of the 
Apocalypse. The most usual method 
has been to seek in successive historical 
events—past, present, or future—the 
fulfilment of its predictions, This prob- 
lem, which has attracted to itself genius 
of the highest order, and intellects of the 
most varied character, has, from the first, 
engaged the attention of theologians: ane 
yet, is it presumptuous to maintain that, 
hitherto at least, the solution, on suck 
principles, has been sought for in vain? 

Nor should the remark be omitted 
that there seems to be a general 
tendency among Commentators to re 
gard ‘the Predictive element of the 
Apocalypse as applicable to but one, 
and that a very limited field of history. 
We read, it is true, in the Evangelical 
prophet, that “the earth shall be full 
of the knowledge of the Lord, as the 
waters cover the sea” (Isai. xi 9; cf 
Hab. ii. 14) ; and we know that Christ 
Himself has taught, in that Discourse 
where He has traced out the lines which 
St. John was to follow in the Revelation, 
that the ‘‘ Gospel of the kingdom shall] 
be preached in all the world for a wit- 
ness unto all nations; and then shall 
the End come” (Matt. xxiv. 14). And 


INTRODUCTION. 


yet, how has the great prophetical Book 
of the New Testament been usually 
explained? Do not expositors, as a 
tule, i their application of the Apoca- 
lypse to the Christian Church, confine 
their attention to those parts of the 
world which have hitherto embraced 
Christianity? Nay, more, have they 
not confined their attention almost ex- 
clusively to Western Christendom, as 
being alone the object of the Seer’s pre- 
dictions? “ Futurists,” indeed,—at least 
some among them,—hold that the con- 
version of the world is not to be effected 
before Christ’s Second Advent, and is 
not to be looked for until then;!—but 
this, perhaps, is an opinion which is not 
generally maintained. At all events, it 
may be well that students of the Book 
of the Revelation should reflect upon 
this whole matter. 

In the exposition of the Book, and in 
the effort to trace the object and plan of 
the inspired writer, St. Augustine’s grand 
conception of the providential course of 
history—his ‘ Philosophy of History,’? so 
to speak,—has been accepted in the fol- 
lowing pages as conveying the funda- 
mental truth which underlies every state- 
ment of the Revelation. According to St. 
Augustine, the events which come to pass 
in this world are neither fortuitous nor 
isolated. Divine Providence directs, co- 
ordinates, and controls them all, causing 
everything to concur towards one and 
the same end—the triumph of purity and 
holiness, of truth and justice, as they 
were originally revealed to the Hebrew 
people, and as Jesus Christ has con- 


1 Dr. De Burgh writes :—‘‘ Our idea has 
been that the design of this the Christian Dis- 
pensation is to convert the world and to spread 
Christianity over the earth: but facts and the 
history of Christianity have hitherto spoken a 
different language ; and neither, I am bold to 
say, does Scripture warrant the opinion..... 
In short, I would say that the conversion of the 
nations is the work of Christ’s Second Advent, 
and of the Dispensation which it introduces” 
(An Expos. of the Book of the Rev., 4th ed., 
p- 280). See within on ch. xiv. 6. 

* St. Augustine it was who first suggested 
the idea of a ‘‘ Philosophy of History.” Vico 
(born 1668) is usually said to have been the 
originator of this idea; and he has been fol- 
lowed by Hegel, and others :—but the science 
was really founded by the great Father of the 
Western Church. 


487 


firmed them, and announced them anew 
to the nations. Whoever hears the voice 
from on High, and follows it, belongs to 
the elect people—to “the City of God ;” 
beside which lies the city of the earth 
occupied with the interests of this lower 
sphere—a city proud, tyrannical, the 
persecutor of the saints, but which does 
not the less subserve, albeit by means of 
which it is unconscious, the establish- 
ment of the Divine Kingdom. Such 
was Babylon in the East ; such was Rome 
in the West: both Imperial Cities, and 
both ordained to diffuse God’s revelation 
—the one the Old Testament, the other 
the New. The Empire of Rome was uni- 
versal, because such must be the King- 
dom of Christ: and as the Old Law was 
but the preparation for the New, so all 
events in the old world converged towards 
Rome and towards the Coming of Christ ; 
in the same manner as all events after 
that Coming have concurred to the final 
triumph and to the Universality of the 
Christian Faith,! 

If this central thought be kept in 
mind, many interpretations, seemingly 
opposed to each other, will be found to 
harmonize; it being assumed that the 
successive events which are taken to be 
the complete accomplishment of an Apo- 
calyptic prediction, are but illustrations 
merely — specimens, so to speak, — of 
God’s dealings with the Church and with 
the world. Thus, to give one or two 
instances, we see in the Seven Churches 
of Asia (Rev. i.-ii.) not only literal 
Churches existing in St. John’s own day, 
but also examples of different conditions 
of the Church Catholic throughout all 
future time ;—the “ Locusts” and their 
king Apollyon under the fifth Trumpet 
(Rev. ix. 1-11) may apply very closely to 
Mohammed and his creed, while this same 
Vision may also foreshow different phases 
of hostility to the Christian Faith at dif- 
ferent epochs of history ;—the indications 
of Antichrist which are given in Rev. 


} “* Without the Apocalypse it would be im- 
possible for us to have a history of revelation, 
or of the Kingdom of God; for it is only the 
Apocalypse in which we can distinctly see the 
goal to which the ways of the Eternal are tend- 
ing,—the end and purpose which He had in 
view in all His doings on earth from the begin- 
ning.”—Auberlen, /. ¢., p. 395- 


488 


xi.—xix. may not be fully realized before 
the Last Days; and yet, in what age of 
the world may we not see fulfilled the 
sayirg of St. John concerning the age in 
which he himself lived: “ Even now are 
there many Antichrists” (1 John ii. 18) ? 

There are three principal systems of 
exposition, as they are commonly classi- 
fied, according to which the Apocalypse 
has, for the most part, been interpreted : 
—the Preterist ; the Historical or Con- 
tinuous; the Futurist! It is obvious, 
however, on the most superficial exa- 
mination,—and this is what renders any 
strict classification impossible,—that there 
is scarcely a single writer belonging to 
any one of these three schools (except 
writers who are strictly Rationalists) who 
does not frequently accept several results 
of expositors belonging to either or to 
both of the two other schools. This 
classification, nevertheless, is sufficiently 
exact for the purpose of giving some 
notion of the numerous and discordant 
expositions which are put forward from 
time to time; and which by their arbi- 
trariness and mutual contradictions, have 
rendered the history of Apocalyptic exe- 
gesis the opprobrium of theology. 

In the subjoined classification those 
names only are introduced which seem 
best to illustrate the principles of the 
different schools: the names of other 
writers—e. g. of writers of such high 
_ authority as Bishop Wordsworth—will 
be found, in due course, as the following 
Commentary proceeds. 


(1) THE PRETERIST SYSTEM. 


According to this system the succes- 
sive statements of the Revelation apply 
chiefly to the history of the Jewish nation, 
down to the destruction of Jerusalem, 
and to the history of Pagan Rome. 


2 Dr. S. Davidson (An Introd. to the N. T., 
Ist ed., vol. iii. p. 619) has needlessly added 
a fourth class of ‘‘extreme,” as distinguished 
from ‘‘simple” Futurists; who hold that the 
entire Book (including, #.¢., ch. ii. and ch. iii.) 
refers to the last times. Liicke (s. 1068) justly 
remarks that the second class, which Dr. David- 
gon calls the ‘‘ Continuous,” should more pro- 

ly be styled the ‘‘ Historical.” Liicke himself 
. 951) classifies the one papers chrono- 

ically, —during (1) The old Catholic; (2) the 
3 (3) the post-Reformation periods. 


INTRODUCTION. 


(a) The earlier writers :—Among the 
earliest expositors of this class is to be 
named Lud. Alcasar (e Soc. /esu),) who 
prepared the way for the commentaries 
of Hugo Grotius (a.D. 1644) ;? Bossuet;® 
Wetstein ;—and more recently, of Moses 
Stuart; Mr. F. D. Maurice, &c. 

(4) Rationalistic writers :—It is a prin= 
ciple of Rationalism to deny the ex- 
istence of the fredictive element in 
Prophecy. Owing to this assumption, 
Rationalists are necessarily “ Preterists.” 
The horizon of a Prophet’s vision does 
not extend, they assert, beyond his 
own lifetime ; and, consequently, all that 
St. John has written must relate to events 
which occurred before his death. In 
carrying out this principle, Eichhorn 
follows Grotius; but he argues as if the 
Apocalypse were composed at the end 
of the reign of Nero* (see above § 4, 


1 “*Vestigatio arcani sensus in Apocalypsi, 
Anty., 1614.” Regarding Rev. i.-iil. as the 
Prologue which the Holy Spirit ‘‘ sacree actioni 
preposuit,” Alcasar takes (1) ch. v.-xi. to exe 
press the conflict of the Church with the Syna- 
gogue ; (2) ch. xii—xix. to express her conflict 
with Roman Paganism; (3) ch. xx.—xxii. to 
express her victory, and repose, and glorious 
tule. In his Preface to the works of Arethas 
this division had already been adopted by Hen- 
tenius (A.D. 1545) ; it is also that of Salmeron 
(Preludia in Apoc., ap. Comm. in Hist. Evy 
t. xvi., p. 346, A.D. 1612) who compares the 
problem of expounding the Apoc. to that of 
“squaring the circle,”—‘‘quod dici solet de 
circuli quadratura . . . scibilis est, sed nondum 
scita” (2, ¢, p. 357). Alcasar mentions I10 
works on the Apocalypse with which he was 
acquainted :—he was answered by David Parzeus 
(A.D. 1618). See Liicke, s. 1021. 

? Grotius writes: ‘‘ Pertinent hzec visa ad res 
hea ee usque ad finem cap. xi.: inde ad res 

omanorum usque ad finem cap. xx.: deinde 
ad statum florentissimum Ecclesie ad finem 
usque” (Comm. in cap. iv., p. 1174). H. Ham- 
mond (A.D. 1653) follows Grotius generally; 
and Le Clerc (A.D. 1698) follows Hammond. 

3“ TD’ Apocalypse avec une explication,” A.D. 
1690. Bossuet, with Grotius, places the com- 
position of the Book under Domitian ; and his 
chronological scheme extends from Domitian to 
the fall of the Western Empire in Cent. v. The 
close of the Millennium, or period of the Church’s 
supremacy, is marked, Bossuet concludes, by the 
appearance of the Turks in Europe, and by the 
heresy of Luther. 

4 “ Einkitung des N. T.,” B. ii, s. 388 
Eichhorn himself thinks that the Apocalypse 
was written under Vespasian; but he adopts 
the Neronic interpretation retrospectively. Eich- 
horn, writes Liicke (s. 1054), has carried to its 
full result, and thus the thought of 


INTRODUCTION. 


p. 433). According to Herder, Hartwig, 
Koppe, and others, the Apocalypse relates 
chiefly to the overthrow of the Jewish 
state ;} according to Ewald, De Wette, 
Bleek, and others, it relates chiefly to 
Rome and the Pagan Emperors. Other 
Rationalists like Eichhorn make the 
Book apply both to the Jews and to 
Pagan Rome. To these names may be 
added those of Réville ; Reuss ;? Renan ; 
and Mr. Desprez® in England. 


(2) THE HisToRIcaL oR CoNTINUOUS 
SYSTEM. 


The Historical school includes the 
great majority of Commentators. To it 
belong those who uphold the “ Year-day” 
theory ; as well as those who interpret 
chronologically. Writers of this school 
differ widely among themselves. They 
differ, e. g., as to the questions—(q) 
Whether the Apocalypse is strictly con- 
tinuous or consists of “synchronous” 
prophecies (Mede®), Hengstenberg re- 
garding the Seals, Trumpets, and Vials 


Parzus, that the Apocalypse is to be under- 
stood as a Jewish drama. Hug, Heinrichs, and 
Davidson agree generally with Eichhorn. 

! Ziillig’s commentary (though really Futu- 
fist) belongs to this class:—he excludes all 
reference to Rome and heathenism ; and refers 
everything to Jerusalem and Judaism. 

2 Reuss thus clearly states the result and pur- 
pose of the rationalistic system: ‘‘ Deux ans 4 
peine aprés la composition de notre apocalypse, 
. -.. il survint des événements, lesquels, tout 
en rentrant, jusqu’A un certain point, dans le 
cercle des idées qui en faisaient le fond, lui 
donnérent cependant un éclatant démenti. Les 
trois ans et demi se passérent, et Jérusalem, au 
-ieu de devenir la demeure des croyants et des 
saints, ne fut plus qu’un monceau de ruines. 
Rome ne fut pas détruite par l’Antéchrist, mais 
resta la capitale d’un puissant empire.... le 

phéte avait été trompé par l’ardeur de ses 
Beets” (Jntrod., p. 37): 

3 The Apocalypse, by P. S. Desprez, B.D., 
1870. 

‘ E. g. those who undertake to fix the Time 
of the End:—thus Nic. Cusanus (De Noviss. 
Diebus, Opp., Basil., A.D. 1565, p. 934) con- 
cluded that Antichrist would come between A.D. 
1700 and 1734. The Waldenses counted the 34 
““times” as 350 years from A.D. 1000. Bengel 
fixed on the year 1836 as the date of the Mil- 
lennium. The year 1866 (606+ 1260) is the 
favourite date. 

5 Mede’s ‘* Synchronisms ”:—(1) The first is 
that of the 1260 days, the 42 months, and 
the 3} ‘‘times,” of the profaned Temple, of 
the Two Witnesses, of the Woman in the 


489 


as being complementary ; (6) Whether 
the sixth Seal refers to Constantine 
(Elliott?), or to the First French Revolu- 
tion (Faber’). In this class we also 


Wilderness, and of the Ten-horned Beast (ch. 
Xi. 2, 3 5 xi 6, 145 xill. 5); 

(2) Of the two Beasts (ch. xiii. I, II) ; 

(3) Of the Mystic Babylon, with the Tene 
horned Beast (ch. xvii. 3-5) ; 

(4) Of the 144,000 Sealed (ch. vii.43 xiv. 1), 
with the Harlot and Beast (ch. xvii. 3) ; 

In the case of these four ‘‘omnia omnibus 
ovyxpovl(over,” The remaining *‘Synchronisms” 
may be summed up as follows :— 

(5) Of the measuring the Inner Court (ch. 
xi. 1), with the war of the Dragon against 
Michael concerning the Woman (ch. xii.) ; 

(6) Of the Seven Vials (ch. xv.), with the a 
proaching fall of the Beast and of Babylon ( 
Xvi. 10, 19) ; 

(7) Of the Seventh Seal and the first six 
Trumpets, with the two Beasts of ch. xiii. ; 

(8) Of the measuring the Inner Court and 
the war of the Dragon against Michael, with 
the first six Seals (ch. vi.) , 

(9) Of the Seven Vials (ch. xvi.), with the 
sixth Trumpet (ch. ix. 13) ; 

(10) Of the Millennium, the binding of Satan, 
the reign of Christ, the New Jerusalem, and 
the triumph of the Palm-bearing multitude,— 
with the seventh Trumpet after the fall of the 
Beast. 

1 So also David Parzus (who wrote in reply 
to the ‘‘ Preterist” Alcasar, and who belongs to 
the class of Protestant and anti-papal expositors) 
considers the Seals and Trumpets as fulfilled, 
in a parallel sense, by the history of the Church 
until Pope Boniface III. (A.D. 606) and Moham- 
med. The Vials refer to Church-history until 
Luther ; and thence to the end. 

2 “* Hore Apocalyptica,” 4th ed., 1841. Mz. 
Elliott’s work is chiefly marked by its anti-papal 
character. Its historical interpretation ends with 
the pouring out of the sx¢# Vial (ch. xvi. 12) in 
1820, since which year the exhaustion of the 
Turkish power has proceeded rapidly. The re- 
maining predictions of the Book are placed 
among the secrets of the future ; but the struggle 
of the Papacy to regain its ascendancy after the 
shock received from Napoleon I. must issue in 
some great event about A.D. 1866, which will 
give the death-blow to the Papal Usurpation. 

3 “© Sacred Calendar of Prophecy,” 2nd thy 
1844. Mr. Faber makes the Apocalypse to 
consist jointly of the ‘‘ Sealed Book” of ch. v., 
and the ‘‘ Little Book” of ch. x., which divide 
the whole into ¢hree parts :—(1) The jrs¢ part 
of the ‘‘ Sealed Book” (ch. vi.-ix.), or from the 
birth of the King who is the ‘‘ Head of Gold” 
(Dan. ii. 38) in B.c. 657, to A.D. 1697; (2) The 
entire of the ‘‘ Little Book” (ch. x.-xiv.), the 
period of the 33 ‘‘times,” or 42 months, or 
1260 days, beginning A.D. 604 and ending A.D. 
1864,—‘‘including also that single additional 
year which constitutes the period of the seventh 
Vial, which coincides with Daniel’s Time of 
the End” (vol. i, p. 272) ; (3) The second part 


490 


find the name of the Abbot Joachim 
(circ. 11801) ; of De Lyra (A.D. 1320); 
Wiclif; Bullinger; Brightman ;? Vitringa® 


of the ‘‘Sealed Book” (ch. xv.—xix.) which 
forms one prophecy of the events under the 
seventh Trumpet or ¢hird Woe. It extends 
from A.D. 1789 to A.D. 1865, in which year the 
Millennium begins. The seventh Vial is con- 
tained in ch. xvi. 17-21, and in ch. xvii—xix. (ex- 
cept the retrospective and descriptive parts of 
ch. xvii.). 

1“ Expositio magni prophete Abbatis Foachimi 
én Apocalypsin, Venet., 1527.” Joachim as- 
sumed to be himself gifted with the prophetic 
spirit, His commentary on the Apoc. was the 
oracle of the enthusiastic anti-papal party 
among the Franciscans, and formed the text of 
its (so-called) ‘‘New and everlasting Gospel” 
[Rev. xiv. 6]. For Joachim, as for Dante, the 
Papacy was anti-christian only in its worldli- 
ness :—in itself, and in its true ideal sense, it 
belongs to the eternal foundation of the Church 
(see Liicke, s. 1010). He divided the history of 
the Church down to his own time into six 

iods, which are represented in the first six 
an Trumpets and Vials ;—what is announced 
in the Seal-Visions being repeated in the Visions 
of the Trumpets and the Vials. He reckoned 
1260 years from the birth of Christ to the birth 
of Antichrist ; ‘‘all the time,” he said, ‘‘ after 
1200, I consider dangerous.” —Alberti Chron., 
sub anno 1188:—see Ch. Maitland, /.¢., p. 321. 
Cf. Gieseler, Kirch. Gesch., B. ii., s. 357. 

? Brightman (‘‘ Afocalypsis Apocalypseos, 
Francof., A.D. 1609”) wrote in answer to the 
**Futurist” Ribera, who regarded the whole 
of the Apocalypse as a commentary on Matt. 
xxiv. With Brightman the seventh Seal not 
only typifies (in ch. vii.) all the ages after 
Diocletian (who fulfilled the szxt# Seal), but 
also denotes, by the ‘‘silence” in ch. viii. 1, 
the peace under Constantine. The Trumpets 
signify Arians, Vandals, Saracens, &c.,—the 
seventh being sounded when England, Ireland, 
and Scotland embraced the Gospel in 1558. 
Constantine is the ‘* Man-Child ” (ch. xii.) of the 
Church ; and when the Dragon, who persecuted 
the Church under Constantius and Valens, failed 
to overwhelm her by the deluge of Barbarians, 
and subsequently of Saracens, he substituted 
as his Vicar the Beast of ch. xiii. 1,—that is to 
say, the Pope who was ‘‘ smitten unto death” by 
the Goths, but healed by Justinian and Phocas, 
The second Beast (ch. xiii. 11) is also the Pope, 
exalted to still higher dignity by Pepin and 
Charles the Great. The ‘* Two Witnesses” 
are the Scriptures slain by the Council of Trent, 
&c., &c. 

* “* Anakrisis Apokalypsios (sic), Amstel., 
1719.” According toVitringa, in the frst division 
of the Apoc. (ch. i. 9—iii. 22) a prophetic view is 
given of the ixferna/ condition of the Church 
until the end. In the second (ch. iv. I—xxii. 7), he 
sees her external condition ;—viz. (a) in the 
Seals, her history from Trajan until the end ; (b) 
in the Trumpets a prophecy concerning Rome, 
both Pagan and degenerate Christian; (c) in 
ch, xii.—xxii., the contents of the last two Trum- 


INTRODUCTION. 


(who wrote in reply to Bossuet); Sir Isaae 
Newton’ (who agrees generally with 
Psi Robert Fleming?; Gaussen 3 
om 
‘A general tendency to allegorize is 
another characteristic of this School. 


(3) THe Fururist System. 


The “ Futurists” apply the predictions 
of the Apocalypse to the events which 
are immediately to precede, or imme- 
diately to follow the Second Advent of 
Christ. The writers of this school 
usually (although they are not always 
consistent) interpret literally :—Israel is 
the literal Israel; the Temple is the 
literal Temple rebuilt at Jerusalem; the 
33 “times,” 42 months, 1260 days, are 
34 natural, literal years. It is clear that 
there can be no discussion as to the 
accuracy or inaccuracy of the results of 
this system of interpretation in any of 
its forms. The Future defies criticism, 

Ribera (¢ Soc. Jesu; 1592) seems to 


pets (ch. ix. 13; xi. 15) are developed,—viz. the 
rise of the Roman Antichrist; the struggle of 
the Church with him, and his downfall; the 
state of the Church in Europe after his fall; her 
triumph over Gog and M , who appear at 
the end of the Millennium vee 

1“ The Prophecies of Holy Writ,” Works, 
1785, vol. v. 

2 “* Discourses—the First containing a new 
account of the rise and fall of the Papacy, by 
Robert Fleming, V.D.M., London, 1701 :”—for 
an account of Fleming’s very remarkable inter- 
pretations, see Note B on ch. xi. 2. 

5 “* Daniel le Prophéte,” 2nd ed., 1850. On 
Rev. xiii., and generally, Gaussen closely follows 
Elliott ;—neither of them regarding the Dragon 
of ch. xii. as Satan, but as the heathen, Roman, 
World-power inspired by him. The Dragon, 
the Beast from the Sea, and the Beast from the 
Abyss, denote the Roman Empire in the ¢hree 
great epochs of its history—‘‘autocrate, poly- 
crate, démocrate.” During the close of the first 
epoch the Empire became Christian ; the second 
began with the inroad of the Barbarians; the 
third began A.D. 1789. The seven Crowns on 
the Dragon’s Heads (ch. xii. 3) signify that 
Rome is still a crowned City; the zx Crowns 
on the Horns of the Beast from the Sea (ch, 
xiii. I) represent the ten absolute Kings of ‘‘ the 
Tribes of the migration’; the Beast from the 
Abyss (ch. xvii. 3, 8) has no Crowns, and this is 
democracy, with its Citizen-Kings, Louis Phi- 
lippe, Leopold of Belgium, Charles Albert of 
Piedmont, &c. The ‘‘False Prophet™ (ch, 
xvi. 13) and the Harlot (ch. xvii.) exist con- 
temporaneously, and together represent the 
“ Little Horn” of Dan. vii. 8,—or the Papacy. 


INTRODUCTION. 


have been the earliest Futurist.. He 
has been followed by Lacunza? (e Sov. 
Jesu; born 1731); Tyso; S. R. Mait- 
land; De Burgh; Todd; W. Kelly.® 


(4) THE SprrITUAL SysTEM. 


There is yet another principle of in- 
terpretation which adopts for its leading 
idea the great conception of St. Augus- 
tine, stated above, as to the “ Philosophy 
of History.” This system may be styled 
the “Spiritual.” Among those who have 
more or less closely adhered to this prin- 


1 Tn Apocalypsin Comm., Antv., 1603.” 
Mr. Elliott (vol. iv. P- 597) makes Ribera to 
be the first ‘‘ Futurist ” or ‘‘nearly the first.” 

* Lacunza adopted the name of Ben-Ezra,— 
probably in accordance with his system which 
assumes the literal restoration, in the future, of 
Israel; or, as Mr. Elliott suggests (vol. iv. 
p- 536), owing to the prejudice then existing 
ete the Jesuits. He wrote ‘‘On the coming 
of Messiah in glory and majesty” (Zen-£zra, 
Irving’s transl.). His great theme was our 
Lord’s ‘‘Pre-millennial Advent’?; and the 
Woman of ch. xii. he takes to be the ancient 
Zion, which is to be restored literally in the last 
days. Commenting on Cant. v. 7, Lacunza 
considers that the clergy of the Church of 
Rome will hereafter become the priests of Anti- 
christ : ‘‘ Our priesthood it is, and nothing else, 
which is announced for the last times, under the 
metaphor of a Beast with two Horns like a 
lamb (ch. xiii. 11).”—Z ¢., vol. i. p. 220. 

‘*Perhaps of all modern writers,” observes 
Mr. Chas, Maitland (‘‘ AZost. School of Proph.- 
Interpr.,” p. 392), ‘*Lacunza has the most 
deeply influenced the study of Prophecy.” ... 
“*The Futurists, when they borrowed from La- 
cunza the great elements of their system, rejected 
that which had cost him dearest,—the admission 
that the Romish Church is Babylon. In prefer- 
ence to this they joined Bellarmine in the expect- 
ation that [the czty of] Rome will fall away from 
her present faith before the days of Antichrist.” — 
4.¢., p. 395. The words of Bellarmine (De Rom. 
Pont., iv. 4) are: ‘* Neque obstat, quod tempore 
Antichristi Roma desolanda, et cremanda vide- 
atur, ut deducitur ex cap. xvii. Apoc.,”—where 
he is merely arguing that the seat of the 
Papacy was not fixed by Divine command in 
Rome. 

* Mr. Kelly, giving his assent generally to 
the results of the usual ‘‘ Historical” exposition, 
considers that there is a still more perfect inter- 
pretation. Regarding the words ‘‘ After these 
things” (ch. iv. 1) as the epoch of the close of 
the history and existence of the Church on earth 
—that is the epoch of “the rapture” of the Saints 
who constitute it—he concludes that all the 
Visions which follow represent the Great Day 
of the Lord at the end of the present Dispensa- 
tion. 


4gl 


ciple may be named I. C. K. Hofmann?; 
Hengstenberg?; Ebrard; Auberlen ;— 
whose conclusions, often arbitrary, and 
constantly tending to the same goal as 
the conclusions of the “ Futurists,” will 
be noted in the following pages. The 
majority of such writers consider that to 
predict the future conversion of Israel, 
and the return of God’s ancient people to 
their own land, was the chief object of St. 
John, But whatever may be thought of 
this application of the Apocalypse, all, 
who in any sense adopt the “Spiritual” 
system of interpretation, must agree in 
accepting the definition of it with which 
Ebrard brings his commentary to a 
close :—‘‘ The Book of the Revelation 
does not contain presages of contingent, 
isolated, events; but it contains warning 
and consolatory prophecies concerning 
the great leading forces which make 
their appearance in the conflict between 
Christ and the enemy. So full are its con- 
tents, that every age may learn therefrom, 
more and more, against what disguises 
of the Serpent one has to guard oneself; 
and also how the afflicted Church at all 
times receives its measure of courage 
and of consolation” (s. 634). 

The ‘‘ Spiritual” system of interpreta- 
tion receives support from the review of 
Apocalyptic symbolism which has occu- 
pied sections g-11 of this Introduction. 
It appears from that review how natu- 
rally the imagery of the Book describes, 
in accordance with the whole spirit of 
Prophecy, the various conditions of the 
Kingdom of God on earth, during its 
successive struggles against the Prince 
of this world. The figurative utterances 
of the Seer are specially suited for this 
purpose, owing to the latitude of appli- 
cation which all symbolism allows; and 
this, without distorting the sense or offer- 
ing violence to the language, of a single 
passage. Reuss indeed objects (4 «a, 
p. 41) that this system does not really 
differ from the ‘ Historical,” inasmuch 
as it merely substitutes the religious his 
tory of the Kingdom of God, for the 
political history of the Church :—but this 


1 “< Wessagung und Erfillung,” 1841. 
* And yet Hengstenberg interprets generally 
on the ‘‘ Historical” and allegorical system 3 
ing the Apocalypse down to ch. xix, as 
already 


492 


objection is manifestly unsound. As 
already pointed out, the “‘ Spiritual” ap- 
plication is never exhausted, but merely 
receives additional illustrations as time 
rolls on ; while the “ Historical” system 
assumes that single events, as they come 
to pass in succession, exhibit the full 
accomplishment of the different predic- 
tions of the Apocalypse. If anywhere, 
Lord Bacon’s estimate of the fulfilment 
of a prediction is verified here :-—“ In 


INTRODUCTION. 


hac re admittenda est illa latitudo que 
Divinis vaticiniis propria est et familiaris, 
ut adimpletiones eorum fiant et con- 
tinenter et punctualiter: ... . atque 
licet plenitudo et fastigium complementi 
eorum, plerumque alicui certe eetati vel 
etiam certo momento destinetur; atta- 
men habent interim gradus nonnullos et 
scalas complementi, per diversas mundi 
getates."—De Augmentis Scient., lib. ii. 
CEE 


( 493 ) 


The principal Works consulted in the following Commentary. 


Acasar, L., ¢. Soc. Jesu » 


AtrorD,H. . . 
ANDREAS .. . 


ARETHAS .. . 
AUBERLEN, C. A. . 


Baur, K.C. . . 
EDA ce 8 ae 
BENGEL, J.A.. . 


”? e 
Brrks, T. R. . 
BisPING, AUG.. . 
IBEEEK, EF, (4. ie 


BossvET, J. B. 
Brown, D.. . . 


Burcer, C. H. A. 
Bree hi Cey - 5 a 
CassIODORUS . . 


Davipson,S. . . 


De Burcu, W. 
DELiTzscH, F.. . 


De Wetter, W. M.L.. 


DO.uinceR, J. J. . 
~ DRUMMOND, JAMES 
DOsTERDIECK, F. . 
EprarD, J. H. E.. 
EIcHHoRN, J.G. . 
Brniorr, E..H. 
Ewatp,H.. . . 


Faser,G.S. . 


FLEMING, RosBert, V.D.M. 


GEBHARDT,H.. . 
GopET, F.. . . 


Vestigatio arcani Sensus in Apoc., 1614. 

The Greek Testament, 31d ed., 1866. 

In Apocalypsin, ap. Opp. St’. Chrysostomi, ed 
Fronto Duczus, Paris, 1609, t. vili. 

Ap. J. A. Cramer, Caten. in Epp. Cath., 1840, 


SEPT. 

The Pape: of Daniel and the Revelation, Engh 
tr., 1856. 

Symbolik des Mosaischen Cultus, 1839. 

Opera, ed. Giles, t. xii, 1844. 

Gnomon NV. T., 1836. 

Erkiairte Offenbarung Johannis, 1834. 

The Mystery of Providence, 1848. 

LErklarung der Apok. des Johannis, 1876. 

Vorlesungen tib. die Apokalypse, 1862. 

LD Apocalypse, Euvres, vol. iii., 1819. 

Christs Second Coming, 6th ed., 1868. 

Die Offend. St. Johannes, 1877. 

Life of J. A. Bengel, 1837. 

Complex. in Apoc., ap. Migne, Patrol., vol. \xx. 

Introd. to the New Test., ist ed., 3 vols., 18533 
2nd ed., 2 vols., 1868. 

An Expos. of the B. of Revelation, 4th ed., 1839. 

Handschriftliche Funde, 1 Heft, Leipzig, 18613 
2° Heft, mit Beitraégen von S. P. Tregelles. 
1862. 

Exegetisches Handbuch N. T., B. iii, 2% Ausgey 
1853. 

The First Age of the Church, Eng. tr., 1866. 

The Jewish Messiah, 1877. 

Handbuch tib. die Ofenbarung Johannis, 1859, 

Die Offenbarung Johannes, 1853. 

Einleitung in das N. T., B. vi., 1810. 

Hore Apocalyptica, 5th ed., 1862. 

Comm. in Apoc. Johannis, 1828. Die Johannelschen 
Schriften, 2° Ausg., B. i, 1862. 

Sacred Calendar of Prophecy, 2nd ed., 1844. 

On the Rise and Fall of the Papacy, 170%. 

Der Lehriegriff der Apokalypse, 187% 

Etudes bibliques, 2* série, 3°™ éd. 


GODET ES as ceoicibaee 6 
VGaRETS EL 52) oa. Map 
ereix, C. Jair en aut 
HENGSTENBERG, E. W. . 
Hormann, J.C. K. . . 
mia, |. Le 5 ~S eee 
Keim, DHroOp: 5), J cae 
KRENKEL, MAX .. . 
Lacunza, Eo. [Ben-Ezra] 
LacurTroor, J.B, .) + 


EMGRE, Fr ts any 


fmraarpgy,. C, EB. sos. is 
BIAITLAND AG 36° ase nt a 
MIATTHAND, sOaR: ccna is 


MAURICE FD > 5 cies 
MEDE, JOSEPH. . : 
Newton, Sir Isaac . , 
NEWTON, BISHOP . . . 
NIERMEYER, ANT... . . 


IRUSHEY, Bia Bas ol ciel Guat 
ISENUAN EL tails) Ui ecaris 
Reuss, Eb. Aea vans 

IREVIEEE ATR pple eerie 
Roura,.M gy 32 aa ee 
Scaorren. J. H. 4. 

SRERNNC. Use aici camaits 
SIUARTAVIOSES 9.) 15) 
SOD, fic Eds, Sisas Te cee ie 
TRENCH, R. CHENEVIX . 


” 


Tyso, Jos. oe ae 
VicToRINUS PETAV. 


Vaucuay, C. J. 
ViTRINGA, CAMP. . , 
VoLkmarR, GusT. . . . 
WEstTcorTrT, B. F. 
Witiiams, Isaac . 
Winer, G. B. . 
WorpDsworTH, CHR. 
@OREIG, Hoy. «1. 


( 494 + 

Comm. sur ? Evang. de S. Jean, 1865. 

Opera Theologica, 1679, vol. ii. pars 2. 

Patres Apostolici, 1855. 

The Revelation of St. John, Eng. tr., 1841. 

Weissagung und Erfiillung, 1841. 

Einleit. in die Schriften der N. T., 4 Aufl, 1847. 

Jesu von Nazara, 1867-1872. 

Der Apostel Johannes, 1871. 

The Coming of Messiah, Irving’s tr., 1827. 

Contemp. Review, 1874-1877. 

Comment. on the Epistles of St. Paul, 1866-1875. 

Comm. tib. die Schr. des Ev. Johannes, 2“ Aufl, 
1852. 

St. John the Author of the Fourth Gospel, 1875. 

The Apostles’ School of Proph. Interpr., 1849. 

The Prophetic Period of Daniel and St. John, 1829, 
and other Tracts. 

Lectures on the Apocalypse, 1861. 

Works, ed. 1672. 

The Prophecies of Holy Writ, Works, 1785, t v. 

Dissertations on the Prophecies, 1827. 

De Tlauthent. des érits johann. (“ Revue de 
Théologie,” June—Sept’., 1856) 

The Minor Prophets, 1869. 

L Antechrist, 1873. 

L’ Apocalypse, 1878. 

Hist. dela Théol. chrét. au Sidcle apost., 7™ 62 

Essais de Critique religieuse, 1860. 

LReligquie Sacre, 2nd ed., 1846. 

Der Apost. Johannes in Klein Asien, 1872. 

Commentar tiber die Offenbarung, 1854. 

A Commentary on the Apocalypse, 1854. 

Six Discourses on the Apocalypse, 1846. 

The Epistles to the Seven Churches, 2nd ed., 1861. 

Synonyms of the New Test., 7th ed., 1871. 

An Expos. of the Books of Daniel and the 
Revelation, 1838. 

In Apocalypsin (ap. Bibl. Max. Patr. Gallandii, 
t. iv.). 

The Rev. of St. John, 3rd ed., 1870. 

ANAKPI3I2 Afocalypsios, 1719. 

Commentar zur Offenb. Johannes, 1862. 

The Canon of the New Test., 3rd ed., 1870. 

The Apocalypse, 1852. 

Gramm. des N. T. Sprachidioms, 6" Aufl, 1855 

The New Testament, 1862. 

Die Offenbarung Johannis, 1834. 


( 495 ) 


ANALYSIS OF THE CONTENTS. 


THE contents of the Apocalypse have been variously arranged ; indeed any arrange 
ment must be more or less arbitrary. 

As a marked characteristic of the Book the numeration according to Sevens 
prevails throughout; as well as the division of Seven into groups of four and ‘¢hree, 
or ¢hree and four :—see, for example, the Visions of the Seals, Trumpets, and Vials, 
The following classification, therefore, of the Visions will be found convenient, and 
is adopted in the present Commentary. 

The most usual, as it is the most obvious, division of the Apocalypse is into three 
principal sections :— 

I. THE PROLOGUE (ch. i.-iii.), setting forth (@) the Vision of Christ ; including the 
Commission given to the Apostle John (ch. i. 1, £1, 19), an intimation of the historical 
personality of the Seer, as well as the place and occasion of his receiving the Revela- 
tion (vv. 9-11) ;—(4) the enumeration of the Seven Churches (ch, i. rr; ch, ii. ; ch, 
iii.) which symbolize the Church Universal (ch. iil. 22) for whose sake the pro- 
phetical utterances are intended ;—(c) the Seven Epistles (ch. ii. ; ch. iii.) ; 

II. THE REVELATION PROPER (ch. iv. 1—ch. xxii. 5); 

III. THe Epinocue (ch. xxii. 6-21) which gradually passes from visionary repre- 
sentation ; and, referring back in ver. 8 to the Prologue, closes with a Divine attesta- 
tion, and with threats mingled with promises. 

THE REVELATION PROPER may be divided into Seven chief Visions :— 

i. The Prelude (ch. iv. ; ch. v.) which introduces the Divine Judgments. These 
chapters contain two scenes:—the Appearance in heaven of the throne of God 
(ch. iv.) ; and the Appearance of the Lamb Who takes the Sealed Book “out of the 
right hand of Him that sat on the throne” (ch. v.) ; 

ii, The Vision of the Seven Seals (ch. vi. 1—ch. viii. 1); including an interlude 
between the s¢xth and seventh Seals which consists of ¢wo scenes :—that of the Sealing 
of the Elect (ch. vii. 1-8), and that of the “Great Multitude which no man could 
number” (ch. vii. 9-17) ; 

iii, The Vision of the Seven Trumpets (ch. viii. 2—ch. xi. 19); including as before 
an interlude between the séxtH and seventh Trumpets which again consists of ‘wo 
scenes :—that of the “ Little Book ” (ch. x. 1-11), and that of the “‘ Two Witnesses” 
(ch, xi. 1-14) ; 

iv. The Vision of the Woman, and her three enemies (ch. xii, 1—ch. xiii. 18)— 
the Dragon (ch. xii. 3-17); the Beast from the sea (ch. xii, 18—ch. xiii. 10); the 
Beast from the earth or “ False Prophet” (ch. xiii. 11-18) ; 

v. The group of Visions in ch. xiv. :—(a@) The Vision of the Lamb with His 
Company on Mount Zion (vv. 1-5); (4) the Vision of the ¢vee Angels proclaiming 
judgments (vv. 6-11); (c) the Episode (vv. 12, 13); (d) the Vision of the Harvest 
and the Vintage (vv. 14-20) ; 

vi. The Vision of the Seven Vials (ch. xv. 1—ch. xvi. 21); again including an 
interlude between the sixth and seventh Vials which now consists of ome scene— 
that of the three unclean spirits gathering the Kings of the earth “into the place 
which is called Har-Magedon” (ch. xvi. 13-16) ; 

vii. The Vision of the final Triumph (ch. xvii. 1—ch. xxii. 5); presenting four 
Scenes: (a) The history and fall of Babylon (ch. xvii. 1—ch. xix. 10)—the hostile 
World-power; (4) The overthrow of Satan (ch. xix. 11—ch. xx. 10)—the hostile 
Spiritual power; (c) The Universal Judgment (ch. xx. 11-15); (d) The glories of 
the New Jerusalem (ch, xxi. t—ch. xxii. 5). 


THE REVELATION 


OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 


CHAPTER I. 


@ Sohn writeth his revelation to the seven 
churches of Asia, signified by the seven 
golden candlesticks. 7 The coming of Christ. 
14 Hts glorious power and majesty. 


HE Revelation of Jesus Christ, 
T which God gave unto him, to 


shew unto his servants things which 
must shortly come to pass; and he 
sent and signified ; by his angel unto 
his servant John: 





(With few exceptions, those variations only from the Textus Receptus which affect the 
translation will be noticed. On the text generally see the Introduction, § 8.) 


[Ver. 2 om. re. 


Ver. 4 om. rov [which Erasmus inserted contrary to his codex, known as 


“1”—Breads @cov]. Ver.5 om. €x.—dyanavti.—aAvoartt [SON, A, C, 1;—B, PreadAoveravri,and 
go Erasmus, who kas altered the reading of 1, after the Vulgate, /avit].—éx rav. Ver. 6 Bacideiav, 
iepeis—[ A, P om. rv aiwvwv,—which is read by &, C, B, 1, as in the e/even other places in this 
Book]. Ver. 8 om. apx7 Kai TéXos.—)eyet KUpios 6 Geos. Ver. 9 om. 1st kai.—om. ev rh before 
Bas.—ev "Inoov (after iaopu.).—om. Xpicrov twice—om, 2nd did. Ver. 11 om. eym ciut TO A 
cui 76 Q,6 sparos Kat 6 €oxaros* Kai.—énta exxd.—om. Tais év "Agia (which Er. supplied after 


the Vulg.qua sunt in Asia). Ver. 13 om. énra. 


Ver.14 @s €piov. Ver. 15 [A, C read remupa- 


peévys,—® reads nerupapevo,—B,P, 1read wervpwpevar]. Ver. 17 €Onxev.—om. pot. Ver. 18 om. 


apnv.—rod bay. kai tr. Gdov. Ver. 19 ypayyov ov. 


THE TITLE. 


The Revelation of John.] So the 
uncial manuscripts N, C, and A in its sub- 
scription. P reads “The Revelation of the 
Apostle and Evangelist John ;’—B reads “ The 
Revelation of John the Divine and Evan- 
gelist;’—Erasmus, “ The Revelation of Saint 
John the Divine;”—The Textus Receptus, 
“ The Revelation of John the Divine.” The 
title “the Divine” (6 Oeoddyos) was first 
applied to St. John by Eusebius (Prep. Ev. 
xi. 18); and Eusebius (H. £. ili. 24) explains 
‘nat St. John, omitting the Genealogy of 
Christ after the flesh, began his Gospel with 
the doctrine of the Lord’s Divinity,—the 
Oeodoyia. The memory of the Apostle, it is 
said, is still preserved in the name, Ayasalouk, 
of a village near Ephesus, corrupted from 
Gytos Ocoddyos (Agio-solouk),—see Forbiger, 
Handb. der Alt. Geogr., ii. 188. Philo gives 
the title GeodAcyos to Moses (Vita, iii. 11), and 
go dees Methodius (A.D. 290), De Resurrect. 
ii, 6. Eusebius also applies the title to the 


Ver. 20 om. ds €ides.] 


Prophets, Demonstr. Ev., ii. 9. In the Ap- 
pendix to Mr. J. T. Wood’s “ Discoveries at 
Ephesus ” (London, 1877), in the transcript of 
“Inscriptions from the Great Theatre,” we 
read, at p. 23, as titles of the highest order of 
the priests of Artemis, the words trois 6eo- 
Adyots Kai Yuvw@dois. Professor Plumptre (The 
Epp. to the Seven Churches, p. 1) considers that 
this may have been the first embodiment of the 
thought conveyed by the word “Theologus.” 


Cuaps. I-III. 
I. THE PROLOGUE 
The First of the three great Divisions of 
the Book. 
THE INSCRIPTION (1-3). 


This Inscrption, setting forth the title and 
prophetic character of the Apocalypse, com- 
mends it to the study of the Church. It is 
pre-eminently a Book of Prophecy, see ver. 
3; ch. xxii. 7, 18. 


1. The Revelation] ‘The religious sense of 


v. 1.] 


the word Apocalypse—in English “ Revela- 
tion ”—is unknown to Classical writers; nor 
does it occur in the Septuagint in the sense of 
a Divine communication,—e.g. 1 Sam. xx. 30; 
Ecclus. xi. 27: see Lee on Inspiration, 4th 
ed., p. 4. With the genitive of the object 
(Rom. xvi. 25), and with the genitive of the 
subject (2 Cor. xii. 1; Gal. i. 12), it denotes 
the act of revealing a Divine mystery (Eph. 
iii. 3). It hasalso come to signify that which 
is itself revealed (1 Cor. xiv. 26). “Revela- 
tion” on the part of God is the foundation 
of all true prophecy ; on the side of man, a 
spiritual intuition or vision is to be presup- 
posed (cf. dracia, 2 Cor. xii. 1; dpapa, 
Matt. xvii. 9; épaos, Acts ii. 17; dca etdev, 
“ all that he saw,” Rev.i. 2; 6 Bdezets, “ What 
thou seest,” Rev. i. 11). Here it cannot be 
taken objectively—“ the Revelation concern- 
ing Jesus Christ ;” but it is used, in the former 
sense, subjectively,—for it is the distinctive 
office of Christ to reveal the mystery of God 
(Matt. xi. 27; Johni.18). Thus, it is Christ 
who addresses the Seven Churches (ch. ii.— 
iii.) ; who opens the Sealed Book (ch. v. 7, 9); 
&c. Hence it is added— 


which God gave him] In harmony with 
the doctrine of St. John as to the relation 
of the Son to the Father, John v. 20; vii. 
16 ; xil. 49; xiv. 10; xvii. 7, 8: 

According to the “ Futurist ” scheme (See 
Introd. § 12), the “ Apocalypse” signifies not 
the revelation 4y or concerning Jesus Christ ; 
but the “ Revelation,’ or Second Advent, or 
future Manifestation of Jesus Christ Him- 
self (1 Cor. i. 7). Not very differently the 
rationalistic ‘‘ Preterists ;”’—but in illustra- 
tion of the rationalistic interpretation of 
the Apocalypse, see note A at the end of this 
chapter. 


to shew] I.e., “that he might shew,” a con- 
struction common to the Apocalypse and the 
Fourth Gospel: e.g. ch. iil. 21; vii. 2; xill. 
14, &c.; Johni. 12; vi. 52, &c. (for the constr. 
with iva, cf. ch. ii. 21; Vili. 3; ix. 5, &c.; 
Jobn xiii. 34; xiv. 16; xvii. 4; 1 John v. 
20, &c.). Others explain “so as to shew,”— 
an infinitive epexegetical of “gave” ;—cf. ch. 
v. 5,7. Not merely “to make known,” as 
in Matt. xvi. 21; but with clear reference to 
“shewing” in Vision, cf. ch. iv. 13 xvii. 
1, &e. 

unto bis servants,| I.e., Christ’s servants ; 
so also “his Angel,” “his servant John” (cf. 
ch. ii. 20); not merely prophets, but the 
Church, in general,—see ch. xxii. 6, 9. 


[even] the things which must] Because 
so ordained by God (dei not pédAet, ver. 19). 
This idea is essentially presupposed in all 
prophecy, see ch. iv. 1; xvii. 10; xx. 3; and 
cf. Matt. xvii. 10; xxiv. 6. For this sense 
eompare ver. 2. Or translate and punctuate: 


New Test.—Vou. IV. 


REVELATION. l. — 


“gave unto Him, to shew unto His ser 
vants the things, &c.” 

shortly come te pass:| “Before long,” t.¢,5 
as time is computed by God; not that the 
events are close at hand. What prophets 
behold are, as they are called here, “the 
things which must shortly come to pass ;” 
for in the invisible world which is dis- 
closed to the Seer all is action, in motion, 
about to approach :—“ The vision is yet for 
an appointed time, but at the end it shall 
speak, and not lie: though it tarry, wait for 
it; because it will surely come, it will not 
tarry” (Hab. ii. 3). This is the usual pro- 
phetic style, see Ezek. xii. 21-25; 2 Pet. iii. 
4,8. The key to passages such as this and ch. 
xxii. 6, 7, as wellas Rom. xvi. 20, is supplied 
by the “speedily ” (ev rayer) of Luke xviii. 
7,8, where long deiay is implied. So Bengel: 
“Totus liber tanquaam unum verbum uno 
momento pronunciatione debet accipi”; see 
De Wette, Ebrard, Alford. Duration is to be 
computed in the Apocalypse, either rela- 
tively to the divine apprehension, as here 
and in ch. xxii. 10 (cf. ver. 3; iii. 113 xxli. 7, 
12, 20); or absolutely in itself as long or 
short; see on ch. vili. 1; xx. 2. (On & 
raxex here, cf. evdéws Matt. xxiv. 29). Haupt 
(The First Ep. of St. John, Engl. tr., p. 111) 
observes on John ii. 18 that Scripture “ has 
for the process of the times a standard of 
measurement different from ours.” Expres- 
sions like the present “can be understood 
only when we interpret them according to 
the canon of 2 Pet. iii. 8,‘one day is with 
the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand 
years as one day.’ But that tells us no other 
than this, that in the Divine estimation 
one day may wrap up in itself a thousand 
human years, and the converse... Thus 
there may be, to speak with the Apocalypse, 
silence for half an hour (ch. viii. 1), or, 
according to human measurement, for half 
an eternity.” 

Otherwise :—it is said, (1) that the events 
are close at hand, see ver. 3 (Diisterdieck) ; 
and so in a different sense, Burger, who 
compares Acts xxv. 4, and thinks that, since 
the Day of Pentecost, we stand in the 
“Last Days” (Acts ii. 17; 1 John ii. 18); 
but, he adds, this Book takes no account of 
time ;—(2) that they must soon Jegin to come 
to pass. So Hengstenberg, who argues that 
already in St. John’s time the axe’ was laid 
to the root of the Roman Empire ;—(3) 
that “the certainty” of the future is meant 
(Eichhorn) ;—(4) that the events which 
precede the Second Advent are to take place 
swiftly, in a short space of time (Todd), 
—a meaning which the Greek cannot well 
bear. 

and he sent and signified [them]] Le. 
“the things which Se to pass 1) tig? 

II 


497 


498 


2 Who bare record of the word of 
God, and of the testimony of Jesus 








The A.V., by supplying ‘<it” understands “ the 
Revelation.” Observe, “ He,” “the Sender,” 
the subject of the verb, is Christ,—as is 
proved by the changed construction, and by 
ch. xxii. 16. Perhaps the verb “ signified” 
may be taken absolutely. Except in Acts xi. 28 
(cf. Acts xxv. 27), this prophetic use of the verb 
(oqpaiva) is peculiar to St. John ; see John xii. 
33; Xvili. 323 xxi. 19. The term denotes 
the figurative and symbolical character of 
what follows :—see on ch. xii. 1, 


by bis angel,| Lit. “through his angel;” 

Ex. iv. 13. Hence, and from ch. xxii. 6, 
16, the office of unveiling the different scenes 
of the Apocalypse seems to have been as- 
signed to a particular Angel; cf. Dan. viii. 
16; ix. 21; Zech. i. 9, 13; ii. 3 :—even when 
the speaker is not defined, as in ch. xix. 9, 
the words which follow clearly point to the 
Angel who speaks in ch. xxii. 8, 9. When 
St. John describes at some length what he 
had previously seen in spirit, the Angel, as 
in ch. iv. 1, accompanies him, and explains 
the mystery ef what has been revealed. The 
description is thus rendered highly dramatic, 
when the voice of the Angelus interpres is un- 
expectedly interposed, as in ch. x. 4, 8, 11; xiv. 
13; xix. 9; xxi. 5 (where note the change of 
verbs and tenses). Others take the word 
Angel generically, as implying different angels 
who act as spokesmen throughout. The first 

ress mention of an Angel imparting a 
Vision is in ch. xvii. 1. Cf. ch. xvii. 7; xxi. 9. 


unto bis servant John ;| The title “servant” 
designates the prophetic office: Isai. xlix. 5; 
Amos iii. 7; cf. Rev. xix. 10; xxii.9. The 
proper name “John” (cf. verses 4,9 ; xxii. 8), 
after the prophetic manner,—for there is no 
anonymous prophecy in Scripture,—accredits 
the writer, see Dan. viii. 1; ix. 2: “History 
had its security in the joint knowledge of con- 
temporaries; but in prophecy, personality is 
of the greatest moment” (Hengst.). For 
proof that the “John” here mentioned is the 
Apostle and Evangelist, see Introd. § 1. 

On this verse seems to be founded the 
modern term ‘Apokalyptik, denoting a class 
of writings in which the Divine impartation 
of mysteries is more prominent than the 
human activity of the person chosen to com- 
Municate them; e.g.,in the Old Test., the 
Book of Daniel :—see Introd. § 9. 


2. who bare witness] Ebrard (Krit. 
4. Ev. Gesch., 8. 858) insisting upon the aortsts 
this ially on “ be saw” at the 
refers these words to the 


REVELATION. I. 


[v. @ 


Christ, and of all things that he 


saw. 





takes Rev. xxii. 17 to be an allusion to the 
previous statement of John vii. 37. The exe 
pressions “the word of God,” and “ be saw,” 
he also refers to 1 Johni. 1; the author of 
the Apocalypse thus announcing himself as 
also the author of the Gospel and the First 
Epistle. So, too, Grotius, Wolf, Eichhorn, 
&c. The majority of commentators, how- 
ever, understand here “the epistolary aorist,”—. 
cf. Rom. xvi. 22; Philem. 19; Thucyd. i 1; 
the present Book alone being meant. The 
verb is characteristic of St. John; e.g. John 
i. 7; ill. 11; v.31; xxi 24; 1 John i. a; &e, 

This idea (of paprupia), writes Haupt 
(Z¢., p. 296), “appears at the beginning, 
and recurs at the end of all the three greater 
documents which we have received from 
St. John.” He begins “ with the vindication 
of his trustworthiness. It is a matter of 
indifference whether the verb here refers to 
the Apocalypse which he is beginning, or to 
the earlier written Gospel. The drift of the 
Apostle is to introduce a guarantee of his 
veracity by the statement that he was an 
eye-witness (dca eidev.)” 

of the word of God,| The greater nume- 
ber of writers explain, not the Personal 
Word (cf. ch. xix. 13), but, in common with 
the rest of the verse, the prophetic contents 
of this Book ae i. 2, LXX.), which 
from first to proceeds from God; see 
ch. xxii. 6 (where, however, we have the 
plural—“ words ”). 


and of the testimony of Jesus Christ,| Ley 
subjectively, the witness borne by Jesus who 
(ver. 5; ch. iii. 14) is “the faithful wetness,” and 
who attests the contents of the Book in ch, 
xxii. 20. The phrase may also be taken as 
parallel to “the word of God;” and thus, 
objectively, also expresses the witness “con- 
cerning” Jesus, combining both senses as in 
ch, xix. ro. Some (e.g. Cocceius) who take 
“the word of God” to mean the Fourth 
Gospel, refer these words to St. John’s 
Epistles. 
[even] of all things that be saw.| (Omit 
“ and,’—see vv. /j.). These words are in 
apposition to the previous clauses. The verb 
here, so constantly used in this Book for the 
“seeing” a Vision, denotes that immediate 
intuition whereby the prophet is said “to see” 
what God communicates, e.g. Isai. i.1; Ezek. 
xxxvil. 8; Mic. i. 1; Hab. i. 1:—on the title 
“Seer,” 1 Sam. ix. 9, see Lee On Inspiration, 
App. K. This use of the word oe that 
“perspective” character 0} phecy, 
i distant in time 


v. 3—4] 


3 Blessed is he that readeth, and 
they that hear the words of this pro- 
phecy, and keep those things which 
are written therein: for the time és 
at hand. 


REVELATION. I. 


4 JOHN to the seven churches 
which are in Asia: Grace be 
unto* you, and peace, from him 


“which is, and which was, and *Eegag 


which is to come; and from the 





the Seer, pelongs to the Apocalypse. Thus 
what is “signified” to St. John had been 
“seen” by him,—seen in “Vision,” ch. ix. 17; 
or at times, is also “heard,” cf. ver. 12; ch. 
xxii. 8; see also r Johni.1. Vitringa refers 
the previous part of this verse to the Fourth 
Gospel; and these words to the Apocalypse 
itself, “seen” in ecstatic vision. The true read- 
ing, however, which omits “and,” excludes this 
sense. The sense accordingly is——God has 
given the Revelation to His Son “to shew unto 
His servants” ; the Son, through His Angel, by 
images and Visions, has “ signified” it to St. 
John ; and St. John here bears record to that 

word of God, and that testimony of Jesus 
Christ,” as all has been seen by him. 


8. he that readeth, and they that hear] I.e., 
the public reader in the Church (Luke iv. 
16; 2 Cor. iii. 14), and those present who 
hear what is read. Hence, the one parti- 
ciple is singular, and the others plural. See the 
use of this fact for settling the date of the 
Book, Introd. § 4, p. 33. 


the words of the prophecy,| I. ¢., of this 
Book ;—see ch. xxii. 7, 18. 


and keep the things which are written 
therein:| See Luke xi. 28. 


for the time] ‘The season (xa:pds) deter- 
mined on,’ as ch. xi. 18; xxii. 10: the word 
is used differently in ch. xii. 12, 14. For the 
noun expressive of mere duration (xpédvos), 
gee ch. il. 21; vi. 113 x. 6; xx. 3. Both 
are combined, Acts i. 7; 1 Thess. v. 1. The 
term here employed denotes “the critical 
epoch-making periods, fore-ordained of God, 
Acts xvii. 26."—Trench, Synon. of the N.T., 
P- 199. 

is at hand.| See on ver. 1 and ch, vi. 10; cf. 
Rom, xiii. 11; James v. 9; 1 Pet. iv. 7, 17. 
At every moment the end draws nearer, but 
every moment it is near: the Lord Himself 
points the moral, Matt. xxiv. 48-51. “The 
Apocalypse,” writes Auberlen, “on the one 
hand points to the coming of Christ as 
distant, for it shows the succession of the 
Seven Seals, Trumpets, and Vials; on the 
other hand it proclaims with uplifted finger, 
©Yea, I come quickly, xxii. 20. In this it 
but follows the example of the Saviour Him- 
self: Matt. xxv. 6, 13,19; Mark xiii. 32-37.”"— 
Daniel and the Rev. (Engl. tr., p. 79). In the 
warnings to Pergamum and Sardis (ch. ii. 16; 
fii. 3) the language associated with the Seco 
Advent is transferred to some nearer and 


more immediate judgment:—see Luke xii. 
36-40; 1 Thess. v. 2. Cf. Plumptre, 1c, 
p- 162. 

Duration is thus treated in the Apocalypse 
as relative to the Divine apprehension,—cf. 
on ver. 1; ch. viii. 1; xx. 2. On the other 
hand, according to the theory prevalent 
among rationalistic writers, the Apocalypse 
was written between June A.D. 68, and Jan. 
A.D. 69 (see Introd. § 4), under the influence 
of the horror and revengeful feelings excited 
by the cruelties of Nero. The hour of ven- 
geance could not, the Christians believed, be 
long deferred (“‘ Ce mot de |’Apocalypse ‘le 
temps est proche,’ qui se retrouve dans les 
trois premiers Evangiles, est puisé au coeur 
méme des sollicitudes chrétiennes de cette 
époque.”—Aubé, Hist. des Persécutions, p.132). 
And writers of this school agree in holding 
that the authors of the New Testament 
all laboured under the common delusion that 
the power of Antichrist was to continue for 
the literal period of three and a half years 
(ch. xii. 14; xiii. 5), when the Lord was 
to return and overthrow the power of Pagan 
Rome. 


THE ADDRESS (4-8). 


The Apocalypse is addressed to the Seven 
Churches, named in ver. 11, which, in their 
mystic unity, represent the Church Unie 
versal,—see ch. ii. 7, 11, 29, etc. The 
fundamental thought is expressed in vv. 7, 8. 

4, John] No title is assumed, as none was 
needed to designate the writer to those whom 
headdressed. Who else but John the Apostle 
would have thus named himself? See on 
ver. I. 

to the seven churches| (On the sacred cove- 
nant-number Seven, see Introd. § 11). We 
have here a greeting after the manner of 
St. Paul, who, however, designates himself 
with scrupulous care;—e.g. Rom. i. 1-7. Not 
all the churches in ‘‘ Asia” are meant, for 
there were, among other churches, Colosse 
to which St. Paul addressed an Epistle,—and 
Miletus where he preached (Acts xx. 17),— 
and Hierapolis (Col. iv. 13) of which Papias 
wasshortly afterwards Bishop,—and Magnesia 
to which the martyr Ignatius wrote some 
few years later; but the “Seven” only whi 
without at all suppressing their histori 
character, were chosen to symbolize the whole 
Church of God (see on ch. ii. 7), and to supply 


499 


590 REVELATION. L 


aoe 
5 And from Jesus Christ, who is #:Coneg 


seven Spirits which are before his 
the faithful witness, and the *first Gusw 


throne ; 





themes for warning, for encouragement, for 
consolation, for promise;—Churches, too, 
which, as we may well suppose, stood in a 
special relation to the Apostle John. As 
Tertullian remarks: ‘“ If we trace the series of 
Bishops in these Churches (“ Johannis alum- 
nas ecclesias”) to their origin, we shall arrive at 

ohn as their founder ” (adv. Marcion., iv. 5). 

his relation is further proved by the intimate 
knowledge of the Apostle as to the circum- 
stances of each church, and especially of 
Ephesus, ver. 11; ch. ii. 1. 


which arein Asia:| Here, and through- 
out the N.T., by ‘Asia’ is meant, not one of the 
three continents of the old world, nor yet 
the region which geographers, about thefourth 
century of our era, beganto call ‘ Asia Minor,’ 
—but a district scarcely one-third of this, the 
bequest of Attalus III., king of Pergamum 
(B.C. 133), to the Romans :—cf. Hor., 2 Carm. 
xviii. 5. Its capital was Ephesus, in which 
city St. John resided, wrote his Gospel, and 
died :—see note B. at the end of this chapter. 
Compare St. Pau]’s mention of the “ churches 
of Asia,” 1 Cor. xvi. 19. 


Grace to you and peace,| Cf. the form of 
salutation in St. Peter’s two Epistles, and in 
those of St. Paul,—exceptin 1 Tim. i.2; 2 Tim. 
i. 2, where, as in 2 John 3, “mercy” is added 
¢ Gal. vi. 16). Weare thus (by this “ most 

equently recurring Apostolic salutation: 
Grace and Peace,’) reminded, notes Arch- 
bishop Trench (Epistles to the Seven Churches, 
p- 5) that the whole Book is an Epistle ad- 
dressed to the Universal Church; not merely 
a Book containing the Seven briefer Epistles 
of ch. ii., and ch. iii. 


jrom him which is| We have here the 
first of the many departures from ordinary 
grammatical construction with which the 
Apocalypse abounds. At all costs,—so St. John 
seems to have felt,—the title of the immutable 
God, Jehovah, the self-existing One, “the 
game yesterday and to-day, and for ever” 
(Heb. xiii. 8; Jamesi.17; Mal. iii. 6), must 
be retained in the dignity and emphasis of the 
nominative case:—cf. “I Am hath sent me 
unto you” (Ex. iii. 14). On such construc- 
tions (dz 6 dy) see Introd. § 7 (omit roi, 
as in vv.//.). Note the threefold “from,” 
of which we have here the first. 


and which was,| These words are not to 
be divided by a comma from the former part 
of the title; both united form a special 
title of God,—see the form, “Whioh art 
and Which wast,” without any addition, 
in ch. xi. 17; xvi. 5. Together, they form 
ene clause which is to be balanced against 


the remaining words: see Trench, in toe. 
and also the comparison of the word “ was 

here, with the “was” in John i. 1, as drawn 
by St. Basil quoted in the Introd., § 2, p. 14. 


and whichis to come; |Lit.,“which cometh,” 
—cf, Mark x. 30. This clause is also in some 
sort a proper name of our Lord (Matt. xi. 3; 
John i. 15, 27; Heb. x. 37; cf. Hab. ii. 3; 
Mal. iii. 1): its occurrence in this compo 
title attests the equal dignity of the Son 
with the Father,—so Origen who quotes this 
verse (de Princip., i. 10, p. 118, ed. Redepen- 
ning). The complete title is not a description 
of the eternity of God,—present, past, future 
(see the different order in ch. iv. 8, and com- 
pare ch. iv. 10),—this would make 6 épydpevos 
equivalent to 6 éaduevos: it simply means 
“which is and which was, and which is to 


come” to judgment. This latter member of 


the clause supplies the key-note of the Book, 
with which it begins (ver. 7), and with which 
it closes (ch. xxii. 7, 12, 20),—“*I come 
quickly ;” cf. John v. 25: and see Trench, 
lc. p. 6. This title is re in ver. 8; 
and is to be omitted in ch. x1. 17; xvi 5. 


and from the seven Spirits] The second 
“from” :—cf. ch, ili. 1; Iv. 5; v. 6. Not the 
Seven principal Angels (cf. ch. viii. 2) as the 
later Jews counted them (Tobit xii. 15), 
but the Holy Ghost, Sevenfold in His opera- 
tions, “that doth His Sevenfold Gifts 
impart :”—see Isa. xi. 2; Zech. ili. 9; iv. 10. 
Angels are never called ‘Spirits’ in the 
Apocalypse; nor would such a sense agree 
with the prerogative claimed for Christ in ch. 
iii. 1. This expression, which guides the 
mysterious Sevenfold imagery throughout the 
Book, is explained by ch. v. 6. The Persons 
ality of the Holy Ghost—which is asserted 
in ch. ii. 11; xxii. 17—is not touched by this 
interpretation, which rests upon the varied 
manifestations of one and the same Spirit (1 
Cor. xii. 4) in the Church ; the number Sewen 
(note the relation to the Seven Churches) 
being the symbol of God’s covenant with His 
people; see Introd., $11,p. 71. The absenceof 
the article (as Dean Vaughan notes on Rom. 
v. 5) attaches to mvedpya the sense of com- 
munication; its presence that of personality. 
Each one of the Seven Spirits (symbolizing t 
diffusion of the Holy Spirit) is so to say, 
a mvedpa Gywov Viewed in Himself, and m 
His personal Deity, He is ré Hvedua 7d ayo. 
Herder’s reference to the Cabalistic per- 
sonification of the Divine attributes cannot 
hold good, for the Sepbiroth (as they were 
called) were ¢en in number. 


which [are] before bis throne;| Note the 


EEE ee eee 


v. 6.] 


begotten of the dead, and the prince 
of the kings of the earth. Unto him 


© Heb. o.that loved us, “and washed us from 


our sins in his own blood, 


REVELATION. I. 


501 


6 Ano iath ¢made us kings and ¢2 es 


priests unto God and his Father; to 
him Je glory and dominion for ever 
and ever. Amen. 





absence of the verb substantive after the re- 
lative :—see Introd., § 7, p. 55. The minis- 
tering office of the Holy Ghost as “sent” 
by the Father (John xiv. 26) is implied 
in the words “ before his throne.” 


5. and from Jesus Christ, [who is] the 
faithful witness,| Thethird “from.” The three 
Nominatives in irregular apposition to the 
genitive denote here, as in ver. 4, the import- 
ance of these titles; cf. ch. xiv. 12; xx. 2. 
Winer (§ lix. 8), suggests that these nomina- 
tives may be taken “as a kind of exclama- 
tion,”—cf. James iii. 8. 

In the New Testament the word “ faith- 
ful” (aicrds) is used, (1) in an active sense 
signifying ‘trusting,’ ‘believing’ (John xx. 
27); (2) ina passive sense, signifying ‘ trust- 
worthy,’ ‘ to be believed ’ (x John i. 9):—God 
alone is “faithful” in this latter sense; see on 
ch, iii. 14. The thought here expressed, 
which is characteristic of St. John (see on 
ver. 2), may be founded on Isaiah lv. 4. 


the first-bornof the dead,| (Omit ék, see 
vv. /j.), Athought found only here, and in Col. 
i, 18; see ch. ii. 8,and Bishop Lightfoot on Col. 
i, 15, 18: — another correspondence with 
Pauline doctrine (although St. Paul writes ex 
tav vexp.). Cf.too 1 Cor. xv. 20; Acts ii. 24; 
g. e., “ death was the womb that bare him.” 
Or, it may be, “jirst-begotten,” as in Acts 
xiii. 33, with reference to Ps. ii. 7; cf. Rom. 
i. 4:—and so Trench, /. c., p. 12. 


and the ruler of the kings of the earth.] 
See Ps, Ixxxix. 27; 1 Tim. vi. 15; cf. Rev. vi. 
15; xvii. 14; xix. 16. The prize offered by 
the Tempter, Christ has won by the way of 
death :— Matt. iv. 8, 9; John xvi. 33. 


Unto him that loveth us,| For the tense 
eee vv. //, :—“ whose love rests evermore on 
his redeemed” (Trench). Cf. John xiii. 1. 


and loosed us from our sins| Seevv.il.: 
—this reading connects the words with those 
other texts which speak of Christ as our 
“ransom,” (Avrpov), Matt. xx. 28; 1 Tim. 
ii. 6; cf. also ch. v. 9; xiv. 3, 4. The prayer, 
“Though we be tied and bound with the 
chain of our sins, yet let the pitifulness of thy 
great mercy /Joose us,” suggests a different 
metaphor. The reading “washed us,” dif- 
fering but by a single letter from that which 
the weight of evidence commends (Aovw— 
Ave), is also in accordance with St. John’s 
tone of thought :—see ch. vii. 14; John xiii. 
fo; 1 John i 7. Cf Acts xvi. 33; and 
‘Winer, § 30, 8 177. 


by his blood;] ransomed us at the 
price of, or with:—Gr. iz; cf. 1 Chron 
xxi. 24, LXX. See Winer’s note quoted on 
ch. v. 9. 


6. and he made us} By a Hebrew 
idiom, the participial is resolved into the 
direct construction. 


{to be]a kingdom,] Cf.ch.v. 10; so, too, 
‘a kingdom of priests,” Ex. xix. 6; 1 Pet. ii, 
g:—see vv. I]. The concrete term“ king” is not 
applied to Christians in the New Testament. 


[to be] priests uxto his God and Father;] 
I.e., consecrated to God,—brought into near 
relationship to Him. On the words, “ His 
God and Father,” cf. Rom. xv. 6; 2 Cor. i. 3; 
Eph. i. 3. The emphasis given to “king- 
dom” points to the reigning of the saints,—an 
idea so prominent in the Apoc.,—ch. uli. a1 $ 
Vv. 10; XX. 4, 6; xxii. 5. Or it may mean 
that the redeemed form Christ’s “kingdom ;” 
and thus, inasmuch as they are “priests” 
unto God, become subjects of Him who is 
“ King of kings.” 

to him be all glory and dominion| The 
article is prefixed to each noun, and expresses 
universality,—“ the glory,” “the dominion.” 
The sense may be: “to Him is the glory,” 
&c.; ze., not ascribing to Him “the glory,” 
but confessing that it belongs to Him,—that 
He possesses it: see 1 Pet. iv. 11. Unlike 
“power” and “might” in the doxology of 
ch. vii. 12, the attribute of “ dominion” or 
“strength ” (Luke i. 51) is applied in the New 
Testament solely to God. The doxology 
becomes threefold at ch. iv. 11; xix. 1 (see 
the notes); fourfold at ch. v. 13 (cf. ch. xii 
Io) ; sevenfold at ch. vii. 12 (cf. on ch. v. 12); 
the article in each case preceding each noun. 
The Divine honour thus expressed can be 
ascribed to none else than God and Christ. 
Writers usually attempt, but rather unprofit- 
ably, to distinguish and to define the ideas 
which these different doxologies contain. 
Compare the doxology of 1 Chron. xxix. 11, 123 
and also that which has been attached to the 
Lord’s Prayer, Matt. vi. 13. 


Sor ever and ever. Amen.| Lit., “unto the 
ages of the ages,” a phrase occurring twelve 
times in this Book:—it is not read in ch. v. 
14. In ch. xiv. 11 the articles are omitted: 
-—see the vv. //. here. This form is not found 
in the Gospel or Epistles cf St. John. Elsee 
where, it occurs in Gal. i. 5; Heb. xiii, a13 
1 Pet. iv. 11; &c.,—in all, nine times 
ch. xiv. 6. 


502 


® Matt. 24. 


7 ‘Behold, he cometh with clouds ; 
and every eye shall see him, and the 
also which pierced him: and all kin- 
dreds of the earth shall wail because 
of him. Even so, Amen. 


REVELATION. IL. 


wv. 78. 


8 I am Alpha and Omega, the 
beginning and the ending, saith 
the Lord, which is, and which 
was, and which is to come, the 
Almighty. 





7. Behold, he cometh| J.e., the Person last 
spoken of. The fundamental thought of the 
Apocalypse, “Christ cometh,” is here so- 
lemnly prefixed, after the manner of the pro- 
phets :—see Pusey (Tée Minor Prophets) on 
Amos i. 2. 


Mr. F. D. Maurice, as a strict “ Pre- 
terist,” lays down from the first his prin- 
ciple of interpretation: “I believe that the 
time of which St. John wrote was at hand 
when he wrote.”— Lect. on the Apoc., p. 9. 


with clouds ;| Gr. the clouds (of heaven, 
Dan. vii. 13; Matt. xxiv. 30; xxvi. 64; Acts 
i. 9, 11); denoting not the glory, but the terror 
of that day :—cf. ch. xi. 12; xiv. 14-16. These 
clouds have nothing in common with the 
“slorious privacy of light ”’—the “ bright 
cloud” (vePAdn hore, Matt. xvii. 5) of the 
Transfiguration (Trench, /¢., p. 16). Cf. 
Nah. i. 3. 

and every eye shall see him,| He is no 
longer as in Isai. xlv. 15; cf. Job xix. 27. 


and they which pierced him;] I. e., ‘who- 
ever,’ ‘all they who’; cf. Acts x. 41, 47. In 
Zech. xii. to, here quoted, the repentance of 
Israel, when the Crucified One is recognized 
as their king, is described. As in Matt. xxiv. 
30, the despair of sinners is now the thought. 
The form of the quotation in this place, as 
in John xix. 37 (the only other N. T. passage 
in which the piercing of the Lord’s side is 
mentioned), is almost a demonstration of 
the common authorship of the Apocalypse 
and the Fourth Gospel. In both, the original 
Hebrew words (172P77WW&) are rendered in 
the same way (avrov efexevtnoay), and with 
the same departure from the LXX. (av6’ dv 
katwpxnoavro). In order to escape this 
inference, Ewald conjectures that the text 
of the LXX. has been altered. Aquila, Sym- 
machus, and Theodotion, however, who 
translate as here, lived after St. John:—see 
Field’s edition of Origen’s Hexapla, vol. ii. 
p- 1026; Lee on Inspiration, p. 345. 


and all the tribes of the earth shall wail 
over him.) Or shall mourn for him, 
as in Zecli. xii. 10 (LXX., which is quoted 
here). The words of the Lord Himself, 
Matt. xxiv. 30, are also referred to. The 
verb denotes the Oriental manifestation of 
sorrow, the smiting on the breast, cf. Luke 
Sviii. 13. 

The frequent quotations from _ the 
Old Testament in this chapter exhibit the 


Apocalypse as the continuation of Hebrew 
prophecy. 


Even so, Amen.) “Yea, Amen,”—the 
Greek and Hebrew forms united, as in 2 Cor. 
i. 20; see ch. xxii. 20,—God’s own ratifica- 
tion, like the “Thus saith the Lord” of the 
prophets. 

Note the three ideas in this doxology,— 
(2) Unto Him that loveth us ; (2) Who made us 
to be a kingdom, to be priests; (3) Who cometh. 


8. lam the Alpha and the Omega, saith 
the Lord God,| See vv. //. The explanatory 
words, “the beginning and the ending,” are 
added here in the Textus Receptus, and are 
read in ch. xxi. 6; xxii. 13 (cf below, ver. 
17). The thought conveyed by this title is 
expressed in Isai. xli. 4; xliii. 10; xliv. 6 
On the expression “the Lord God,” or 
“the Lord the God,” cf. Luke i. 32. 


which is @'c.] See on ver. 4. 


the Almighty.] This title (6 Havroxparap) 
occurs nine times in the Apoc. ; elsewhere in 
the New Test. only in 2 Cor, vi. 18, where 
it isaquotation: it isthe equivalent inthe LXX, 
for Shaddai (‘1’) only in Job(e. g. Job. v. 17); 
and for Tsaba, in such phrases as Tsebi Tsiboth 
(MINAY 95N, Jer. iii. 19), or Elohi Tsebbaoth 
(masons, Amos iv. 13). “ We have ale 
ways translated it ‘ Almighty,’ except at Rev. 
xix. 6, where with a very sublime effect our 
Saxon ‘ Almighty’ is exchanged for the Latin 
‘Omnipotent’” (Trench, /.c, p. 18). This 
verse expresses the worship in heaven under 
the seventh Trumpet, ch. xi. 17. Liicke 
(Einl. in die Offenb. des Johann., 2te Ausg., Ss. 
693) thinks that “the reference to Ex. iii. 
14 cannot be mistaken;” and Alford also con= 
siders that these words are “uttered by the 
Eternal Father,’—although at ver. 17, and 
also at ch. xxii. 13, Christ is the speaker. At 
all events, Christ’s Divinity and co-eternity 
with the Fatherare plainly stated in these latter 
texts. Early Christian Art and early Christian 
Hymnology alike apply the symbolic lan- 
guage of such passages to Christ : e. g.— 


** Corde natus ex Parentis, ante mundi exordium 
Alpha et © cognominatus, Ipse fons et 
clausula 
Omnium, que sunt, fuerunt, queque post 
futura sunt.” 


PRUDENTIUS, Cathem. ix. 10 (quoted 
by Bishop Wordsworth és dec.) 


v. g—I0.] 


9 I John, who also am your bro- 
ther, and companion in tribulation, 
and in the kingdom and patience of 
Jesus Christ, was in the isle that 


REVELATION. L 


is called Patmos, for the word of 
God, and for the testimony of Jesus 
Christ. 

10 I was in the Spirit on the 





THE First SCENE OF THE VISION 
(i. 9—ili. 22). 

As the Prophets of old related their call 
(Isai. vi. 8; Jer. i 4; Ezek. i. 3), so St. John 
sets forth his commission, in order to identify 
this Book with the Revelation announced in 
ver. I. 


9. I John,| The writer here names him- 
self for the third time :—so again, ch. xxi. 2 ; 
xxii. 8. Elsewhere, Daniel alone says, “I 
Daniel” (Dan. vii. 15, 28; viii. 15, 273 ix. 
2; X. 2,7; xii. 5). See on ver. 4. 

your brother] Omit “who also am,’—see 
wv./j. Isaiah names himself “ son of Amoz ;” 
St. John, as having entered the circle of 
Christian thought, refers merely to the 
brotherhood in Christ. 


and partaker with you in the ¢ribulation 
and kingdom and patience [which are] 
in Jesus,| See vv. //. The Lord’s words, 
in Matt. xx. 22, had been fulfilled so far as 
« James the brother of John” was concerned, 
—see the narrative in Acts xii. 2: the pre- 
diction is here brought home to John himself. 
For the case of others, cf. ch.ii. 13; vi. 
9; xvii. 6. Note the order: “while the 
tribulation is present, the kingdom is in hope” 

nch), and hence, “ patience in Jesus,” the 

link which unites them, is added ;—see Acts 
xiv. 22; Rom. viii. 17; 2 Tim. ii. 12. 

The word Christ is twice omitted in this 
verse. 

qwas| "Eyevouny—not jv which implies 
the mere fact. We have no one word in 
English to express the force of this Greek 
verb when a person is meant (see ver. 18); 
in the case of an event we say “came to 

” Here, therefore, we are to understand 

—TI found myself” “I became a dweller ;” 
not simply “1 was.” As in ver. 10, the verb 
seems to imply that St. John was no longer in 
Patmos when he wrote these words. 


Patmos,| Or Patnos—whence the popular 
form Patino, known in the Middle Ages as 
Palmosa, one of the Sporades, a rocky island 
consisting of three solid masses united by 
Harrow isthmuses: it is about thirty Roman 
miles in circuit, and lies in that part of the 
fégean called the Icarian Sea. Patmos is 
visible about forty miles out at sea from the 
hills which surround Miletus at the mouth of 
the Mzander. M. Guerin (Description de Pile 
de Patmos, 1856) estimates the population 
of La Scala, the ancient Hellenic town of 
which the Acropolis still exists at its port, 


at twelve or thirteen thousand. Its excellent 
harbour, according to the custom of coasting 
voyages at that period, was the first or the 
last station between Ephesus and Rome. See 
Renan, L’ Antechrist, p. 373; and also Dean 
Stanley’s description, Introd., § 4, p.25. It 
appears to be the certain result of historical 
evidence (see Introd., § 4) that the Apostle 
John was banished to the island of Patmos 
during the reign of the Emperor Domitian 
(A.D. 81-96), and in the fourteenth year of 
that reign; and that he was recalled from 
Patmos to Ephesus by the Emperor Nerva 
in the year 96. 

for the word of God} The use of this same 
preposition (6:4 with an accus.) in ch. vi 9; 
xx. 4 (cf. John xv. 21), renders imperative the 
sense that St. John’s banishment is here 
meant, not (as Liicke thinks, s. 816) that he 
was a voluntary dweller in Patmos ‘for the 
purpose of’ receiving “the word of God.” 
For the confirmation which the nature of 
this punishment supplies of the date of the 
Apocalypse under Domitian, see Introd. p. 27. 
Renan writes: “Jean parait avoir souffert 
pour le nom de Jésus:” and he quotes Poly- 
crates (ap. Euseb., H. E., v. 24), who testified 
that St. John was a “martyr and teacher” 
(/.¢., p. 198). 

In reply to the modern theory that “ the 
tradition” as to St. John’s banishment is 
founded altogether upon this verse, see 
Introd. $ 7> i. (a). 


and the testimony of Jesus.] Seevv./h. 
For the meaning of this phrase (the objective 
sense—“the testimony concerning Jesus ”— 
predominating here, cf. ch. xii. 11), see on 
ver. 2. 


10. I was in the Spirit] See on verse 9,— 
‘T found myself in that state wherein revela- 
tions are received’—“in a trance,” Acts x 
10; xi. 5; xxil. 17 (for the opposite state 
see Acts xii. 11) ;—withdrawn from the rela= 
tions of ordinary life. St. Paul cannot tell 
whether “in the body” or “out of the body,” 
—z2 Cor. xii, 2-4. Cf. Luke xxii. 44 for a 
similar use of the verb. This phrase occurs 
only here, and in ch. iv. 2;—see also ch. xvii, 
3; xxi. 10; Num. xxiv. 2; Ezek. xi 5 (Lee 
On Inspiration, p. 131, &c.) 

on the Lord’s day:| ‘The first day of the 
week,’ the day cf the Lord’s Resurrection 
(7 Kuptaxy jpépa,—cf. 1 Cor. xi. 20). For the 
early use of this expression (which 1s not 
found elsewhere in the New Test.) to denote 


5°3 


504 


Lord’s day, and heard behind me a 
great voice, as of a trumpet, 

11 Saying, 1 am Alpha and Omega, 
the first and the last: and, What 
thou seest, write in a book, and send 


REVELATION. L 


[v. 3% 


it unto the seven churches which are 
in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto 
Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and 
unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and 
unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea, 





Sunday,’ see note C.at the end of this chapter. 
Eichhorn (cf. Liicke, s. 815), relying on the 
article, understands the chief Lord’s day, i.e., 
Easter Day. Some maintain, but without 
sufficient reason, that “the Day of the Lord” 
here signifies “the Day of Judgment” in the 
distant future, as in Joel i. 15; iii. 14:—so 
Wetstein, Augusti, Zillig, S.R. Maitland, J. 
H. Todd (cf. Zullig, Die Offend. Johannis, 
Excurs. i., B. i. s. 401.) See the argument 
of Godet, founded on the ecclesiastical use of 
“the Lord’s Day,” in proof of the date of 
the Apocalypse (Introduction, § 4). 


and I heard behind me a great voice,| The 
speaker is undefined. We note here the 
same indefiniteness as to the speaker which 
we frequently find throughout this Book :— 
e.g., ch. iv. 15 vi. 63 ix. 13; X.4, 8; xiv. 13; 
xviii. 4. Still more indefinite is the speaker in 
ch. xix. 9; xxi. 5:—see onver. 1. In ver. 15, 
the “voice” is clearly that of Christ: so also 
in ch. ii., iii. The voice proceeding from 
“ bebind” the Seer has been thought to signify 
that all the symbols and references are of the 
Old Testament (I. Williams in /oc.);—but 
cf Ezek. iii. 12. 


@s of a trumpet] A trumpet, as of the 
Law (Ex. xix. 19; Num. x. 1-10), but ar- 
ticulate with human utterance, as of the 
Gospel. Cf. Isai. xxvii. 13; Matt. xxiv. 31. 


ll. saying,| Cf. ch. iv. 1.:—“ saying” is in 
concord with “ trumpet.” 


What thou seest,] Omit “Iam Alpha 
and Omega, the first and the last, and”— 
see vv. //, The words omitted are borrowed 
from verses 8 and17. The sense is—* What 
thou seest ” throughout the Vision now open- 
ing. 

write in a book,| Gr. into a roll (eis 
BiBdiov): see Note A on ch. x. 2. The 
command to write is given twelve times in 
the Apocalypse ; viz. here, and ver. 19; ch. 
ii. 1, 8, 12, 18; iii. 1, 7, 14; xiv. 13; x1x. 9; 
xxi. 5. Hengstenberg is certainly wrong 
when he restricts the command to the con- 
tents of ch. ii. and ch. iii.,—see on ver. 19. 


and send [it] to the seven churches; 
unto Ephesus, and unto, d.] Though 
his Codex reads “ seven,” Erasmus omits it, 
and is followed by T.R. Omit “ which are 
ts Asia,”—see vv. Hl. 


umto Pergamum,] Or Pergamos :—for 


the form of this word see note D at the 
end of this chapter. As to the selection of 
these Seven Churches, see on ver. 4; and 
Trench, /c., pp. 25, 222-4. Renan (p. 347) 
would account for the omission of Hierapolis 
by the conjecture that the residence in that 
city of the Apostle Philip (see Introd. § 2, p. 9) 
removed it from the jurisdiction of St. John; 
and for the omission of Colossz, by the asser= 
tion that it had suffered so severely from the 
earthquake of the year 62, as to have almost 
disappeared from the number of the churches, 
Such criticism, however, does not explain the 
omission from the list of Miletus, or Tralles, 
or Magnesia. 

The Seven Churches are divided into groups 
of three and four (see the remarks introduc- 
tory to ch. ii.). The first group consists of 
Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum ;—Ephesus 
standing first as being the scene of St. John’s 
own labours; as being the most important 
church in ‘ Asia,’ as well as the chief city of 
the province; and, it may be, as being geo= 
graphically nearest to Patmos. The second 
group is arranged according to the order 
given in the “Itinerarium Antonini.” Of 
Laodicea we read in Col. iv. 16; of Philae 
delphia in the Epistle of St. Ignatius to that 
church; of the churches of Pergamum, 
Thyatira, and Sardis, we know nothing from 
the Pauline or Ignatian age. The objection 
of the Alogi (see Epiphanius, Her. 51, 33)— 
that there was no “church of the Chris- 
tians in Thyatira,” and, therefore, that St. 
John was not the author of the Apocalypse— 
Lucke (s. 424) proves to be of no weight: 
see Introduction, §5. By these Seven the 
Church Universal is symbolized; and so each 
Epistle is addressed to “the Churches,”—ch. ii. 
7, II, 17, 29; iil. 6, 13, 22. As the “ Mura- 
torian Fragment” expresses it :—“ John, in 
the Apoc., though he writes to Seven 
Churches, nevertheless speaks toall.” (“Johan- 
nes in Apocalypsi licet septem ecclesiis scri- 
bat, tamen omnibus dicit.”) So also Vic- 
torinus (“quod uni dicit, omnibus dicit,” ap. 
Galland., t. iv. p. 53), who adds that St. Paul, 
too, wrote Epistles to seven churches only, 
addressing his other Epistles “ singularibus 
personis,” lest he should exceed the number 
of seven churches. Godet (ftudes bibliques, 
2™ série, p. 349) Observes: ‘“ Christianity, 
represented by these Seven Churches, is the 
true audience to which the author addresses 
himself.” 


¥v, 12—14.] 


12 And I turned to see the voice 
that spake with me. And being 
turned, I saw seven golden candle- 
sticks ; 

13 And in the midst of the seven 
candlesticks one like unto the Son of 


12. And I turned to +e the voice] “The 
voice” put for the speaker. Or, “And I 
turned round fo see.” 


that spake with me.| I. e., * what the voice 
was which was speaking.’ 


And having turned I saw] Here the 
Vision, properly so-called, begins. 


seven golden candlesticks ;| Here (see also 
ch. xi. 4) the: Avyvia (LXX.) or lampstand, 
Ex. xxv. 31 (Heb., menorah), is properly 
the stand which supported the Avyvos (LXX.) 
or /amp, Ex. xxv. 37 (Heb., zer) :—see Matt. 
v. 15; Rev. xviii. 23 (cf. ch. iv. 5; viii. 10). 
The zer was a shallow covered vessel, oval in 
form, with a mouth at one end from which 
the wick protruded :—see the note on Ex. 
xxv. 37. We recognize the reference to the 
Seven-branched Candlestick, Ex. xxv. 32, 
and the “seven lamps,” Zech. iv. 2. “ The 
Jewish Church was one; for it was the 
Church of a single people: the Christian 
Church, that too is one, but it is also many; 
at once ‘the Church’ and ‘the Churches.’ ” 
—Trench, /.¢., p. 28. “Any one candlestick 
may be removed (ch. ii. 5), but the Sevenfold 
unity is not disturbed by ‘ts removal’ 
(Wordsworth). 


THE APPEARANCE OF CHRIST (13-18). 


The subject matter of the Book is now 
by the description of Christ’s 
appearance,—as His relation to the world had 
been described in vv. 5, 6. Hence, each of 
the Seven Epistles opens with a feature 
borrowed from this description. What He 
afterwards says to them in words, He here 
prefigures through his appearance (Hengst.). 
“The Majesty of Him who holds His own 
in His right hand (cf. ver. 20), is the real 
ground of all Apocalyptic hope” (Disterd.). 
13. and in the midst of the candlesticks] 
Omit seven, see vv. //. In the midst of the 
Seven Churches,—see ver. 20,and cf. ch. ii. 1. 
one like unto the Son of man,| A title 
adopted from Dan. vii. 13; but nowhere ap- 
pie! to Christ by others than Himself except 
, and in ch. xiv. 14,—and also in Acts vii. 
56 where the articles occur which are absent 
here and in ch. xiv. 14, as they are absent in 


ion vy. 27. Itis no more necessary to trans- 
“a son of man” when the article is thus 


REVELATION. I. 


man, clothed with a garment down 
to the foot, and girt about the paps 
with a golden girdle. 

14 His head and his hairs were 
white like wool, as white as snow; 
and his eyes were as a flame of fire; 


absent, than to render “a Spirit of God” in 
Matt, xii. 28, or 1 Cor. xii. 3. If the absence 
of the article is to be insisted on, the expres- 
sion “a son of man” would simply declare 
that the risen Lord still retains in glory His 
human Nature. The contrast between His 
return to glory and the condition described 
in Phil. ii. 7, 8, explains how it was that, while 
He continued in the state of humiliation, no 
created being dared to address Him as “son 
of man.” That St. John, who had “h 

and seen with his eyes, concerning the Wo! 
of life,” could have here intended merely to 
describe a human form, is scarcely credible. 
Réville conjectures that here, and in ch 
xiv. 14, the word “/ie” implies that St. 
John recognized his Master in the Divine 
Personage whom he describes (Revue de 
Théologie, ix. p. 241). 

@ garment down to the foot,| The Greek 
equivalent for these words (zodyjpns, scil. 
éaOns) is found only here in the New Testa= 
ment. It is of frequent occurrence in the 
LXX., representing different Hebrew terms 
(cf. Ex. xxv. 7; xxviii. 4). It is the linen 
priestly garment (0°73) of the “One Man” 
revealed to Ezekiel (see the note on Ezek. ix. 
2). It is also the “ Ephod” of the High 
Priest (see the note on Ex.xxviii.31), “ woven 
without seam :”—“a high-priestly-royal robe ” 
(Ewald). 

and girt about at the breasts with agoldex 
girdle.| See Luke xi. 27; cf. ch. xv. 6. 

Bengel and others have attempted to ree 
produce this description pictorially ; but with 
an unhappy result. 


14. And sis bead and bis hair were white 
as white wool, [white] as snow;] (See 
vv. li.). As in Dan. vil. 9; not, however, 
the hoary head as of ‘the Ancient of days,” 
but “a part of the transfiguration in light 
of the glorified Person of the Redeemer” 
(Trench, p. 34):—see Matt. xvii. 2; Mark 
ix. 3. So of the Angel at the empty tomb 
(Matt. xxviii. 3), it is “not the garment 
of innocence but of glory ” (Trench, Studies 
in the Gospels, p. 194). White is the colour 
and livery of heaven; and has through 
out the Apocalypse a Messianic reference: 
ch. i. 17; ili. 4, 18; iv. 43 vi. 2, 11; Vil. 9,13; 
xix. 8, II, 14; xx. 11. (In the Apocal 
Aeukés is not albus, but candidus :—“ aliud est 
candidum esse, id est juce quidem zitente per- 


5°5 


506 


And his feet like unto fine brass, 
gt i they burned in a furnace; and 
his voice as the sound of many 
waters. 

16 And he had in his right hand 
seven stars: and out of his mouth 
went a sharp twoedged sword: and 


REVELATION. I, 


[v. 15—17. 


his countenance was as the sun 
shineth in his strength. 

17 And when I saw him, I fell at 
his feet as dead. And he laid his 


right hand upon me, saying unto me, 


Fear not; “I am the first and the ft. me 


last : 





fusum; aliud a/sum, quod pallori constat esse 
vicinum.”— Wetst.). Reuss insists that the 
colour white is here the characteristic feature 
of old age; and in his Introduction (p. 34) he 
argues from this that the Apocalypse was not 
written by the Apostle John, who was ac- 
quainted with the Lord’s appearance. He 
also notes on this verse that Christ does not 
appear “as the historical personage who died 
before He reached His fortieth year, but as a 
Divine Person invested with the symbolical 
attributes of cternity.” 


as a flame of fire;)_ As in Dan. x. 6; cf. 

. xix. 12. Fire, throughout Scripture, 
isthe symbol of Divine wrath :—Gen. xix. 24 ; 
Num. xi. 1; 2 Kings i. 10, 12; 2 Thess.i. 8. 


15. like unto burnished 4brass,] See 
Ezek. i. 7, The etymology and meaning 
of this term (Chalco-libanos, or—on, a noun 
fem., or rather neuter: see note E at 
the end of this chapter), found only here 
and in ch. ii. 18, have hitherto been merely 
guessed at. Thus we have the senses : 
‘Brass of Mount Lebanon, (so Arethas, and 
the Syriac version); —‘ Mountain - brass’ 
(Vulg., aurichalcum, the vulgar form of ori- 
chalcum, and erroneously taken to be a com- 
pound of aurum and xa\xés,—more precious 
than gold, cf. Plaut. Curc. i. 3, 46) ;—‘ Brass 
of the furnace’ (Words.);’'—‘ Brass at a 
white heat’ (Bochart) ;— ‘Brass the colour of 
frankincense’ (Ausonius, ap. Wetst.);—a 
metal like electrum (Suidas), a word which 
signifies both amber, and the metal electrum. 
A combination of the last two explanations 
may give the true sense, ‘A metal like 
electrum, having the colour of amber,— 
amber being the colour of frankincense, which 
is the commercial name of “the gum-resin 
Olibanum,” (Brande and Cox Dict. of Science). 
Grimm gives as the general meaning imposed 
by the context: “Metallum auro simile, si 
non eo prestantius.” 


as if it had been refined in a furnace ;] 
(Compare Zech. xiii. 9, LXX.). This ver- 
sion reads the dative of the participle,— 
see vv. //. Reading the genitive, we get the 
same meee, the construction being ir- 
regular,—cf. ch. ii 20; iii, 12; iv. 1, &c. 
The nominative masculine plural, adopted i in 
AV., would agree with “feet ;’—cf. ch. x. 1. 


as & voice of many waters.) Cf. ch. xiv. 
2; xix. 6; Ezek. xliii. 2. The form of 
the sentence now changes; the description 
proceeding as if with pencil touches;—cf. ch. 
XIX. 125 XXI. 12. 

16. And he bad in his right band seven 
stars :| See ch. ii, 1; where also the prepo- 
sition is “in,” not “on,” as in ver. 20. Some 
would explain, “whichhe grasped asa garland,” 
i.e., “a crown of stars;”—the words of Jer. 
xxii. 24, suggest to others the idea of seven 
signet rings on the right hand. At all events 
we learn that Christ holds in His right hand 
His own, represented by the Seven Stars. 


and out of bis mouth proceeded a sharp two 
edged sword: The sword of Christ is desig- 
nated by a peculiar term in this Book,—see 
ch. ii. 12,16; vi. 8; xix. 15, 21 (poudaia, the 
heavy Thracian broadsword, found elsewhere 
in the N. T. only in Luke ii. 35). The 
shorter sword (udya:pa) occurs in ch. vi. 4; 
xiii. 10,14. For the image, see Isai. xi. 4; 
xlix. 2; Hos. vi. 5; 2 Thess. ii. 8; Heb. iv. 
12. This last text supports the reference to 
“the word of God.” The early writers saw 
in the “two edges,” the Law and the Gospel 
(Tertull., Mare. ili. 145 Augustin., Enarr. 
in Ps, cxlix. 6). Or the meaning may simply 
be that the words which Christ utters are of 
judgment and command,—ch. ii. 16; xix. 21, 


and his countenance [was] as the sun shineth 
in his strength.| ‘The construction is again 
broken. Not the Lord’s general appearance, 
but His “countenance,” His “face,” is meant ; 
—see John xi. 44. Diuisterd., however, ap- 
pealing to ch. x. 1; John vii. 24, and to the 
frequent use of pécw7ov in the Apocalypse 
to denote the countenance (e. g. ch. iv. 73 
ix. 7, &c.), takes dys here to mean “the ap- 
pearance,” the whole form, radiant as with 
the brightness of the sun. 

17. as one a So Moses (Ex. xxxili. 20); 
or Daniel (viii. 27). The state of prophetic 

:—see Dan. x. 7-19; Matt. xvii. 6, 73 

Acts x. 10; cf. Lee On Inspiration, p. 174, ete. 

And be laid bis right hand upon me,| See 
vv. il. The prep. with the accus.,—see 
on ver, 20. 

Saying,| Omit “ unto me,”—see wv. Il. 

Fear not; Lam the first, and the last,) These 
words explain ver. 8. The prerogative three 


v. 18—20.] 


18 J am he that liveth, and was 


dead ; and, behold, I am alive for hast seen, and the thin 


evermore, Amen; and have the keys 
of hell and of death. 


REVELATION, I. 


19 Write the things which thou 

which are,aad 

the things which shall be hereafter ; 
20 The mystery of the seven stars 





times claimed for Jehovah, Isai. xli. 4; xliv. 
6; xlviii. 12, is three times claimed in 
this Book for Christ:—here; ch. ii. 8; xxii. 
13. Some explain ‘frst in glory, /ast in humili- 
ation’ (Phil. ii. 6-8). Richard of St. Victor 
(quoted by Trench, p. 46) writes: “ Primus, 
quia Ego sum causa originis; novissimus, 
quia Ego judex et finis.” 


18. and he that liveth;] Or, and 
the Living one;] Le., ‘Who is possessed of 
absolute being’:—‘I live for ever,” Deut. 
Exxii, 4o: see 1 Tim. vi 16; cf. John i. 4; 
v. 26; xiv. 6,19. All hopes of immortality 
are but shadows, compared with the guaran- 
tee which this truth of Christ’s Life affords. 


and Iwas dead,| Gr. “I became dead,” 
gee on verse 9. 

alive for evermore,| Gr. “unto the ages 
ef the ages,”’—see onver. 6. Compare also 
wer. 5; ch. iv. 9, 10; x. 6; and also Acts ii. 
24; Rom. vi. 4. (Omit “ Amen,”—see vv. /l.). 

and I have the keys of death and of hell.] 
See vv. JJ. “Hell,” Gr. Hades, is in like 
manner combined with Death, inch. vi. 8; xx. 
13, 14. “Hades,” personified in ch. vi. 8; xx. 
14, is here conceived of as a city with walls 
and gates, of which Christ had already spoken, 
Matt. xvi. 18 ;—cf. Isai. xxxvill. 10. (See 
the application of the symbol “ey” in ch. ix. 
I, 23 XX. 1). 

In the natural order “death” precedes 
“ Hades” (Sheol), the gathering place of de- 
parted souls. “ Hell” (Gehenna, Matt. xviii. 9; 
James iii. 6) is “the lake of jire,” the final 
abode of the lost, spoken of in ch. xix. 20; 
XX. 10, 14,15. The “eps” are the symbol 
of authority,—see ch. iii. 7; ix. 1; xx. I. 
Christ used these “keys” when the peni- 
tent was admitted into Paradise——Luke 
xxiii. 43; and He asserted His power to 
use them, in John xi. 25, 43. Cf the Jewish 
tradition as to the “ four keys” (of which ‘the 
key of the sepulchre’ was one) which God 
entrusts neither to Angels nor Seraphim, 
but reserves in His own power:—see in 
Wetstein, on this verse, the Jerus. Targum 
on Gen. xxx. 22. 

Note that in ch. xx. 14; Luke xvi. 23, 
“ Hades” means the place of torment. 


19. Write therefore] See vv.//, In con- 
tinuation either of ver. 11, or of ver. 18—4.¢., 
“having seen this Vision.” (Note the occur- 
rence here, and in ch. ii. 5, 163 ili. 3, 19, 
of the word ovv,— a word characteristic of 
&t. John’s style: see Introd., § 7, IV., (¢). 


the things which thou sawest,| Namely, in 
vv. 12-16. 


and the things which are,] I.e.,as contrasted 
with those which are about to happen, the 
things present being described in ch. il.; iii. © 
Arethas, Bengel, Liicke, Disterd., Words, 
and others), Or, and what things they 
signify or represent, as explained in ver. 20 
(so Ewald, De Wette, Alford, and others) ; 
and in proof it is urged, (1) that the plural 
eiciv distinguishes this clause from that in 
which we find the singular wéAdeu; and (2) that 
eiciv must mean here what it means in ver. 
20. The plain reference, however, of pera 
tavra to a eiciv seems to decide in favous 
of the former sense. 


and the things which shall come te pass 
hereafter ;| I. e., in Vision,—e.g. ch. iv. &c. 
Sequence merely, not Divine appointment, is 
signified,—see on ver. 1. 

According to Bengel, Elliott, Bisping, and 
others, a threefold division of the Book is 
indicated in this verse:—(1) vv. 12-18; (2) 
ch. ii.; iii.; (3) ch. iv.—xxii Hengstenberg, 
connecting this verse with ver. 11, refers it 
altogether to the Seven Epistles of ch. ii.; iii., 
—the words “ which are” describing the real 
condition of the Churches,as contrasted with 
their outward appearance, e. g. ch. iii. 17; and 
the word “ Zereafter” telling the Churches 
of their Lord’s coming. The command to 
“write” is suspended at ch.x. 4. The come- 
mand is renewed at ch. xiv. 13; xix. 9; xxi. 5. 
The publication, as it were, is comman 
at ch. xxii.1o. See above on ver. 11. 


20. the mystery] Either governed by 
“ aurite,’ ver. 193 or placed, as it were, abso= 
lutely, stating the “spiritual riddle of which 
the solution follows in the latter half of the 
verse,’—so Trench, p. 50. Throughout the 
N. T. a “ mystery” denotes not an enigma, 
but what is secret,—a symbol before its mean- 
ing is explained,—that which lies beyond the 
reach of the natural understanding, and which 
God’s Spirit only can unfold: in a word, the 
direct antithesis to Revelation or Apocalypse. 
See Matt. xiii. 11; Rom. xi. 25; Eph. v. 32; 
Col. i. 26; Rev. x. 7; xvii. 5—where see 
the note. Reuss notes that the Seven Stars 
and the Seven Candlesticks are the only 
images in this description which are peculiar 
to the author, who, accordingly, after the 
manner of the ancient prophets, hi eke 
plains’ them:—cf. Jer. i. 11, &C.; mxiwg 


59 


508 


which thou sawest in my right hand, 
and the seven golden candlesticks. 
The seven stars are the angels of the 


REVELATION. L 


[v. 20, 


seven churches: and the seven can- 
dlesticks which thou sawest are the 
seven churches. 





Amos, vii.; viii. This 1s a questionable state- 
ment,—see Introd. § 10. 


of the seven stars which thou sawest in my 
right band,| Gr.,on. (Note that emi witha 
gen. will be indicated throughout by the word 

on;” with an accus. by “upon,”—see ver. 
17. With a dat., the context must decide: 
e.g. ch. iv. 9; vil. 10; ix. 14; xix. 4, 14; and 
gee on ver. 16, where the prep. is év). 


The seven stars are the angels of the seven 
eburches:| These “Angels” appear not 
merely at the head of each of the Churches (ch. 
ii; iii), but also as “Stars” in the right hand 
of the Redeemer :—cf. ver. 16; ch. ii. 1; iii. 1. 

By the “ Angels” here are to be understood 
the Bishops, in the modern sense of the title, 
of the Seven Churches,—the term ‘bishop’ 
(émioxoros, Acts xx. 28; Phil.i.1; 1 Tim. iii. 
2; Tit. i. 7) not being as yet restricted to 
the Successors of the Apostles. This title, 
“ Angel,” to denote a high spiritual function 
may have been suggested by Hag. i. 13; and 
Mal. ii. 7: (‘The priest’s lips should keep 
knowledge . . . for he is the messenger 

LXX. dyyedos) of the Lord of Hosts).” 

his symbol of the “Stars” is explained, 
as is that of the “Candlesticks” in the 
next clause, without an express applica- 
tion, which, however, is made in the fol- 
lowing chapters where the address to 
each Church is personal to its “Angel;” the 
bishop being regarded as persona ecclesia, by 
the Chief “Shepherd and Bishop of Souls” 
—1 Pet. ii. 25. Primasius notes that in ver. 
4 St. John addresses “the Seven Churches ; 
but, in ch. ii.; iii, “the Angels of the 
Churches,” taking “the person of the Church 
and of the Angel to be the same,” (“unam 
widelicet faciens Angeli Ecclesieque perso- 
nam.”—Comm. in loc., ap. Migne, Patrolog., 
vol. lxviii., p. 803). In the typical lan- 
guage of Scripture a “Star” is the symbol 
of highest dominion, Num. xxiv. 17; Isai. 
xiv. 12; Matt. ii. 2; and also of faithful or 
false teachers, Dan. xii. 3; Jude 13 (some 
refer, in this sense, to ch. vi. 13; Viil. 10; 
xii. 4): and so, as Ewald (in /oc.,s. 118) 
writes of the “ Angels” here, “ Es sind die 
Vorsteher der sieben Gemeinde ”—“ They are 
the presidents of the Seven Churches.” 
Dean Vaughan notes: “The Angel of 
the Church is its chief minister or pastor. 
The title is borrowed from the Jewish Syna- 
gogue, in which the angel or messenger of the 
assembly was the person who presided over 
and arranged the meetings for worship, 
charged, as it were, with the messages of 


the people to God . . . exercising also (it is 
said) something of discipline over its meme 
bers.”—Lectures on the Rev., 3rd ed. vol. i 
p. 20. It has also been suggested “that the 
Apostolical bishops may have been called 
‘ Angels’ as ministering the New Testament, 
with reference to the fact of the Law havin 
been received” “at the ministration 
Angels ”—Acts vii. 53; Gal. iii. 19; Heb. ii, 
2 (Walcott, in Blunt’s Annot. B. of Com. 
Prayer, p. 531). See Trench, p. 51, &c. 
Reviewing some of the interpretations 
which have been proposed,—the sense cannot 
be, (a), as Alford and Reuss argue, ‘the An 
who are guardians of the Churches:’ ‘If,’ it 
is said, ‘ single persons (Matt. xviii. 10; Acts 
xii. 15; cf. Dan. x. 21; xii. 1) have their 
Angels, why not Churches’? But,on sucha 
theory, how explain the language of ch. ii. 4, 5, 
14, 20; ili. 1,2, 15,17? If Angels in heaven ~ 
are meant, how account for the command 
to the Seer to “write” to such and such 
an “ Angel”? To argue that, because else= 
where in the Book “ Angel” is used in its 
strict sense, it must be so here, is to assert a 
principle which cannot be carried out:—our 
Lord is once styled Logos, the Word, in ch, 
xix. 13 ; elsewhere in the Apocalypse the term 
is used in its lower sense: —the noun @npioy, 
“the beast,” is employed once in its literal 
sense in ch. vi. 8; elsewhere it is used 
bolically. The interpretation thus supported 
by Alford was anciently held by Andreas and 
Arethas; and, with a modification, the same 
theory has been maintained, (4), in recent 
times, by De Wette, Liicke, Diisterd., Geb- 
hardt,—viz., that the“ Angels” of the Churches 
are the personified spirits of the Ch 
“die persénlich vorgestellten Geister der 
Gemeinden” (Gebhardt, Der Lehrbegr. der 
Apoc., S. 39), or the Churches theme 
selves ;—as we read of the “ Angels” of the 
various elements; of the winds, ch. vii. 13 
of fire, ch. xiv. 18; of the waters, ch. xvi 
5. To this entire theory Rothe (Die Ame 
fange der Christi. Kirche, s. 423) justly ob- 
jects that we should thus have a Star the 
symbol of an Angel, and an Angel the symbol 
of a Church, to which in the same context 
another symbol, that of the Candlestick, is 
attached,—a manifest confusion of symbols. 
(c) For Bishop Lightfoot’s explanation that 
the heavenly representatives of the Churches 
are meant,—‘ the celestial guardian, or only 
a personification, the idea or spirit of the 
Church,”—an explanation which combines 
more than one of these various shades of opie 
nic-.—see note F at the end of this chapter. 


v. 20.| 


Wor, (d), can we understand by the “ Angels” 
“the messengers” from the Churches to St. 
John, as in Phil. ii. 25; iv. 18; Col. iv. 12. 
One does not address a letter to such mes- 
sengers,—the letter is sent 2ythem. (e) Again, 
the notion of Brightman, revived by Hengst- 
enberg, that the “ Angel” is no one person, 
but “the collective presbytery,” — “das 
gesammte Kirchen-Regiment,”—is opposed 
to the distinct relations which the Seven 
Epistles set forth as subsisting between each 
Church and its “ Angel.” 

See the argument of Godet (quoted Introd. 
§ 4 P- 33) founded upon the use of the 


REVELATION. I. 


word Ange/ in chapters ii. and iii., for fixing 
the date of the Apocalypse. 


and the seven candlesticks are seven 
churches.] Omit which thou sawest,—see 
vv. ll. Verse 12 is now explained, -“ The 
candlestick or lampstand .. . . is not light, 
but it is the bearer of light, that which 
diffuses it, that which holds it forth and 
causes it to shine throughout the house; 
being the appointed instrument for this. It 
is thus with the Church.”—Trench, p. a9. 
Compare the Lord’s words in Matt. v. 14:— 
“ Ye are the light of the world.” 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Chap. I. 


Nore A ON VER. 1.—“ RATIONALISTIC” 
EXEGESIS. 


The rationalistic interpretation of the 
Apocalypse may be summed up as follows, 
after Professor Reuss of Strasbourg, one of 
the latest expositors of this school (L’ Apoca- 
&pse, Paris, 1878) :— 

(a) The design of the Book is to set forth 
the “revelation” of Christ in the objective 
sense ;—i.c., the extraordinary manifestation 
ef Christ’s future coming to His Kingdom, 
as the word droxdaAvyis is used in 1 Cor. 
i. 7; 2 Thess. i. 7; 1 Pet.i. 7,13. Accord- 
ingly, the ‘Apocalypse of John’ means the 
*Book of the re-appearance of Christ de- 
scribed by John.’ In it the Author brings 
together the various eschatological ideas which 
circulated, during his lifetime, in the Jewish 
and Judzo-Christian world; and to add 
aught to, or to take away aught from the 
popular conviction was held by him to be 
an act of sacrilege (ch. xxii. 18, 19). Far 
from containing new and marvellous dis- 
closures, the Apocalypse gives but a meagre 
outline of what the majority of its readers 
already knew and believed. The hopes and 
fears of the early Christians led them to ex- 
pect the immediate manifestation of Messiah ; 
and this expectation the Apostles everywhere 
encouraged (“nourissaient et caressaient”),— 
Matt. xxiv., xxv.; Acts i. 6; Heb. x. 25; 
Jamesv. 7-9; 1 Pet.iv. 7; 1 Johnii. 18. This 
current of ideas our Author describes with 
prophetic enthusiasm ; and he gains the ear of 
the masses by lending the charm of poetic 
allegory to frequent reminiscences borrowed 
from the supreme authority of Scripture. All 
his facts are strung on one chronological 
thread ; the principal facts of this continuous 
evolution being the purification of the Holy 
City, and the des:ruction of Rome (pp. 3-18). 


(4) Visions.—Onur fathers, writes Professor 
Reuss, have spoken of the “ Visions” of the 
Prophet of Patmos, as if he had ever been in 
the state of prophetic ecstasy. Of ecstatic 
Visions, we have, indeed, examples in the 
history of St. Paul; but our Author was a 
mere visionary, as many ardent men, at alf 
times, are visionaries. For him “ heaven had 
nothing to reveal which the other Apostles 
have not also known and believed: conse- 
quently ‘ Visions,’ in the theological sense, 
would be quite as superfluous as they would 
be poactobetaly incomprehensible” (p. 23). 

(c) Thetime of the End :—The entire dura- 
tion of the Roman Empire from the time when 
the Author wrote, down to the final catas- 
trophe, he himself fixes, after Daniel, at three 
years and a half (ch. xi. 2, 3; xii. 14). ‘“ This 
conclusion can only be evaded by substitutin: 
for the proper sense of the text a so-call 
spiritual interpretation, which is in truth 
quite arbitrary, and condemned beforehand 
by the Author himself, who at every instant 
repeats that he wishes to be understood 
literally—ch. i. 1, 3; ii. 5, 163 ili, 115 
xi. 145 xxii. 6, 7, Io, 12, 20, &c.” (pp. 25, 


36). 

(d) The Apocalypse is to be interpreted on 
the “Preterist” theory:—The Author has 
sharply defined the horizon which embraces 
the entire range of his prophetic vision, “ even 
designating by name [i.e., the name of Nero— 
see on ch. xiii. 18] the principal personages of 
the drama which he unfolds before our eyes.” 
This fact men persist in disbelieving :— 
forsaking the region of primitive Christian 
history, they seek for the meaning of the 
Book along the obscure vista of the future. 
And yet, the entire Apocalypse is no more 
than a “summary, as complete as it is lucid, 
of the hopes which animated the churches in 
the Apostolic age; and which gave them the 


599 


510 


REVELATION. I. 


strength to brave the world, and the courage 
to conquer it” (pp. 3, 4). 

(e) The date:—The date of the Apoca- 
lypse can be determined with greater exacti- 
tude than that of any other Book of the 
New Testament, and even absolutely fixed; 
although there is not a Roman Emperor, from 
Claudius to Hadrian, under whom expositors 
have not sought to place its composition :— 
“ The Apocalypse has been written under the 
reign of Galba; that is to say, in the interval 
between the two epochs when men might have 
known in Asia the death of Nero, which took 
ee June 9, 68, and that of Galba, who was 

illed January 16, 69” (p. 26). Many com- 
mentators, indeed, hold that the Book was 
composed under Domitian, “on account of 
the ancient legend which tells that the Apostle 
was exiled to Patmos by that Emperor; and 
above all, because they suppose that the Author 
may be thus spared the reproach of having 
been deceived in one of his principal predic- 
tions” [e.g. as to the preservation of the 
Temple of Jerusalem, assumed to be predicted 
in Rev. xi. 1]. “We acknowledge,” continues 
Professor Reuss, “that we are touched but in 
a moderate degree by this advantage; since, to 
speak the truth, we do not see that one single 
prediction of his has been realized” (p. 24). 
Indeed, “scarcely two years after the compo- 
sition of our Apocalypse there came to pass 
events ... which in a glaring manner falsified 
it. The three years and a half [Rev. xi. 2] 
had not passed away, and yet Jerusalem, in- 
stead of becoming the abode of the Saints, 
was no more than a heap of ruins; Rome 
was not destroyed by Antichrist ;” &c., &c. 
(p. 37). 


NoTE B ON VER. 4—“ Asia.” 


The phrase “ Asia Minor,”—first found in 
Orosius (i. 2), or "Acia 4} psxpd (Constant. 
Porphyr. De Prov. . 1. 1), was not used 
until the fourth century after Christ. The 
Roman Province “ Asia” properly embraced, 
mot all Asia Minor, but only its western 
divisions. For the Peninsula, which we now 
eall “Asia Minor” (otherwise Anatolia, 
Natolia,’Avarohn) there had previously been no 
proper name; and the region was styled 
‘Agia 7 evrds rov “Advos (Strab. xii., p. 5343 
Herod. i. 28); or 7 evrés tod Tavpou (Strab. 
6.); or ’Acia 7 idiws Kadovpévn (Strab. xii. 
P 577; Ptol. v. 2); or “ Asia propria,” or 

proprie dicta” (Plin. H. N. v. 27, 28); or 
absolutely “ Asia” (Cic. pro Flacco, 27; prolege 
Man. 6; Liv. xxvi. 24):—see Forbiger Handb, 
der alt. Geogr. B.ii.s.92. St. Irenzus uses the 
expression ev t7 kdrw ’Acia (Ep. ad Florin., 
ed. Ben. p. 399). Neubauer (Geogr. Talm. 

308) observes that “ Asia” (s’Dx, NYDY) 


E used by the Talmudists as vaguely as by 


Latin and Greek writers, since they speak of 
“Asia” sometimes as a city (Antioch or 
Laodicea), sometimes as a country. In the 
New Test. “ Asia ” and “ Cilicia” (Acts vi. 9) 
are both regarded as Roman Provinces im 
Asia Minor. 

“ Asia Minor under the Romans was die 
vided into districts, each comprising several 
towns and having its chief city, in which the 
Courts were held from time to time by the 
proconsul or legate of the province. Each of 
these political aggregates was styled in Latin 
conventus, in Greek diotknois .. .. At the 
head of the most important of these political 
dioceses, the ‘ Cibyratic convention’ or ‘ juris= 
diction,’ as it was called, comprising not less 
than twenty-five towns, stood Laodicea. Here 
in times past Cicero, as proconsul of Cilicia, 
had held his court. (See Ad Attic. v. 16, 21; 
vi.2)........ Inits metropolitan rank we 
see an explanation of the fact, that to’ Laodicea, 
as to the centre of a Christian diocese also, 
whence their letters would readily be circu- 
lated among the neighbouring brotherhoods, 
two Apostles address themselves in suc- 
cession, the one writing from his captivity in 
Rome (Col. iv. 16), the other from his exile 
at Patmos (Rev. iii. 14),”—Bishop Lightfoot, 
Epp. to the Col. and Philem., p. 8. After the 
year B.C. 49, the three cities, Laodicea, Hier= 
apolis, Colossz, with the rest of the Cibyratic 
union, seem to have been permanently at- 
tached to “Asia”: before that time they are 
bandied about between Asia and Cilicia :—see 
Bergmann, De Asia provincia, Berlin, 1846. 
Laodicea is assigned to “ Asia” in 
Corp. Inser. 6512, 6541, 6626: “ Asan Asiatic 
Church accordingly Laodicea is addressed in 
the Apocalyptic letter” (Ibid. p. 19). There 
appears, too, to have been a very intimate 
relation between the other Asiatic cities and 
Ephesus. Thusthe Concord of the Laodiceans 
and Ephestans, the Concord of the Hierapolitans 
and Ephesians, are repeatedly commemorated 
on medals struck for the purpose,—Eckhel, 
ill, pp, 155, 157, 165 (Idid. p. 31). 


Note C ON VER. ro—‘ THE LORD’sS 
Day.” 


The following are some instances of the 
early use of  xupiaxy nuépa to denote our 
Sunday, or ‘First day of the week’: St 
Barnabas thus refers to and defines the 
phrase :—dyonev rv jpépay tiv dyddnv els 
evppoovyny, ev 7 kat 6 Incods avéotn ek veKe 
pav (Epist., c. 15). Dionysius of Corinth :— 
THY Kuptakny dyiav nuépav Sinydyopev (ap. 
Euseb. H. E., iv. 23). St. Ignatius :—nxere 
caBBarifovres, dANa Kara Kuptaxny Conv Covres 
(ad. Magn.c.9). Tertullian:—“Die dominico 
jejunium nefas ducimus (De Corona, 3); and 
again :—“ Non dominicum diem, non 


REVELATION. I 


costem ” (De Idol. c. 14). Clemens Al. :— 
kupiakyy juépay mrovet . . . THY TOD Kupiov 
@vacracw Soédtwy (Strom. vii. 12). AS 
representing the interpretation of Rev. i. 10 
by later writers, we may take the words of 
Andreas: IIvevpari dyi@ yevopevos kKaToxos 
we. CY TH KUpLAKT Nuepa, Kav TOUT@ TLunGeion 
8a Thy avdoracw, x. TX. (in loc., . c., p. 8.) 

On the other hand, the reference of Wet- 
stein and of the “Futurists” to the Day of 
Judgment receives some support from the 
reference of Julius Africanus to the Ogdoad, 
or eighth millennium of the world: raya 
Te onpaiver TO moAvxpdvioy avrov dia THY 
trrepxoopuoy dySoada, Kupraxny nuepay (Chroni= 
con, 5, ap. Routh, ii. p. 240): cf. Irenzus, 
Adv. Her. v. 28 ; Victorinus, de Fabr. Mundi, 
ap. Cave, i. p.148. (Victorinus is speaking of 
Ps. vi., the title of which is ““ Upon the eighth,” 
trep tis dydons,— David pro die octavo 
Dominum rogat .. . . hic est enim revera 
futuri illius judicii dies octavus ”). 

The usual form in the New Test. for the 
first day of the week is 7 pia trav caSBarop, 
Luke xxiv. 1; John xx. 1, 19; Acts xx. 7; 
ef. 1 Cor. xvi. 2. The great “Day of the 
Lord,” is expressed by 7 juépa tov Kupiov, 
a Thess. ii. 2 ;—or 7 jepa Kupiov, 2 Pet. iit. 
10;—or “the Day of Christ,” juépa Xpiorov, 
Phil. ii. 16: never by 4 kvptaxy nuepa. The 
adjective occurs only here and in 1 Cor. xi. 
20 (Kupiakoy Bcimov>. 


Nore D ON VER. 11—“ PERGAMUM.” 


The form usual with Greek and Latin 
writers is the neuter, “Pergamum.” ‘Thus 
Forbiger (/. c., ii. 158) writes: “ Pergamum (16 
Iépyapov: Strab. xiii. 4, pp. 603, 619, 623 f.; 
Xen. Anab., vii, 8, 8, 23; Polyb. iv. 48, 2; 
v. 78, 6; Plin. v. 30, 33). I<pyapos bel 
Ptol. v. 2; noch j. Pergamo oder Bergama.” 


The Greek commentators use the feminine :, 


thus Arethas on Rev. ii. 15:—Opdvov S€ rov 
Sarava tiv Ilépyayov xadei (ap. Cramer, 
Catena, p. 208). “Instances of the feminine. 
y Ilepyapos (Ptolemy, i. 2), are excessively 
rare (see Lobeck, Phryz., p. 422); while the 
meuter, 7d Iépyayoy in Greek, and “ Perga- 
mum” in Latin, occurs innumerable times. ’— 
Trench, on ch. ii. 12, p. 113. 

Besides “ Pergamum ” in Asia Minor, we 
sead of “ Pergamos” which denoted a town 
im Crete, near Cydonia (Plin. iv. 12, 20),— 
gee Virg. 47. iii. 133; or a fortress in the 
Pieric hollow by which Xerxes passed (Herod 
Wii. 112) :—see Smith’s Dict. of Geogr. 


NOTE E ON VER. 15.—“ CHALCOLIBANOS.” 


XadkodiBavos, ov, 7 (Or—Bavoy, ov, 7rd), 
Suidas explains to be a kind of e/ectrum, a 
metal much prized by the ancients (7Aexrpoy, 


ie., GAAdTuTOv xpucioy peputypevoy VEAG ral 
AiGeia). Electrum is “a natural alloy of gold 
and silver in the proportion of two of gold to 
one of silver.’—Brande and Cox, Dict. of 
Science, in verb. 

The Vulgate translates here by aurichaleum 
Meas dala orei—, or orichalcum). ‘This word, 
ound in the New Test. only here and in ch. 
il. 18, seems to be taken from the oP nvn3 
of Ezek.i. 7 (A.V. “burnished brass”; LXX. 
e€actpdarrer), and of Dan.x.6 (LXX. yakos 
atihBov) : cf. Sown Ezek. i. 4,027 sh Ville 
(LXX. ij\exrpov). 

In the Critias of Plato (p. 114, E), among 
the productions of the island Atlantis, is men= 
tioned orichalcum,—ro viv dvopaCduevov povov, 
Tore O€ mA€ov GvdpaTos HY TO yevos eK yijs OpuT= 
TOpevoy GpELxadkov... TANY XpUTOV TYLwTATOP 
év Tois Tore dv. So too we read; “ Tibia non, 
ut nunc, orichalco vincta."—Hor., Ars Poet, 
202; and “Ipse dehinc auro squalentem alk 
boque orichalco”—Virg., neid. xii. 87 (cf 
Cic., De Off, iii. 23, 12). 

The rule as to compounds in Greek (and 
also in English, e.g. brass-mountain and moun. 
tain-brass) that the important word comes 
last, and the qualitative first, ought not (see 
Abp. Trench, 4.c., p. 36) to be urged against 
the suggestion, as old as Arethas,—a suge 
gestion older still, see below,—that the 
meaning depends on the word \iBavos; and 
that the meaning therefore is “ brass of Mount 
Lebanon” (so also Ebrard) :—“ Libanus pro 
quolibet monte,” says Wolf. Salmasius (fol- 
lowed by Hitzig and Ewald) reads yahkoxAle 
Bavos=“ brass of the furnace.” Alford suggests 
xadkoiBadiov = “a stream of melted brass.” 
Bochart (followed by Grotius, Vitrin 
Hengst., Trench, Words.) proposes “a hybrid 
formation” from yadkés, and }1? = albare, 
to make white, ie., “brass at a white heat.” 
Words. rather prefers the suggestion of 
Schwartz, viz. from eiBw liquo (as mavds 
from zre(Ow), with the sense, /iquid or moltens 
brass. Zillig thinks there may be an enigma 
here, founded on the meaning given by Suidas, 
nAdextpoy signifies a metal, and also signifies 
amber. Some take \iBavos to be frankincense 
(ch. xviii. 13; see Note B on ch. viii. 3), and 
we have (as xpva0c-mpacos, ypuco-Avbos) a 
sense, copper in ignition, like frankincense 
when red hot. So Ausonius (af. Salmas., 
ad Solin., p. 810):—6 XiBavos gy pla 
el0n Sévdpav, kal 6 pev appny dvondterar yad= 
KodiBavos, HAvoerdys Kal muppds your EavOds, 
Dusterdieck thinks that the word may have 
been a provincialism of Asia Minor. 

In his interpretation of the Arabic text of 
the (lost) commentary of St. Hippolytus (see 
Note A on ch. xii. 3), Ewald says that Hippo= 
lytus agrees with the Peschito,—“ Brass of 
Mount Lebanon ”—“ weil der Libanon das 
beste Erz getragen habe” (s. 5). 


5ur 


512 


NOTE F ON VER. 20.— THE ANGELS,” 
THE CHURCHES. 


OF 


The use of the word “ Angel” to signify 
the Bishop of a Church is not common; but 
the instances which are met with in early 
writers indicate that the title was clearly 
understood. St. Jerome thus comments on 
1 Tim. iil. 2: “ Oportet enim ote. Aut 
Ecclesiz princeps non erit, &c. . . . doctorem| 
Tam verbo quam exemplo.. quia Angelus 
Dei Omnipotentis est” [Mal. i. 7].—Opp., 
ed. Vallars. t. xi. p. 1047. The historian 
Socrates also, giving a catalogue of the Egyptian 
Solitaries, describes by this title Serapion, 
bishop of Thmuis (circ. A.D. 359): 6 Tis 
Quovirav “Ayyedos Sapariov.—Hist. Eccl. iv. 
23; St. Jerome styling Serapion “Thmueos 
Egypti urbis Episcopus.”—De Vir. Ill. c. 99. 
Cassiodorus (A.D. 500) notes on Rev. i. 20: 
“ Cum sit earum rerum innumera multitudo, 
septem ponuntur ad perfectionem scilicet 
indicandam: unde ‘Angels Ephesiorum, hoc 
est Episcopo, commonet scribendum.”—Com- 
en in Apoc., ed. Migne., t. Ixx. p. 1405. 

rimasius (A.D. 550) notes on the same verse: 
“Angeli Ecclesiarum hic intelligendi sunt 
rectores populi, qui singulis Ecclesiis presi- 
dentes, verbum vite cunctis annunciant.”—ed. 
Migne, t. Ixvili. p. 803. See Melito and 
Gregory Naz. already quoted, Introd., § 2; 
and the note on ch. ii. 13 

As stated above Andreas writes thus on 
Rev. i. 20: rovrwy dé € éxdory ayyehos pirag 
epéorixe : and - dorepas b€ rods 
"Ayyéhous Tous TeV exknovdy epdpous kahet 
2. as €& avrou TOU mriov THs Sixacootvns TO 

@s X@pTyoupevors . . €xdoty b€ ru” Ayyedos 
€miorarei Kat 6 Geodbyos Tpnyéptos mapabepevos 
émorocaro—ap. Cramer, hc., p. 199. 

This explanation, fanciful as it is, has been 
accepted in modern times by writers of repute. 
Thus Ltcke (s. 430), who criticizes the theory 
of Vitr., Beng., and others,—viz. that by the use 
of the term “ Angel” St. John meant to transfer 
to the Christian Church the technical expres- 
sion’ of the Jewish Synagogue may mby or 
“ Legatus Ecclesiz,”—and who observes that 
there is no proof that this expression, which 
most probably signifies simply “ precentor,” 
was in use in St. John’s day, and that such a 
title is unsuitable to the office which is here 
assigned to the “Angels” of the Churches ;— 
himself adopts the theory put forward by Sal- 
masius (De Episc., p. 182), by Gabler (De 
ay «; P. 14), and by De Wette (én /oc.), namely 

that St. John, who has elsewhere (ch. xiv. 18; 
avi. 5 ; cf. John v. 4) recognized Angelsas pre- 
siding over the elements, here follows the usage 
of Daniel (x. 13, 20; xii. 1) by recognizing 
Guardian Angels over "the Churches (“ welche 
den Gemeinden immanent vorstehen”). 

Bishop Lightfoot considers that the Stars, 
@8 opposed to “the earthly fires” of the 


REVELATION. I. 


Candlesticks, are the heavenly representatives 
of the Churches, “ the star shining steadily by 
its own inherent light. ” Were this a eacn 
“ Star” or “ Angel” must, surely, be equally 
faultless; and yet the "es Angels” of the 
churches of Smyrna (ch. ii. 9-11) and Phil- 
adelphia (ch iii. 8-11) alone of the Seven are 
spoken of without reproof. Again, he objects 
that the “ Angel” is “made responsible” for the 
Church “to a degree wholly unsuited to an 
human officer,”—£. to the Phil., p. 198. This 
is a matter of opinion; but the objection is 
scarcely reconcilable with the statement at the 
close of the Essay that “the Christian minister 
is the representative of man to God—of the 
congregation primarily ” (p. 265). 

The circumstances under which the Apos- 
tolic office was extended, and the government 
of the Church committed to the Episcopal 
Order, are no doubt obscure. And yet Ter- 
tullian writes expressly: “ Habemus Johannis 
alumnas Ecclesias; nam etsi Apycalypsin ejus 
Marcion respuit, ordo tamen Episcoporum ad 
originem recensitus in Johannem stabit aucto- 
rem.”—adv. Marc. iv. 5. Eusebius also (H. E. 
iii. 23) reports the saying of Clemens Al. to the 
effect that St. John, having on the death of 
the Tyrant removed (uerijA ev) from Patmos 
to Ephesus, amet TmapaxaAovpevos kal emi ra 
mrynordxwpa tev eOvav, dou pev émurKorrous 
KaTaoTno@v, dmou de Odas éexkAnoias dpudcay, 
Grou be KAnp@ 6 éva yé Twa xhypdcav TOY aad 


Tov mvevpatos onpatvonevav.—Quis Dives 
salvetur, C. 42. 

Bishop Lightfoot admits that “ this pores 
must have been brought about during 
last three decades of the first century ; and, 
consequently, during the life time of the 
latest surviving Apostle” (/. ¢., p.199). The 
Apocalypse here supplies the missing link ; 
and by the use of the word “ Angel” furnishes 
the term which marked the gradual change of 
name from “Apostle” to "Exicxoros OF 
“ Bishop,” as denoting the supreme Order in 
the Church. The title “Angel” or “ Mes- 
senger” is applied to men in Hagg. ery 
Mal. ii. 7; iii. 1; and its use here is character- 
istic of the symbolical language of this Book. 
Rothe (Die Anfange der christl. Kirche, t. 
427) quotes 3 John, 9, 10, where Diotrephes 
is described by St. John himself as ory 2 
position far higher than that of Presb 
the Apostle’s language being uninte igible 
did Diotrephes not fill an office of a very 
special character. That the “Angels of the 
Churches” mean Bishops in the strict sense 

—‘“monarchische Bischéfe”—is held by 
Bunsen (Ignatius, s. 85); while Rothe sees in 
them “an ideal anticipation of Bishops” (/c., 
8. 423);—the title “Ayyedos, he adds, is 
very significant, denoting not only the con- 
sciousness that the office was n , but 
also the conscious effort to realize it. The 


Apocalypse knows the idea of the Episcopate, 


REVELATION. I. 


got merely as relative to a single community, 
but as relative to the assemblage of single com- 
Munities, that is, to the Church. Consider 
ch. i. 16, 20; ii.1; iii. 1:—-what is meant by 
these texts but this, that the (ideal) per- 
sonages, in whom the single communities are 
each comprehended in a concrete unity, are 
again comprehended in one by Christ Him- 
self, Who is present and works in all as their 
common centre? And thus the full idea of 
the Episcopate was already formed out of the 
process of the collective Christian life ; not as 
a foreign institution, but as the realizing of an 
Ideal innate in the Christian consciousness 
itself (s. 425, ff.). 
The “ Apostolical Constitutions” supply 
information as to the tradition which had 
reached their writer. In Book VII. c. xlvi. 
ed. Cotel., t. i. p. 385) the names of “the 
ishops ordained” by the Apostles are given 
(mepi dé rav bq’ Huav xetporovnbevtay Emiokd- 
mov). Among these the writer mentions that 
St. John appointed John to succeed Timothy 
at Ephesus ;—at Smyrna, Ariston is the first 
Bishop, and after him Stratzas, son of Lois, 
who is succeeded by another Ariston ;—at 
Pergamum, Gaius ;—at Philadelphia, Deme- 
trius ;—at Laodicea, Archippus is named (see 
Col. iv. 17; Philem. 10). No other Apo- 
calyptic Church is mentioned ; but the names 
of “ John” (who is said to have succeeded 
Timothy) and of Ariston, or Aristion (see 
Introd. § 2, p. 3), are deserving of notice. 
The date of this seventh Book is, like the rest 
of the “ Constitutions,” uncertain ;—part of it, 
at least, belongs to the beginning of Cent. ili. : 
so Hilgenfeld (Nov. Test. extr. Can., fasc. iv. 
Pp. 93). Jacobson, in Herzog’s Real-Encyclop., 
fixes the date as the beginning of Cent. iv. 
Accepting “the tradition” as to the ap- 
pointment by St. John of Bishops at the head 
of the different churches, Neander (4g. Gesch. 
der Kirche, 3te Aufl. B. i. s. 104) will not 


allow that this Apostle intended to found the 
Episcopate; or, admitting that some exigency © 
of the time led St. John himself to ordaim 
Bishops (“das Institut der Bischéfe ... 
eingesetzt hatte”), Neander will not concede 
that this form of Church government was 
intended for all future time. By such arbie 
trary conclusions any Apostolical ordinance, 
proved to be such, might equally be set aside. 
An impartial writer like Godet observes: 
“Rothe, Thiersch, Neander himself, attribute 
to the influence exercised by St. John the 
stable constitution of the churches of Asia 
Minor during Cent. ii., the first traces of which 
we already find in the Apocalypse (‘ the aged 
of the Church’), and a little later in 
Epistles of Ignatius."—Comm. on St. Jobn’s 
Gospel, Engl. transl., vol. i. p. 60. 

We have here another illustration of the 
importance of fixing the date of the Apo= 
calypse. Bishop Lightfoot is in favour of the 
earlier date. Taking for granted that “ pro= 
bably not more than two or three years 
have elapsed from the date of the Pastoral 
Epistles” (A.D. 66 or 67) and the Book of 
Revelation ; and also that no distinct traces 
of Episcopal government had appeared in the 
former, Bishop Lightfoot holds it to bescarcely 
possible that the Episcopal organization could 
have been so mature, when the Apocal 
was written as the interpretation (here as 
sumed to be the true one) of the name 
“ Angel” must involve. The interval supposed 
“seems,” he thinks, “quite insufficient to 
account for so great a change in the adminis- 
tration of the Asiatic Churches ” (p. 198, &c.). 
(For a different conclusion see the argu- 
ment of Godet, quoted in the Introd., § 4, 
Pp. 33-) 

“T repeat my conviction,” concludes Arch 
bishop Trench, “that in these ‘ Angels’ we 
are to recognize the Bishops of the several 
Churches” (/.¢., p. 57). 


Cu. II.; [1].—Tue EpistLes TO THE SEVEN CHURCHES. 


What the parables of the Gospels are to in- 
dividual men, these Epistles are to the Church 
of all time. In this sense they may be regarded 
—and so the whole Book may be regarded— 
as prophetic; but yet not as foreshadowing, 
as many hold, different states of the Church 
down to the end of all things. Thus, Mede 
considers that we have here “ patterns and 
de of the several ages of the Catholic 

hurch from the beginning thereof unto the 
end of the world;” a picture, in short, of “a 
sevenfold temper and constitution of the whole 
Church according to the several ages thereof.” 
—Dise. lit. on Rev. iii. 19, p. 296. On the 
game principle, Vitringa regards Ephesus as 
fepresenting the Church from Pentecost, to 

New Test.—Vou. IV. 


the Decian persecution; Smyrna, from the 
Decian to that of Diocletian inclusive; 
Pergamum, from Constantine to Cent. viii. 
Thyatira, the Church’s mission—during the 
first half of the Middle Ages—to the end of 
Cent, xii., and the rise of the Waldenses; 
Sardis, thence to the Reformation; Philae 
delphia, the first Century of the Reformation 
period; and Laodicea as the type of the Re- 
formed communities in the subsequent times: 
—see note A at the end of chapter ii 

One cannot, however, overlook the his- 
torical character which is stamped on the 
Epistles throughout,—e. g. ch. ii. 6, 10, 13, 
15; iii. 4,9, 17,—and which distinctly points 
to a state of things actually before St. John’s 


KK 


518 


514 


mind as existing in his own day in the several 
Churches. The Apostle, of course, employs 
such facts as the foundation of his inspired 
teaching ; just as he employs the existence of 
the Seven Churches themselves,—or, through- 
out the Book, other historical facts (e. g. the 
Egyptian Plagues, see on ch. viii. 6),—or the 
details of Jewish worship,—or the different 
phenomena of nature. That such teaching 
is applicable for reproof or for encouragement 
throughout all future time, is firmly to be 
maintained; but that definite periods of the 
Church are here predicted, or that these 
Epistles refer severally to successive aspects 
of the Divine Kingdom, may well be doubted; 
and this will appear more fully as the expo- 
sition proceeds. This historical character, 
however, of the Seven Epistles, which are 
merely the introduction to the Book, is by no 
means to be ascribed to the rest of the 
Apocalypse, in the sense maintained by 
Preterists and Rationalists alike ;—see Introd. 
§ 12; and Note A, (d) on ch.i. 1. 

Ittameier, in his commentary (Nordlingen, 
1880), starts from this point,—namely, that 
these Seven Asiatic Communities are not 

es of successive ecclesiastical periods, but 
of different conditions or states of the whole 
Church (“ Kirchenzustinde”):—the Seven 
Epistles are not to be regarded as forming a 
section apart from the rest of the Book, but 
the rest of the Book, and the entire contents 
of the Revelation, are addressed to the Seven 
Churches; and merely expand and develop 
the warnings and the promises which are 
attached to each Epistle. 

The Seven Epistles are all constructed on 
the same model, and all rest on the same 
fundamental thought,—the Coming of the 
Lord, as announced at ch.i.7. Each Epistle 
consists :—(1) of an inscription containing the 
command to write to such or such a Church, 
uttered by Christ Himself Who there claims 
one or more of the titles drawn from the 
attributes already ascribed to Him (ch. i. 4— 
20), and preceded by the constant prophetic 
formula, ‘“ These things saith He” (cf. Amos 
i. 3, 6, 9, 11, 13; ii. 1, 4, 6) ;—(2) of the special 
import of the Epistle, introduced by the 
announcement, “I know” the condition of 
each; and followed by praise or censure, warn= 
ing of dangers present or future, together with 
words of encouragement, or consolation, or 
threatening (ch. ii. 2-6, 9-10, 13-16, 19-25; 
—(3) of a conclusion, 


fii. 1-4, 8-11, 15-20) ; 
consisting of two parts, (a) an appeal, “ He 


REVELATION. IL. 


that hath an ear,” &c., reminding each at th. 
same time that what is said to one Church, is 
said to all; and (4) a promise “To him that 
overcometh.” 

And yet with all this symmetry, the ele= 
ment of diversity is here. Thus, in the 
case of the last four, the order of (a) and 
(4) is inverted, thereby dividing the Seven 
Epistles into groups of three and four (viz. 
three churches in ch. ii. 1-17, and four 
churches in ch. ii. 18—iii. 22), as in the case of 
the Vials (see ch. xvi.):—for the Seals and 
Trumpets, see on ch. vi. 1; viii. 1. (Cf. the 
Seven parables of Matt. xiii.,.—the first four 
being connected by the words, “ Another 
parable put He forth unto them;” the last 
three by, “ Again the Kingdom of Heaven 
is like,” &c.). The form, too, borrowed from 
the symbolism of ch. i. 4-20, under which 
Christ appears as He addresses each Church, 
is different. The contents also are varied: 
—thus, for Smyrna and Philadelphia, there 
is praise ; for Sardis and Laodicea, reproof; 
for Ephesus, Pergamum, and Thyatira, praise 
and reproof intermingled. 

A division more ingenious than accurate, 
and which does not suit that division into 
consecutive groups of three and four, or four 
and three, which is adopted throughout the 
Apocalypse, has been given by Godet (Etudes 
Bibl., p. 294). He, too, divides the Seven 
Epistles into two groups,—but they are 
denoted by the odd numbers 1, 3, 5, 7, and 
by the even 2, 4, 6; the former numbers 
indicating “the different possible degrees 
of the dominion of sin over the Christian 
life in a Church;” and the latter “ the 
different degrees of the victory of the work 
of God over sin.” Thus the tone of ree 
proach is raised progressively from Ephesus, 
through Pergamum and Sardis, to Laodicea; 
while Smyrna, Thyatira, and Philadelphia are 
praised. This division is clearly inaccurate 
as regards Thyatira, the fourth Church. 
There is, indeed, one feature which cone 
nects the Churches of the odd numbers, viz. 
that “in these only the formula “ Repent” is 
introduced (ch. ii. 5, 16; iii. 3, 19), followed 
by a menace in case of obstinate hardening,” 
—“cette alternance de tableaux lumineux et 
sombres qui sera l’un des caractéres les plus 
frappants du livre entier.” And yet here, too, 
we can read in the case of Thyatira (ch 
ii, 21):—“ And I gave her [Jezebel] time that 
she should repent; and she is not willing @ 
repent of her fornication.” 


REVELATION. IJ 515 


¥ 1.) 
NTO tne angel of the church 
CHAPTER IL. of Ephesus write; These 

: teak te Goss atti ae the , things saith he that holdeth the seven 
Rag este rn eg Gade, sous in kis riche Vand’ who walketh 


Tite ant SEL oma me iuag nthe midst of the seven golden can- 
wanting in them. j dlesticks ; 





[Ver. 1 rd ev Edécw. Ver. 2 om. 2nd cov.—eneipagas t. héyovras Eavrovs az. [these words, 
got found in 1, Er. supplied, after the Vulg., gui se dicunt apostolos esse]. Ver. 3 txopovnp 
éx. x. ¢8aor.—om. 3rd xai (bef. S:a).—xal ob xexomiaxes.—om. kai ov xexunxas (added by Er, for 

rendering of the Vulg., e¢ nen defecisti, which is, however, the rendering of xai ov 
Kexorriaxas. In 1, the verse began with xai ¢Samticas. Er. afterwards learned from Stunica, and 
adopted, the correct reading, but did not remove xai ov xéxuyxas). Ver. 5 om.taye. Ver. 7 
€& 7 mapadeiow. Ver. 8 rs ev Sy. exxd. Ver. 9. om. Ta Epya Kai.—a)Xa wAovowos.—ex Ta 
Aey. Ver. 10 un.—{®, B read cai eere. A., P read xat Exqre].— Ver. 13 om. ra Epya cou xai.— 
om. ev ais [Er., by an error of transcription, reads €yais|—o mtordés wou. Ver. 14 om. év bef. 
+@ Badax. Ver. 15 om. rév.—suoies (for 6 wicd. P reads cpoiws 6 wod,—a reading suggested 
Bp. Wordsworth before P was collated). Ver.16 perav. otv. Ver. 17 om. payciv axd.—oider 

[6 006. Zyw ci wy 6 AapS., wanting in 1, Er. supplied after the Vulg., quod nemo scit nisi qué 
aceipit|. Ver. 19 7. dydnny, k.T. TioTLY, K.T- dtaxoy.—om. Kai bef.ra ax. Ver. 20 om. édtya.—ageis 
for cas).—17 éyouca.—xat didacxet kai wAava Tous. Ver. 21 iva peray., kai ov Gédet peravonoas 


€x THs wopy. avtjs. Ver. 22 Epyav auras. 
ra Baléa.— 8adXao.]. 


Ver. 24 Néye Trois ox. Tois—om. ai bef. otrives— 





THE EPISTLE TO EPHESUS. (1-7.) 


Cuap. II.—1. Unto the angel] The Bishop 
Officially represents his particular Church:— 
see on ch. i. 20, and Introd. § 4, p. 33. A 
few years later (A.D. 107, or A.D. 116) Igna- 
tius wrote to the Ephesians: “ We have re- 
ceived your abundance in the name of God 
by Onesimus, who is your Bishop in love 
unutterable.”— Ep. Izn., Cureton’s Recension, 
p- 13. 

of the church in] See vv. ii. In ver. 18 
the reading is the same. In the case of the 
other Epistles, we read as in ver. 8. 

Ephesus} Ephesus was the chief city of 
Tonia, on the Caystrus, near the sea, be- 
tween Smyrna and Miletus; the civil as well 
as the ecclesiastical centre of ‘Asia’ (see 
note B on ch. i. 4), of which, in the time of 
Strabo (xix. 1, 24), it was the most import- 
ant seat of commerce. It was styled by Pliny 
© Asiz lumen” (H. N. v. 29,31). Under the 
fee emperors Ephesus became the capi- 

of the entire province of ‘ Asia,’ (Hierocl., 
p. 658):—see Forbiger, /.c., ii. p. 189. Here 
St. Paul had laboured (Acts xix.; xx. 31), 
and ordained Timothy as its Bishop (1 Tim. i. 
3; 2 Tim. i. 6); the very Bishop, perhaps, to 
whom this first of the Seven Epistles was 
addressed—if we accept the statement that 
Timothy died as a martyr under Domitian 
or Nerva, which his youth at the close of St. 
Panl’s career renders not impossible (1 Tim. 
iv. 12; c&é Euseb. HL £. iii. 4; Theodoret. 
Comm. in Epp. ad Tim. ; Niceph. H. E. iii. II). 
By others the martyrdom of Timothy is 


placed under Nero (cf. Photius, Cod. 254). 
Dorotheus of Tyre (see on ver. 6), cire. A.D. 
300, states that Gaius (1 Cor. i. 14; Rom. 
Xvi. 23) was Bishop of Ephesus after Timothy 
the disciple of the Apostle Paul,—/. c. p. 126. 
Ephesus was the chief seat of St. John’s 
later ministry (Euseb. v. 20, 24; see Intro- 
duction, § 4); and from it, as centre, he 
exercised jurisdiction over the surrounding 
churches (3 John 9, 10). The chief church 
at Ephesus (once the seat of the celebrated 
temple of Diana, Acts xix. 27) was dedicated 
to the Apostle (see Procop. 4d. v. 1; Anna 
Comn., p. 319). This once famous city is 
now a mass of ruins; its “Candlestick” ig 
indeed removed (ver. 5). The sea, it is true, 
has not “as has been supposed, receded far, 
if at all, from the ancient seaboard;” but 
Ephesus ard the Turkish town at Ayasalouk 
have alike fallen into decay. “The cause of 
the decay is to be found in the malaria from 
the marshes near the river Cayster,”— Wood’s 
Epbesus, pp. 4, 14. 

write; These things saith be| On this 
opening, common to all the Epistles (see 
above), cf Isai. viii. 11; Ezek. iL 4, &e 
Christ is the speaker throughout. The sym- 
bols of ch. i. 13, 16, explained in ch. i. 20, are 
now combined. 

that boldeth the seven stars] The verb— 
cf. vv. 13, 25; ch. iii. r1—is more forcible 
than in ch. i. 16, and recalls the promise in 
John x. 28, while it is suggestive of the 
warnings of ver. 5 and ch. iii. 16. Even 
Sardis and Laodicea are still “ix bis right 
band,°—are not yet cast away. 


516 


2 I know thy works, and thy 
labour, and thy patience, and how 
thou canst not bear them which are 
evil: and thou hast tried them which 
say they are apostles, and are not, 
and hast found them liars : 


he that walketh| An addition to ch.i. 13: 
He now appears exercising His Divine 
action among the Churches,—in order, per- 
haps, that the lamps may burn pure and 
bright. The thought refers literally to Lev. 
xxiv. 2-4, and symbolically to Lev. xxvi. 12. 


in the midst of | As in ch. i. 13 :—Christ 
“in the midst of” all, renders the individual 
Churches one body,—namely, the Church 
Universal, of which He is the centre. See 
on ch, 1. 20, together with the argument of 
Kothe in note F on that verse. 


2. I know thy works,| Cf. the first prayer 
of the disciples, Acts i. 24 :—“ works” gener- 
ally, good or evil: see also vv. 9, 13,19; ch. 
iil 1,8, 15. 

In the personal address here, and in each 
Epistle, the rule is observed: “ Unam facit 
Angeli Ecclesieque personam,”—see on ch. i. 
20. 


and thy toil and patience,] (See vv. //.). 
The active and passive sides of the Christian 
life combined (Words., Alf.),—qualities so 
geedful in the idolatrous city of Diana: 
cf. ch. i. 93 xiv. 13. 

and that thou canst not bear] See on ver. 3. 


evil men,] The word used here, 
xaxos, refers rather to the essence and charac- 
ter, while movnpés refers to the acts or 
manifestation : movnpos is the concrete appear= 
ance of what is xaxds,—(Cremer, Worterd. d. 
N. Test., s. 465; Trench, N. T. Synon. p. 298); 
for both words cf. ch. xvi. 2; 1 Cor. v. 8. 


and didst try] ‘Make experiment of, as 
in ver. 10;—see 2 Cor. xiii. 5. The dif- 
ferent verb in 1 John iv. 1, means ¢o prove, 
to acquire a definite knowledge of. Christ 
proposes the test, Matt. vii. 16. 


them which oall themselves apostles, and 
they are not,|] (See vv. //.). These persons 
(see Acts xx. 28-30; 2 Cor. xi. 12-15) were 
most probably the Nicolaitans spoken of in 
ver. 6, and more particularly described in vv. 
14, 15; cf. the language of ver. 20. Pro- 
fessor Plumptre (see below on ver. 4) makes 
“ the false teachers ” to be Hymenzus, Alex- 
ander, and Philetus (1 Tim. i. 20; 2 Tim. 
i.17). This title “ apostles,” argues Reuss, 
is a proof that the Book was not written at 
the end of the century, as the Fathers held; 
for then, no one would have dared to usurp 
the name. 


REVELATION. IIL. 


[v. 3—4 


3 And hast borne, and hast pa- 
tience, and for my name’s sake hast 
laboured, and hast not fainted. 

4 Nevertheless I have somewhat 
against thee, because thou hast left 
tny first love. 


and didst find them false;] The adjec- 
tive is found only here, in ch. xxi. 8, and in 
Acts vi. 13. The false teachers, notes St. 
Hippolytus (Arabic text; see Note A on 
ch. xii. 3), were Jewish-Christians sent from 
Jerusalem, with whom St. Paul alse had to 
contend. 

The theory first started by Schwegler 
has now become a commonplace with Ger- 
man critics,—e. g. Volkmar (Zur Offend. 
Einleit. s. 25 ff.), and Keim (Jesu von 
Nazara, i. s. 160), and the same result is 
repeated by Renan (L’Antechrist, pp. 363- 
476; Saint Paul, pp. 303, 367)—viz. that 
the Apostle Paul and his teaching, as bein 
that of “Gentile Christianity,” is here, 
throughout the Apocalypse, assailed by St. 
John, the teacher of “ Jewish Christianity.” 
[Volkmar writes: ‘“ Direct verworfen wird 
Paulus erstens in den Briefen an die 7 Ge- 
meinden, cap. i-iii.,"=s. 28]. Neander justly 
censures this theory as being utterly destitute 
of proof;—see his Gesch. der Pflanz., Bohn’s 
transl., vol. ii. p. 161; and, below, note A. 
on ch. iii. 19. The notion, indeed, that the 
author of the Apocalypse, writing to the 
church of Ephesus, could apply the language 
of this verse to St. Paul, the founder of that 
church, carries with it its own refutation. 


3. and thou hast patience and didst 
bear for my name’s sake, and hast not 
grown weary.| The text which the A.V. 
represents is very corrupt,—see vv. //. This 
may be due to the perplexity of the scribes at 
the affinity of the verb, here rendered “to 
grow weary” (xo7ia), with the noun ren- 
dered “toil” (xdézos), in ver. 2; cf John 
iv. 6. As the verb “to bear” (Bacra{w), in 
its figurative sense (cf. John xvi. 12), is re= 
peated in this verse the meaning is “ There 
are things which thou canst not bear [as in 
ver. 2], and things which thou canst bear 
[as here]” (Trench, p. 76). “Thou toilest, 
but dost not feel the toil” (Words.). For the 
use of the verb in its literal sense “to carry,” 
see ch. xvii. 7; and cf. Luke x.4; John xii. 6. 


4, But I have [this] against thee,] Cf. 
the similar form, Matt. v. 23. 


that thou didst leave thy first love.) 
Here (see also ver. 20) the A. V. inserts “some 
what,” and thus mitigates the censure ; this, 
however, the Greek does not authorize, as it 
does in ver. 14. The words “ thy frst love 


v. 5—6.] 


5 Remember therefore from 
whence thou art fallen, and re- 
pent, and do the first works; or 
else I will come unto thee quickly, 








plainly convey the same meaning as “ the first 
works’ in ver. 5. This fact sets aside the 
interpretation of Hengst., Ebrard, Bisping, 
which would apply the words “ thy first love” 
not to the love of Christ, but to the exercise 
of brotherly love. St. Paul, it is said, noted 
the same failing at Ephesus (Eph. iv. 2; 
v. 2); and the falling away which is censured 
here, may have arisen from the zeal of different 
members of that church against the teachers 
of error, out of which grew mutual coldness 
and mistrust. This restriction, however, is 
not authorized by the context. 

The Church is here, for the first time in 
this Book, addressed as a Bride,—see Jer. 
ii)a)5ve\eh.-xix. 7..: In. ver., 19, Thyafira 
is commended for that in which Ephesus is’ 
here pronounced wanting. Neither in St. 
Paul’s Epistle to this Church, nor in his part- 
ing charge, Acts xx. 17, &c., is there any sign 
that its love for Christ had, as yet, grown cold, 
—although he warns them of dangers which 
were to “enter in” after his “departing,” 
Acts xx. 29,30. A generation at least must 
have passed away, and the thirty years from 
Nero to Domitian must have elapsed, ere the 
cbange here noted could come to pass. 
We may observe the analogous change in 
the condition of Israel, in the generation after 
Joshua :—see Josh. xxiv. 31; Judges ii. ro, 
11 (Trench, p. 78). Hence the bearing 
of this verse on the date of the Apocalypse :— 
see also Godet, as quoted Introd. § 4 b. 

Professor Plumptre, who places (/. c. p. 3) 
the date “shortly after the death of Nero 
(say circ. A.D. 68 or 69),” disputes (/. c., p. 68) 
this reasoning. The Church of Ephesus, he 
thinks, had its shortcomings in St. Paul’s 
time ; “the false apostles” (2 Cor. xi. 13), 
“who followed him with ceaseless hostility 
in Galatia, Corinth, Philippi, and Colossz, 
were hardly likely to leave Ephesus un- 
touched” (/.c., p.64) This, however, is mere 
conjecture. 


5. do the frst works ;| ‘As in the time of 
thy first love’ (ver. 4). 

or else I come unto thee,| On the omission 
of the word “ quickly,” see vv. /i.; and cf. 
ver. 16; ch. ili. 11. 


and I will move thy candlestick out of his 
place,| Cf. ch. vi. 14. Perhaps, the metaphor 
was suggested by the removal from the 
Temple of the Seven-branched Candlestick, 
which graced the triumph of the Roman 
conqueror, and is still visible as represented 
en the Arch of Titus at Rome. The same 


REVELATION. II. 


and will remove thy candlesiick 
out of his place, except tkou re- 
pent. 

6 But this thou hast, that thou 


transfer of a church’s privileges is expressed 
under other images, e. g. Matt. xxi. 41; Rom. 
xi. 17;—Christianity herein differing from 
Judaism, in that this transfer can take place 
only in the case of a particular Candlestick, 
(as, for instance, in the case of Ephesus itself, 
or of the church of North Africa—once the 
church of Augustine), and not of the Church 
Catholic: see Matt. xvi. 18; xxvili. 20. 


6. But this thou hast,) The Lord, in His 
Divine compassion, again (see ver. 2) brings 
forward some good thing which he had found 
in Ephesus. 


that thou hatest the works| Cf. 2John ro: 
“True Christian charity ‘amat errantes, odit 
errores.”” (Words.). 


of the Nicolaitans,| As noted in the re- 
marks introductory to this chapter, the 
Seven Epistles present a distinctly historical 
character ;—see, e. g. ver. 13. As with 
the names found elsewhere in this Book,— 
Egypt, Babylon, Sodom,—so here also Balaam, 
Balak, Jezebel, are historical names, although 
they may be applied mystically. Inreply, then, 
to the question, Who were the Nicolais 
tans? analogy itself suggests the answer :— 
‘An actual sect here denounced by St. John.’ 
Nor is historical proof wanting. Tertullian, 
Irenzus, Hippolytus, followed by Jerome, 
Augustine, and others, expressly state that a 
licentious sect of antinomian Gnostics did 
exist, whose founder was the Deacon Nicolas, 
Acts vi. 5:—see St. John’s own allusion to the 
Gnostics in ver. 24. Clemens Al. merely says 
that this sect misapplied the words of Nico- 
las—“ One must misuse the flesh ” (Strozz. ii. 
p. 162); and Dorotheus of Tyre states that 
Nicolas, “one of the Seven,” became bishop 
of Samaria, and apostatized from the faith 
along with Simon Magus (see the illustrae 
tions of the Paschal Chronicle, ap. Corp. 
Scriptt. Hist. Byzant., vol. xv. p. 122, 
Niebuhr). Eusebius (H. £. iii. 29) expressly 
tells us that the Nicolaitans were a sect 
who claimed the Deacon Nicolas as their 
founder; that they were censured by St. 
John in the Revelation; and that the sect 
disappeared in a very short time. Ewald too 
(Gesch. des V Isr., vii. Ss. 175) admits the 
possible existence of this Gnostic sect, even 
before the destruction of Jerusalem. This 
accordingly, would be the earliest instance 
under Christianity of a sect named after its 
founder. Ewald (/. ¢., s. 172) also quotes a 
further statement of St. Hippolytus, that 
Nicolas was the fore-unner of Hymenzus 


517 


REVELATION II. 


hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitanes, 
which I also hate. 

7 He that hath an ear, let him 
hear what the Spirit saith unto the 


and Philetus (2 Tim. ii. 17),—ap. T. Lagarde, 
Analecta Syr. p. 87, &c. As stated above, 
the historical existence of this sect is not op- 
posed to the mystical interpretation of which 
the key is given in ver. 14, where “the teach- 
ing of Balaam” points to “the teaching of the 
Nicolaitans” (ver. 15). The name Balaam, 
moreover,—which, in Hebrew, denotes “ he 
who vanquishes, or destroys the people,”— 
would thus be the equivalent of Nicolas, as a 
Greek compound, after St. John’s manner :— 
e. g- Apollyon = Abaddon, see on ch. ix. 11. 
Balaam, who resisted Moses, is the well- 
known Old Testament type of Antichrist. 
Thus the Targum of Jonathan, on Isai. xi. 4, 
explains that “ Messiah will slay drmillus, the 
wicked one;” where Armillus (= Eremolaos) 
the final Antichrist = Nicolas, or Balaam 
(note B at the end of this chapter). St. John 
himself (1 John ii. 18) tells us: “ Even now 
have there arisen many antichrists.” As a 
matter of fact, the tempters of the Church 
in the Apostolic age were those who, like 
Balaam (Numb. xxxi. 16), introduced the free- 
dom of the flesh,—Acts xv. 20; 2 Pet. ii. 15; 
Jude 11; and thus, irrespectively of the ety- 
mology of the names, the licentious Nicolai- 
tans may well be spoken of under the type of 
Balaam, ver. 14. Ziillig, in /oc., denies the 
existence of a sect of Nicolaitans; but he re- 
gards the identification of the persons here 
censured with the followers of Balaam, as 
certain,—* Nikolaiten= Bileamiten.” Arch- 
bishop Trench (p. 87), points out that in 
this verse we have not a mere repetition of 
the praise bestowed in ver. 2, which would 
identify the “evil men” of that verse 
with the Nicolaitans here,—but mention of 
a further merit which the Lord acknow- 
ledges in His Church at Ephesus. 

Renan (see on ver. 2) calmly notes on the 
Nicolaitans :—“ Les partisans de saint Paul ” 
(1. ¢., p. 363). 

7. He that hath an ear,| Cf. ch. xiii. 9 :— 
the wonted invitation, not found in St. John’s 
Gospel, to solemn attention; cf. Matt. xi. 15; 
Mark iv. 9; Luke viii. 8; &c. 

awhat the Spirit saith) Archbishop Trench 
notes (p. 168): “It is the Lord himself who 
speaks throughout ... That the Master is 
speaking and not the servant is remarkably 
attested in the fact of the numerous points of 
contact between these Seven Epistles and the 
words of Christ as recorded in the Gospels, 
in the three synoptic Gospels above all:”—see 
on ch. iii. 3, 5. The Revelation thus proceed- 


[ve 7 


churches; To him that overcometh 
will I give to eat of the tree of life, 
which is in the midst of the paradise 
of God. 


ing from Christ (ch. i. 1), the Spirit Who ine 
spired St. John (ch. i. 4) guides the words 
in which it is conveyed :—cf. ch. i. 10. 


unto the churches.| The plural, although 
but one church is addressed, indicates the 
universal character of the Seven Epistles in 
each of which this formula occurs,—see on 
ch.i. 11. Here also Christ declares: “ What 
I say unto you I say unto all,” Mark xiii. 37; 
cf. ver. 23. What follows is put absolutely. 
This appears from the last four Epistles, in 
each of which the ‘ promise’ comes before this 
formula: hence a full stop is required at the 
word “ Churches,” and so in vv. 11, 17. 


To him that overcometh,| The verb is used 
absolutely in this formula which is common to 
all these Epistles ; elsewhere it is absolute only 
in ch. xxi. 7 (cf. ch. xv. 2); and, in the case 
of Christ Himself, in ch. iii. 213 v. 5; Vi. 2. 
On the other hand, while the strife is 
proceeding the object of the verb is ex- 
pressed :—e. g. ch. xi. 7; xii. 11 ; xiii. 7; xvii. 
14; and so in John xvi. 33; 1 Johnii. 13, 14; 
iv. 43 v. 4, 5. This fact sets aside the ob- 
jection of Liicke (s. 677; see Introd. 
§ 7), that wxay is used differently in the 
Johannean writings, and in the Apocalypse. 
This word is characteristic of St. John. It 
occurs once in the Gospel, six times in the 
first epistle, sixteen times in the Apocalypse ; 
and elsewhere only in Luke xi. 22; Rom. 
iii. 4; xii. 21. 

to him wil] I give] The pronoun 
is repeated for emphasis ;—see ver. 17, and cf. 
ch. xx. 8; John xviii. 11. Christ through- 
out these Epistles (cf. ch. xxi. 6) ase 
sumes for Himself, without qualification, 
the distribution of rewards (Heb. xi. 6) in 
the kingdom of glory. Elsewhere, St. Paul 
writes, “the gift of God is eternal life” 
(Rom. vi. 23); here it is the gift of Christ 
(Trench, p. 91). 

to eat of the tree of life,) I.e. to “ live for 
ever,” see Gen. ii. 9; iil. 22 :—“ They that do 
things that please him shall receive the fruit 
of the tree of immortality ” (Ecclus. xix. 19), 
At this stage, the promise pauses at the 
pledge of immortality,—see on ver. 11. 
Note too the reference here, in “ the tree of 
life,” to the New Jerusalem, ch. xxii. 2. 


which is in the Paradise of God.| See 
vv. /l.; for the reading “my God” (B, Vulg.), 
cf. ch. iii. 2,12; John xx. 17. “ After the 
completed victory of Christ, the true and 
perfect Paradise can only be above” (Stiex, 


v. 8—9.] 


8 And unto the angel of the 
church in Smyrna write; These 
things saith the first and the last, 
which was dead, and is alive ; 

g I know thy works, and tribu- 


on Luke xxiii. 43) ;—“ The tree which dis- 
appeared with the disappearance of the 
earthly Paradise reappears with the appear- 
ance of the heavenly” (Trench, p. 91). 
The LXX. render by “ Paradise” the word 
“garden” where the “garden of Eden” is 
meant (e.g. Gen. ii. 8 ; ili. 1; Ezek. xxviii. 13) ; 
and sometimes the word “ garden” generally 
(e.g. Isai. i. 30; Jer. xxix. 5):—it is formed from 
Pardés,an Aryan rather than a Shemitic word. 
It is usually held to be Persian ; and the 
A.V. translates it by “orchard ” in Eccl. ii. 5; 
Cant. iv. 13; and by “forest” in Neh. ii. 8. 
Elsewhere in the New Testament we find 
the word “ Paradise” only in Luke xxiii. 43, 
denoting the invisible world in which the 
souls of the faithful await their full felicity ; 
and in 2 Cor. xii. 4, denoting “the third 
heaven” where is the presence of God. 

Archbishop Trench (p. 95) observes that 
the various promises in these Epistles “look 
on to, and perhaps first find their full ex- 
eral in, some later portion of the 

ook :”—Thus, deliverance from “ the second 
death” (ver. 11) points to ch. xx. 14; xxi. 8; 
—“the new name” (ver. 17) to ch. xiv. 1 ;— 
“authority over the nations” (ver. 26) to 
ch. xx. 4;—“‘the morning star” (ver. 28) to 
ch. xxii. 16 ;—“ the white garments” (ch. 
iii. 5) to ch. iv. 4; vii. 9, 13 ;—the name 
written in the Book of Life (ch. iii. 5) to 
ch. xiii. 8; xx.15; xxi. 27 ;—“‘the new Jerue 
salem” (ch. ill. 12) to ch. xxi. 2, 103 xxii. 14; 
—the sitting with Christ in His throne (ch. 
iii. 21) to ch.iv.4. The final promise (ch. ii. 
11) is in contrast to the doom announced in 
ch. xxi. 8 ;—above all, “the Tree of Life,” 
which we meet here at the opening of the 
Book, forms the crowning blessing at its 
close, ch. xxii. 2, 14, 19. 


1 HE EPISTLE TO SMYRNA (8-11) 


This is the shortest of the Epistles, as that 
to Thyatira is the longest. 

8. And unto the angel] According to 
Tertullian (De Prescr. 32), Polycarp was 
appointed Bishop of Smyrna by St. John 
(Irenzus, iii. 3, 4, says “by the Apostles”) ; 
and, as Ussher argues on the authority of 
Irenzus, was the “ Angel” referred to here, 
—see The Original of Bishops, Works, Elring= 
ton’s ed., vol. vii. p. 50. As stated in the 
Introduction (§ 2), M. Waddington proves 
that the baptism of Polvcarp (which most 
probably took place whe he was some vears 


REVELATION. II. 


lation, and poverty, but thou art 
rich, and J know the blasphemy of 
them which say they are Jews, and 
are not, but are the synagogue of 
Satan. 


old) is to be assigned to the year 69 (Mém. 
de PInstitut, t. xxvi. p. 235); and, as the 
date of the Apocalypse is to be assigned to 
the year 96 (see Introd. § 4), all chronoe 
logical difficulty is removed, and wv. 9, 10, 
repiesent an historical event as well as 
vv. 6, 13, 15. Dorotheus of Tyre (/.c., 
p. 124) states that Apelles (Rom. xvi. 10) 
was “Bishop of Smyrna before the holy 
Polycarp.” Among its Bishops the “ Apos- 
tolical Constitutions” give the name of 
Aristion,—see Introd., § 5, p. 38, note 4. 


of the church in Smyrna] See vv. Il. 

Smyrna was a populous city of Ionia 
to the north of Ephesus, at the head of 
the bay named after it, to the east of the 
mouth of the Hermes, and on the little 
stream Meles. Its excellent harbour rene 
dered it one of the most flourishing centres 
of commerce under the Romans. It boasted 
to be the birthplace of Homer, to whom a 
statue was erected in a building styled 7d 
“Opnpecov ; and there was also a Temple of 
Cybele (Strabo, xii. 3, 27; xiv. 1,37). Itis 
still the centre of the trade of the Levant. 
Polycarp was Bishop of Smyrna (see above), 
and suffered martyrdom there on Feb. 23, 
A.D. 155, under Antoninus Pius, eighty-six 
years, as he himself testified, after his baptism: 


the first and the last,| A title taken from 
ch. i. 17, and found again only in ch. xxii. 13. 


which was dead, and lived [again] ;] 
These words are taken from ch. i. 18. Gr. 
became dead:—for the idea conveyed by 
eyeveto, see on ch. i. 9. 


9. I know thy tribulation, and thy 
poverty] Thewords, “ works, and,” read in 
wv. 2,19; Ch. ili. 1, 8, 15, are omitted here 
and in verse 13 :—see vv. /. 


but thou art rich,| Ie., before Christ ;— 
cf. ch. ili. 17; Matt. vi. 20; 2 Cor. vi. 10 
Hengstenberg sees here a reference to the 
name “ Polycarpus, rich in fruits ;’ ne also 
sees an allusion to James ii. 5-7. 

and the blasphemy of them I. e., “ preceede 
ing from them :”—see vv. //. 


which say they are Jews, and they sre 
not,| As in ch. ili. 9,—“‘are not worthy to 
be so called” (Rom. ii. 18, 29; cf. John 
iv. 22; vill. 39). In this Book, by “ Jews” 
are denoted the people of God,—the true 
Israel: see on ch. xi. 2. The “Epistle of 
the Church of Smyrna,” giving the account 


519 


520 


10 Fear none of those things 
which thou shalt suffer: behold, 
the devil shall cast some of you 
into prison, that ye may be tried ; 


of the martyrdom of Polycarp (c. 12, 13, 
17), tells how the Jews joined the heathen 
in their persecution :—cf. Acts xiii. 50; xiv. 
2, 5, 19; Xvii. 5; xxvi. 2; 1 Thess. ii. 14, 15. 
This reference to Jews properly so called 
(some try to maintain that they were false 
Christians,) is confirmed by the words which 
follow :— 

but [are] a synagogue of Satan.| Cf. 
ch. iii. g; and see ch. xii. 9; John vill. 44; 
xiii. 27. The term “synagogue” is con- 
fined to the Jews (see Trench, Syn. of 
N. T.), except in James ii. 2; and thus, it 
represents here the Jewish antagonism to the 
Church. So, “the throne of Satan” (ver. 
13) denotes the 4eathen antagonism; “the 
depths of Satan” (ver. 24) denoting the 4ere- 
#tcal antagonism. Renan again notes here: 
“Les partisans de saint Paul ;’—cf. on vv. 
a,6. Seethe proof for the date of the Apoca- 
lypse founded on this verse, Introd. § 4. 

Smyrna and Philadelphia (ch. iii. 8) alone 
are not censured:—-Smyrna, alone of the 
Seven Churches, remains to this day. 


10, Fear not the things which thou art 
about to suffer:| Cf. Acts ix. 16; Matt. 
Xx. 16-31. Why this suffering is to be prized 
will be declared presently. 

the devil] Gr. Diabolos (cf. ch. xii. 9, 12; 
XX. 2, Io),—the rendering given in the LXX. 
(e.g. Job i. 6) of Satan, as the “ accuser” 
(ch. xii. 10); not daimonion, which signifies 
an evil spirit of inferior order (see ch. ix. 20; 
xvi. 14, Xviil. 2), and which is always used 
by St. John instead of daimon: e.g. John 
ee Vili. 48, 49, 52; X. 20, 21 (Introd. 
§ 7). 

is about to cast] That the Devil was 
the author of their sufferings is implied in the 
reference in ver.9 to Satan, who uses Jews 
and heathen as his instruments (John xiii. 
27;—cf. The Epistle of the Church of Smyrna, 
c. 3)- 

tgat ye may be tried;| Ie, by God’s 
gracious trials, James i. 2, 3; t Pet. i. 6, 7 
(Trench; Ewald). Others understand the 
temptations, just referred to, of the Devil as 
the agent (note the use of iva), and pointing 
to ch. iii. 10; Luke xxii. 31 (Dusterd., Alf.). 

and ye shall have| Or, according to the 
reading of some manuscripts, “and may 
have,” see vv. //.:—so Disterd., who refers 
to the limit which the Lord assigns to His 
gervants’ trials; Matt. xxiv. 22. 

tribulation ten days.) Or, Gr, a tribu- 


REVELATION. IL. 


{v. ta 


and ye shall have trilulatior ten 
days: be thou faithful unto death, 
and I will give thee a crown of 
life. 





lation of ten days.] The expositions 
are various :—(1) Ten literal days (Grotius, 
Bengel, Herder); or, perhaps, in a wide 
sense, the days during which the outbreak of 
the persecution under M. Aurelius lasted, in 
which Polycarp suffered, Euseb. iv. 15 (Stern, 
Words.) ;—(2) a very short period, see Gen. 
xxiv. 55; Num. xi. 19; 1 Sam. xxv. 38; Dan. 
i. 12 (Ewald, Trench, and the majority) ;— 
(3) avery long period, see Gen. xxxi. 41; Num 
xiv. 22; Job xix. 3 (Ribera, Cor. a Lapide), 
ten standing for a multitude, e. g. ten talents: 
Mr. White (Symbolical Numbers, p. 115) exe 
plains “to the very end:” cf, Deut. xxiii. 3, 
with Neh. xiii. 1;—(4) on “the Year-day” 
theory (see Ezek. iv. 6, and Introd. § rr), 
the ten years’ persecution, A.D. 81-91, under 
Domitian (Cluverus ap. Calov.); or under 
Decius and Valerian, A.D. 249-259 (Vitringa); 
or under Diocletian, A.D. 303-313 (Daubuz, 
Faber, Birks): see note C at the end of this 
chapter;—(5), the ¢en persecutions said to 
have occurred from Nero to Diocletian (Stier, 
Ebrard). Perhaps (2), with a reference to 
(1), suits best the numerical symbolism of 
the Apocalypse: “a day” denoting a com- 
paratively short division of time,—cf. ch 
xviii, 8; and see Introd. § 11 (b). 

Be thou faithful] Or “Shew thyself 
faithful” (yivov miorés—see Thue. v. 6), 
cf. John xx. 27. 

On the force of the singular “ thou,”— 
is, the “ Angel,”—see on verse 2. 


unto death,| I.e., not to thy life’s end, 
but, ‘ even to the endurance of death,’ ‘to the 
worst that the enemy can inflict,’ see ch. 
xii. 11; Matt. xxiv. 13;—the death of the 
body, distinguished from “the second death,” 
ver. 11: cf. Acts xxii. 4. How this fidelity is 
exhibited we learn from ch. xvii. 14. 


the crown of life.] The gen. of apposition, 
—life as a crown (De Wette),—the life 
over which death has no power: compare 
“thy crown,” ch. iii. rz. Only here, and in Jas, 
i. 12, does this expression “ the crown of life” 
occur: but we have the kindred expressions 
“the crown of righteousness,” 2 Tim. iv. 8; 
“ the crown of glory that fadeth not away,” 1 
Pet. v. 4,—the latter passage clearly expressing 
the sense, “the garland of victory,” a metaphor 
fully explained by such texts as 1 Cor. ix. 24, 
25; 2 Tim. ii. 5. Noemblem is more fre 
quent in the Bible; it was common to the 

ews ane to se nations. With the 

reeks the wreath or garland (crégavos 
af clive, larch ‘waakial ecaldens chaser 2 


v. 10.] 


the public games; with the Romans the vic- 
torious general received a garland or crown 
of laurel. Among the Jews also a similar 
usage prevailed :—the garland which was the 
emblem of joy (Ecclus. vi. 31 ; xv. 6; 3 Macc. 
vii. 16), was also the ornament at the solemn 
reception of a prince and leader (Jud. iii. 7), 
or in celebration of a victory (Jud. xv. 13); 
and, in a religious sense, the festive decoration 
of the temple (1 Macc. iv. 57):—cf. Acts xiv. 13. 
As with the Greeks and Romans, the Jews 
also used garlands at feasts (Isai. xxviii. 1, 4; 
Ezek. xxiii. 42); and at marriages (Cant. 
iii. 11). The garland or crown is the typical 
representation of an honourable decoration 
(Job xix. 9; Isai. Ixii. 3; cf. Phil. iv. 1; 1 
Thess. ii. 19). Hence the allusions to the 
Greek games which occur (see above), in 
a religious sense, in the New Testament as 
metaphors to describe the Christian course,— 
e.g., in Gal. ii. 2; Phil. iii. 14; here also, 
and inch. iii. 11; iv. 4,10. Forthe full sense, 
‘the conqueror’s crown,’ see ch. vi. 2. Stier 
sees in the symbolical name of the First 
Marty1—Stephanos = “a crown ”—a pro- 
phecy of the “ crown of life” which awaited 
him :—The Words of the Apostles, Engl. tr. 
p. 138. 

In his New Test. Synonyms (p. 76), Arch- 
bishop Trench sees here “ the emblem, not of 
royalty, but of highest joy and gladness 
(Ecclus. vi. 31), of glory and immortality.” 
Commenting, however, on this verse (p. 
to9), he explains the word “crown” as 
meaning “the diadem of royalty” (so also 
Zillig, 2. c., i. 310),—although a different 
word (6.adnua, diadem) is employed, in this 
signification, in ch. xii. 3; xiii. 1; xix. r2. 
The “golden crowns (orédavo:)” he adds, 
“of ch. iv. 4, 10, can only be royal crowns 
(cf. ch. v. 10).” And again “ orédavos is the 
word which all the Evangelists employ of 
the crown of thorns, evidently a caricature 
of royalty, which was planted on the Saviour’s 
brows” (see below). St. Paul, proceeds the 
Archbishop, freely drawing his imagery from 
the Greek games, can describe the victor’s gar- 
land as “a crown:”—his culture was Hellenic 
as well as Jewish; but not so the Christians 
of Palestine. To them these Greek games were 
not only strange, but “the objects of their 
deepest abhorrence” (Joseph. Antt. xv. 8, I- 
4)- Tertullian’s point of view (Scorp. 6) would 
very much have been theirs: “And then 
(he adds) to me at least, decisive on this 
point is the fact, that nowhere else in the 
Apocalypse is there found a single image 
drawn from the range of heathen antiquity. 
-... lhe palms in the handsof the redeemed 
who stand before the throne (ch. vii. 9), 
May seem an exception to the universality of 
this rule; but really are far from being so. 
It is quite true that the palm was for Greek 
and Roman a token of victory, but this ‘ palmi- 


REVELATION. IL 


ferous company’... do not stand before 
the throne as conquerors,—T ertullian’s expo- 
sition, ‘albati et palmis victorie insignes’ 
(Scorp. 12), being at fault,—but as those who 
keep the true Feast of Tabernacles, the Feast 
of Rest, of all the weary toil in the wilderness 
accomplished and ended. As such, and to 
mark them for what they are, they bear, 
according to the injunctions of the Old Tes- 
tament, the branches of palms in their hands 
(Lev. xxiii. 40),”—/. c.,p. 110. (Hengstenberg, 
on ch. vii. 9 adopts the same interpre- 
tation). : 

Two points, however, are to be noted with 
respect to this interpretation of the metaphor: 
—(1) It is not quite evident that the three 
Evangelists who mention “the crown of 
thorns” (Matt. xxvii. 29; Mark xv. 17; John 
xix. 2, 5) understood thereby “a caricature 
of royalty.” Their narratives, when examined, 
seem to indicate that the minds ofthe Roman 
soldiery were occupied by the charge that 
our Lord incited an insurrection against 
Cesar ; and that, in order to scoff at His 
pretensions, the soldiers crowned Him with 
a mock laurel wreath, like that worn by the 
Emperors (who did not wear a £ingly crown), 
and which is represented on their coins. The 
“thorns” of which the mock wreath was 
made, were the numerous and sharp thorns 
of a plant found in Palestine, the flexible 
twigs of which replaced the laurel:—see the 
note on Matt. xxvii. 29. (2) As tothe absence 
from the Apocalypse of images drawn from 
the range of heathen antiquity, one must 
recollect the use of the term, ‘pis, to-denote 
a “ rainbow,’—of which the only instances in 
the New Test. are in Rev. iv. 3; x. 1,— 
and which is, surely, an exception to the uni- 
versality of the rule: see also the instances 
which seem to be afforded by ver. 17, and ch. 
xiii. 16. In place of the mythological Iris 
the Septuagint has ro rdé£ov to denote “ the 
dow in the cloud” (Heb. n/p), Gen. ix. 13, 
14,16; Ezek. i. 28 ;—7d£ov being found in 
the New Testament only in Rev. vi. 2, and 
there signifying the implement of war. 

“The garland,” or “crown of victory,” 
then, seems to be the sense which must be 
adopted here. The “diadem,’ not the 
“crown,” was the ancient emblem of royalty ; 
and this distinction it is important to keep 
in view with reference to the interpretation 
of Rev. xiii. and Rev. xvii. On this distinc- 
tion see Note D, at the end of this chapter. 

The writer in Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, ari. 
Smyrna, would refer to the custom of pre- 
senting a crown to the priest at the end of 
his year of office; the title “ garland-wearer” 
(ctedavndopos),in this sense, occurring in the 
inscriptions of Smyrna:—see Boeckh, Corp. 
Inscr. Grec., vol. ii. p. 752, No. 3190, &e. 

Zeller has raised a question on the fact 
noted above,—viz., that the phrase, “the 


525 


522 


11 He that hath an ear, let him 
hear what the Spirit saith unto the 
churches; He that overcometh shall 
not be hurt of the second death. 

12 And to the angel of the church 
in Pergamos write; These things 


REVELATION. II. 


(v. 1r—rg 


saith he which hath the sharp sword 
with two edges ; 

13 I know thy works, and where 
thou dwellest, even where Satan’s 
seat is: and thou holdest fast my 
name, and hast not denied my faith, 





crown of life,” is found in the New Test. onl 

in this place, and in Jas. i. 12. He considers it 
to be a difficulty which expositors have not 
answered, ‘where is “the crown of life” 
spoken of in Jas. i. 12 promised?’ His 
conclusion is that Rev. il. 10, “and no 
other, is the passage which floats before 
the mind” of St. James. Forgetting that 
the idea of the Christian course, and of the 
prize resulting from it (1 Cor. ix. 24), is, as 
pointed out above, the idea which underlies 
the whole teaching of the New Testament, 
Zeller can find no other solution of “the diffi- 
culty” caused by the use of this phrase in 
the Epistle of St. James, than that the author 
wrote subsequently to the composition of 
the Apocalypse—which he saw and copied— 
most probably before the end of the first 
century. The author of the Apocalypse, 
Zeller “conjectures,” “first formed the idea 
of ‘the crown of life’ from ‘the crown’ of 
Zechariah (vi. 14, LXX.);—‘ the crown of 
life’ standing in expressive contrast to ‘ the 
truth unto death,’ thus presenting a thought 
similar to that in Matt. x. 39.”—Zeitschrift 
fiir wissenschaftl. Theologie, 1863, S. 93. 
Zeller concludes by adding that in the Epistle 
ascribed to St. James we have thus gained a 
valuable testimony to the Apocalypse, and 
one, too, of the highest antiquity (“wohl 
durch kein anderes von gleichem Alter zuer- 
setzendes ”). 


11. unto the churches.| A full stop is to be 
placed after “churches ;”—see on ver. 7. 


shall not be hurt} “in no wise” :—much 
more-than a mere negative,—see John vi. 37. 


of the second death.| A phrase found only in 
the Apocalypse :—it is defined to be “the Jake 
of fire,” inch. xx. 145 xxi. 8; cf.ch.i.18. Na- 
tural death is common to all men—the death 
of the body (ver. 10); the second death is that 
of body and soul. ‘This expression is not 
unusual] in the later Jewish theology: e.g. 
“_—improbos, qui moriuntur morte secunda 
et adjudicantur Gehenne,—TZarg. in Ps. 
xlix. 11, ap. Wetst.; see also Mede, Works, 
p. 572. “The death in life of the lost, 
as contrasted with the life in death of the 
saved” (Trench, p. 111). Note, that St. John, 
im ver. to and elsewhere, abstains from the 
use of the phrase, “the frst death,” which we 
might have looked for, in this context, as the 
antithesis to “the second death. See on ch 


xx. 5, 6; on which place Victorinus thus come 
ments: “The first resurrection is now,— 
the resurrection of souls by faith, which does 
not permit men to pass to the second death. 
Of this resurrection the Apostle (Col. iii. 1) 
writes: ‘If ye then de risen with Christ,’ 
&c.” (ap. Galland., iv. p. 63.) 

In verse 7 the promise pauses at immore 
tality,—“ the life that knows no ending.” Here, 
it rises to deliverance from the doom (Gee 
henna) foreshadowed in Matt. x. 28 (‘Vita 
damnatorum mors est,”—August,); cf. ch. xx. 
6. Hengst. notes onch.xx. 14: “ The first death 
has, as it were, two lands over which its ruleexe 
tends:—(1) One in time, before the separation 
of soul and body (Luke xv. 32; 1 Johniii.14), 
the state of those who allowsin to reign over 
them in this life. (2) The other death follows 
after the first ; and into it they fall who have 
not been softened by the judgment of the first 
death :”—see ch. xxi. 8. This thought of “ the 
second death,” or exclusion from eternal life, 
is peculiar to St. John,—see John xi. 25, 26: 
1 John v. 16, 17. 


THE EPISTLE TO PERGAMUM (12-17). 
12. And unto the angel] See on ver. 1. 


in Pergamum] On the form of this word 
see Note C, at the end of ch.i. Pergamum, in 
Mysia, on the Caicus, the most northerly of 
the Seven Churches, is styled by Pliny (H. N. 
v. 33) “by far the most illustrious city of 
Asia” (see Note B, at the end of ch. i.). 
Under the Byzantine emperors its prosperity 
declined when Ephesus became the capital 
of the newly-formed province of ‘ Asia 
Minor’:—see on ver. 1. It had been the 
chief seat of the kings of the family of 
Attalus, under whose dynasty it became a 
city of temples,— Zeus, Athene, Apollo, 
Dionysus, Aphrodite, being the objects 
of worship. Its principal cultus, however, 
was that of #sculapius, whose temple, of 
which the ruins still remain outside the city, 
was regarded as an “ asylum ” (Tac., Aza. ill, 
63). Here Galen the physician was born 
(0b. A.D. 200). Its famous library of 200,000 
volumes, founded by Eumenes II. (B.C. 197= 
159), was given by M. Antonius to Cleo- 
patra (Plut. Anton., 58), and was destroyed, 
with that at Alexandria, under the Caliph 
Omar. Parchment (charta pergamena) 
rives ¥ name from Pergamum (Plin. sii 
TI, 31 


v. 14.| 


even in those days wherein Antipas 
was my faithful martyr, who was slain 
among you, where Satan dwelleth. 


REVELATION. II. 


14 But I have a few things against 
thee, because thou hast there them | 


that hold the doctrine of *Balaam,;,"™ 





the sharp two-edged sword;] The attri- 
bute of Christ in ch. i. 16 is repeated, and 
is the basis of ver. 16 below. 


18. Iknow where thou dwellest,] The 
reading as in ver. 9:—omit “thy works, 
and,” see vv. Il. 

[even] where the throne of Satan is:] 
The notorious idolatry of Pergamum gives 
this description, repeated at the close of the 
verse, its historical foundation. The scu- 
lapius of Pergamum rivalled the fame of 
Diana at Ephesus, and of Apollo at Delphi. 
The chief reference, accordingly, is to the 
worship of #sculapius whose well-known 

bol was a serpent (see ch. xii. 9; xx. 2, 
and cf. 1 Cor. x. 20); “and who is so repre=- 
sented on the coins of Pergamum, and is called 
‘Pergameus Deus’ — Mariial.ix.17” (Words.). 
For this obvious sense others substitute simply 
a reference to ver. 10,—where the devil is 
represented as the author of persecution 
which, at Pergamum, was always intense 
(Euseb. iv. 15), and of which this verse sup- 
plies an instance. Burger insists on the fact 
that Pergamum was the seat of a supreme 
Court of Justice, from which the first sen- 
tences of the Roman magistracy against the 
followers of Christ proceeded ; and hence the 
expression “ the throne of Satan.” Of course 
this aspect of Satan’s work is included here. 
The A. V., by rendering, throughout the Apo- 
calypse, the Greek noun 6pévos by “ throne,” 
when it refers to our Lord (e. g. ch. ili. 21); 
but by “seat,” when it refers to Satan (as here ; 
ch. xiii. 2; and ch. xvi. to), or to the faithful 
(ch. iv. 4; xi. 16),—obliterates the two great 
ideas which pervade the whole New Testa- 
ment; viz.,“the hellish parody of the heavenly 
kingdom” by Satan; and the share of the 
faithful in Christ’s sovereignty: see Trench, 
On the Auth. Vers., p. 53. 


and thou holdest fast my name,| Cf. ver. 1; 
ch. iii. 11;—17.¢., still, at the present time. 
This fidelity was proved on a special occa- 
sion, as follows :— 


and didst not deny my faith,]| Cf. ch. xiv. 
12; the “mame,” as objective (John i. 12; 
Acts ix. 14), is parallel to the “faith,” as sub- 
Sective. 

even in the days of Antipas my wit- 
ness,.| Or “martyr,’—cf. Acts xxii. 20. 
Omit “ wherein,” see vv./]. Luther, follow- 
ing the error of Erasmus, translates “in 
seinen Tagen.” [A reads dyreimas,—and the 
Copt. renders “‘et in diebus prodidisti testem 
fidelem.”) 


my faithful one,j The text here is 
perplexing: in that which is adopted, Antipas 
is regarded as the gen. of an indeclinable 
proper name (so De Wette, Bleek, Alf.) with 
appositional nominatives as in ch. i. 5 (Ewald 
notes: “fiir ’Avrizas, ist ’Avtime herzu- 
stellen.”—s. 133). The alternative reading 
gives: “even in the days wherein [was] 
Antipas, my faithful witness” (so 
Words.). Ebrard takes the clause as an 
‘anacoluthon,’ and the sense to be: “ Where- 
in Antipas ...who was slain,”—the 
latter words having been changed into a rela- 
tive clause, owing to the addition of “my 
faithful witness.” Diisterd. considers that 
the Vulgate (“‘et in diebus [illis] Antipas testis 
meus fidelis, qui occisus est”) represents the 
true reading :—‘“‘and in [those] days [was] 
Antipas my faithful witness, who was 
slain” (“und in den Tagen [war] A. mein 
treuer Zeuge welcher, wu. s. w.”). Bengel, 
reading ais, supplies, “Even in the daysin 
wich A. did not deny my faith.” 

.vho was killed] Explanatory of “wit- 
ness,”—see ch. vi. 9; xx.4. Of Antipas (= 
Antipater, Joseph., Antz. xix. I-3) nothing his- 
torical isknown. Andreas (éz /oc.) tells us that 
“he had read” the account of his martyrdom 
at Pergamum; perhaps the account of the 
ancient martyrologies (see Meno/l. Gr. iii. 5) 
which state, on his day, April 11, that he was 
the predecessor of the “ Angel” or Bishop, 
and that he suffered under Domitian :—see 
Stern in /oc., who quotes to this effect Simeon 
Metaphrastes. Dollinger (T4e frst Age of the 
Church, Oxenham’s transl.,i., p. 168) observes 
that “there can be no mistake here as to 
Domitian and his persecution being meant.” 
This persecution is referred to by Dion 
Cassius (Ixvii. 15); and so severe were its 
cruelties that they were noticed by a heathen. 
writer of the period, Bruttius (see Euseb. 
Chron. ii., ad Olymp. 218; cf. Chron. Pasch, 
vol. i. p. 468, ed. Dindorf). Tertullian also 
names Antipas as a (“Item ad Per= 
gamenorum [angelum] de Antipa fidelissimo: 
martyre interfecto in habitatione Satanz.”— 
Scorpiace, Cc. 19). 

Aretius, followed by Hengst.and Stier, exe 
plains the name symbolically, as ‘the oppo- 
nent of all,’ ‘ Antikosmos;’ for Antipas = avr 
mavrev, just as Timothy = ‘Honour God.’ 
And thus, with Cocceius, Antipas is a mystic 
name under which Athanasius (viz., ‘ Athana= 
sius contra mundum’) and others of the 
orthodox are to be prophetically understood ; 
and Vitringa (p. 98) makes the mystic Perga- 
mum to be Alexandria, the see of Athanasins, 


523 


524 


who taught Balac to cast a stumbling- 
block before the children of Israel, to 
eat things sacrificed unto idols and 
Lo commit fornication. 

15 So has. thou also them that 
hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, 
which thing I hate. 


REVELATION. II. 


[v. 15—17. 


16 Repent ; or else I will come unto 
thee quickly, and will fight against 
them with the sword of my mouth. 

17 He that hath an ear, let him 
hear what the Spirit saith unto the 
churches; To him that overcometh 
will I give to eat of the hidden 





E. Schmidt notes, ‘‘ Antipas = ’Aytizaza.” 
But all this is to trifle with the sacred text. 

That a martyr Antipas suffered at Per- 
gamum, this verse renders certain: “Il n’est 
pas douteux qu'il n’y ait la~-dessous un martyr.” 
—Renan, /. c., p. 183. 


where Satan dwelleth.| Burger appeals to 
this repetition of the reference to Satan, after 
the mention of the martyrdom of Antipas, in 
confirmation of his explanation (see above) of 
the phrase “The throne of Satan. [The 
Arabic] Hippolytus, observes Ewald (see 
Note A on ch. xii. 3), understands by these 
words Jerusalem, “ because he could find no 
other as the faithful martyr who had fallen 
there except Christ. It follows therefore that 
the author did not know the reading Antipas ” 
(1. ¢,s. 6). 


14, But I have a few things] Few as com- 
pared with the things approved in ver. 13,—cf. 
ver. 4; not (as Luther, Hengst.) “a little 
matter.” 

thou bast there some that bold) Even 
“ there” where my nameis held fast, see ver. 
13. 

the doctrine of Balaam,| See on ver.6. The 
name Balaam had become typical of any who 
played the part of a prophet with regard to 
the heathen, and of a seducer with regard to 
Israel:—see Num. xxii. 5; xxv. I-9; XXxi. 16. 
The history of Balaam is held out as a con- 
stant warning in the New Testament:—1 Cor. 
x.8; 2 Pet. ii. 15; Jude 11. 


who taught Balak] See vv. /l.;—the dative 
here (the accus., as in ver. 20, is the regular 
construction) is a Hebrew idiom, as most 
writers hold :—cf. Winer, § 32. It is not a 
dativus commodi, meaning “for Balak,” “in 
the interests of Balak,” as Bengel and Hengst. 
argue. On the sin of Balaam, see Josephus, 
Anitt. iv. 6, 6. 


a stumbling block] “‘ Properly a trap, or more 
preceely, that part of the trap on which the 

it is laid, and the touching of which causes 
the trap to close upon its prey; then gene- 
rally any /oop or noose set in the path.”.— 
Trench, in /oc., p. 118. 

Sacrificed unto idols,| Cf. Acts xv. 29; xxi. 
95; 1 Cor. viii 1o-13 ;—a temptation (see 
Trench, p. 119) “ which addressed itself ex- 
clusively to the converts from heathenism,” 


in whose former existence sacrifice had bound 
itself up in almost every act of social life, 
And thus a searching test was supplied from 
the first of the Christian’s sincerity,—1 Cor. 
X. 20, 21, 


fornication.) A reference to the impure 
character of the heathen festivals :—cf. the re- 
ference to both sins, 1 Cor. x. 7, 8; Num. 
XXV. I, 2; and see on ch. xvii. 1. Renan (cf. 
on vv. 2, 6) discovers here a new allusion to 
the teaching of St. Paul, relying upon an 
assumed indifference on his part, as shown 
in t Cor. x. 23-27, to heathen usages, 
This notion is at once set aside by 1 Cor. 
viii. 9-13; x. 28-31. As Balaam was the 
forerunner of the “ False Prophet” (ch. xvi. 
13), SO was Jezebel (ver. 20) of the great 
Harlot (ch. xvii. 1). See on ver. 17. 


15. So bast thou also} ‘As Balak had Balaam 
for a false teacher, so hast thou also, &c.,—for 
the sins to which Balaam allured Israel were a 
type of the sins (ver. 14), to which the doc- 
trines of the Nicolaitans now seduce thee.’ 
Or, ‘So hast thou as well as the ancient 
Church of Israel.’ Or,‘ as well as the Church 
of Ephesus,’ ver. 6. Or, “So” (odras) is 
pleonastic, ‘Thou hast also,—see ch. iii. 5, 
16; ix. 17; John iv. 6; xiii. 25. 

some that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans] 
Viz. the sins to which Balaam had tem 
eating things offered to idols, and fornication. 
The sin of Pergamum, described in ver. 14, is 
here identified with “the teaching of the 
Nicolaitans ;’—see on ver. 6, and note B at 
the end of this chapter. As this sect had its 
parallel in the days of Balaam, so also (ver. 
20) it has a representative in the more recent 
case of Jezebel,—1 Kings xxi. 25, 26. Pro- 
fessor Plumptre denies the identity of the 
Balaamites and the Nicolaitans; although he 
admits that the latter “arrived at the same 
goal by a different path” (/.c., p. 121) :—vizy 
by an overstrained asceticism and scorning the 
body. 

in like manner.) The true text gives 
this sense, in place of the Authorized Version, 
“ which thing I hate,’—see vv. ll. 


16. Repent therefore; or else I come to 
thee quickly,| The insertion of “therefore” 
(odv,—see vv. //.) is important, as indicative 
of St. John’s style:—see Introd. §7. On 
the word “quickly,” see ch. iii 11; xxii y, 


v. 17.] 


manna, and will give him a white 
stone, and in the stone a new name 


REVELATION. IIL 


written, which no man knoweth 
saving he that receiveth it. 





12, 20; and cf. ver. 5. As noted on ch. i. 3, 
language specially referring to the Second 
Advent, is associated with a judgment about 
to fall on Pergamum :—see on ch. iii. 3. 


and I will make war against them with 
the sword of my mouth.| Cf. ver.12. Many 
see here a reference to the Angel’s sword, 
Num. xxii. 31; and to the sword by which 
Balaam was slain—Num. xxxi. 8; Josh. 
Kili. 22. It is surely more natural to refer 
to ch. i. 16, for the source of this metaphor. 


17. unto the churches.] A full stop isto be 
placed at “churches”; see on wv. 7, II. 


To him that overcometh,to him] For the 
construction, see on ver. 7. 


will I give of the hidden manna,| (Omit to 
eat,—see vv. il.) Cf. on ch. xi. 19; and also 
what we read of “the Ark of the Covenant ” in 
Heb. ix. 4. The heavenly food—“Angel’s food” 
(Ps. lxxviii. 25) given to Israel—is here op- 

to the idol-offerings of Pergamum : the 
idol-offering is to be spurned, and the prize 
is to be “ the hidden manna.” ‘In almost all 
these promises there is a peculiar adaptation 
of the promise to the self-denial by which 
it will have been won” (Trench, p. 126). 
The reference is plainly to Ex. xvi. 32-34 
(cf. Deut. viii. 3, LXX.), as well as to 
John vi. 32-35. 

The life eternal, it is true, begins on 
this side of the grave, where Christ is Him- 
self the true manna (John vi. 51), “the medi- 
cine of immortality ” (Ignat. ad Ephes. 20). 
This gift begins with “the new birth unto 
righteousness,”—with “the first resurrection” 
(see on ch. xx. 5); but there is yet a higher 
gift which it hath not entered into the heart 
of man to conceive,—the manna which is 
bidden ; and this, like that manna laid up in 
the holy place, the Lord reserves for those 
who “overcome.” Thus He says, John iv. 
32: “I have meat to eat which ye know not 

7” see also John xi. 25. 


and I will give him a white stone,| Gr. 
“pebble:”’—the word rendered “‘ stone” is 
found only in this verse, and in Acts xxvi. ro. 
“I gave my vote.” On the word “ qhite,” 
gee on ch.i. 14. 

Here; in vv. 26-28; and in ch. iii. 5, 
two distinct rewards are included in each 


Promise. Eas 

The interpretations given to the “ white 
stone” are various:—(1) The Jewish notion 
is alluded to, viz., ‘‘ Cadebant Israelitis una 
eum manna lapides pretiosi,’—Joma 8 (ap. 
Wetst.) ;—(2) “the white stone” was of old 
the mark of good fortune (Pers., Saz. ii. 1) ;— 


(3) by it the Greeks were wont to give sene 
tence of acquittal: so the earliest explanation, 
by Andreas; and so Victorinus, Erasm. Vit 
(cf. Ovid, Met. xv. 41) ;—(4) the victor at the 
games received a ticket (tessera, ijdos), 
which entitled him to food at the public exe 
pense; here to the heavenly feast, ch. iii. 20; 
xix. 9: so Arethas (ap. Cramer, p. 210), 
Hammond, &c. (cf. Plin. Ep. ad Traj. 119, 
120; Ziphilin. Epit. Dion. p. 228). To the 
same effect Ewald (who is followed by Pro- 
fessor Plumptre, / ¢., p. 128) refers to the 
mention of the heathen-feasts in ver. 14; 
and sees here the contrasted feast, represented 
by the manna, which is to be the reward 
of the faithful (cf. Matt. viii. 11 ; xxii. 10),— 
the manna being as yet reserved in the 
heavenly temple (ch. xi. 19; cf. Heb. ix. 4), 
and no longer onearth. To this heavenly 
feast the tessera hospitalis (Plautus, Penulus, 
v. I, 8), the “white stone,’ admits each 
worthy guest ;—(5) the last two senses come 
bined, signifying justification and election 
(De Wette, Stern, Words., Bisping): Bure 
ger, who excludes the justification which is 
promised on earth, restricts the meaning to 
acquittal at the Last Judgment, see Luke xxi. 
36;—-(6) it was an ancient custom to use 
pebbles on which to engrave various inscrip- 
tions ; and thus, without any further signifi- 
cance, the use here is simply to receive “the 
new name,” so Bengel, Hengst., Diisterd., Alf. ; 
—(7) Stier, M. Stuart, and Bisping explain 
this verse by referring to Ex. xxviii. 36, 37,— 
the “auhite stone” being here substituted for 
the High Priest’s golden frontlet with its 
inscription :—(8) Archbishop Trench, setting 
aside every allusion to heathen usages (see on 
ver. 10), accepts the solution of Zillig (i 
s. 405 ff; and so Ebrard, s. 178), premising 
that the mention of manna in the same clause 
points to Jewish history; while the priestl 

dignity of the victorious Christian (ch. i. 6 

also points to the prerogatives of the High 
Priest. Hence, the “cw4ite stone” (and \jdos 
in later Greek is used for a precious stone, the 
gem in a seal ring,) is a diamond; in fact is 
the mysterious Uri (Num. xxvii. 21), which 
was concealed in the High Priest’s “ breaste 
plate of judgment” (see the note on Ex 
xxviii. 15 ; cf. Lev. viii. 8). For this precious 
gem, the Urim, and to conceal it, the 
High Priest’s ‘‘ breastplate” existed, “quite 
as much as the Ark existed for the sake 
of the tables of the law.” Except the High 
Priest no one knew what was graven on 
it; and what can with greater probability 
have been graven on it than the Holy 
Tetragrammaton,—the ineffable name of God 


595 


§26 


18 And unto the angel of the 
church in Thyatira write; These 
things saith the Son of God, who 


REVELATICN. IL. 


|v. 18 


hath his eyes like unto a flame 
of fire, and his feet are like fine 


brass ; 





(717)? In Ex. xxviii. alone do we read of 
stones with names engraved on them: among 
these the diamond does not appear, for it is 
allowed that the word Jahalom (LXX. 
taomts), SO rendered in ver. 18, is not the 
diamond,—“as though this stone had been 
reserved for 2 higher honour and dignity 
still.” —/.c., p. 133. To this conclusion, how- 
ever, there exist two grave objections :— 

(a) The Hebrew noun (Shamir) translated 
“diamond” in Jer. xvii. 1, 1s translated “ada- 
mant” in Ezek. iii. 9; Zech. vii. 12 ;—and this 
is the name (adamas) by which our diamond 
(in low Latin, petra de adamante) was known 
to the ancients. Theophrastus, writes Mr. 
King (Nat. Hist. of Precious Stones, p. 39), 
“does not include the Adamas in his list of 
gems, and only once incidentally alludes to it 

19) as an incombustible substance. . . . The 
first indisputable mention of the Adamas as 
the true diamond ... is met with in Manilius 
(iv. 926,—‘ Sic Adamas punctum lapidis pre- 
tiosior auro’); and this poet flourished in the 
latter part of the Augustan age.” Pliny men- 
tions it as of the highest value among gems 
(xxxviii. 15); and clearly refers to the mention 
of the Adamas in Plato’s Timzus (59 B), as 
being “the germ of gold ;’—the connexion of 
the diamond with gold being an ancient belief, 
which is confirmed by modern discoveries. 
The diamond was thus known to be most 
precious in the age of St. John; and the chief 
difficulty in conceiving it to be referred to 
here, or in Exod. xxviii., is the mention of the 
engraving of a name upon it. The method 
of even cutting the diamond to a pattern was 
not known in Europe before A.D. 1475; Mr. 
King thinks it possible that the art of engrav- 
ing the diamond was discovered in 1564; but 
~ he suspects that Costanzi (circ. 1700) was the 
first who really engraved one (/.c., p. 99). 

(4) As Professor Plumptre observes, there 
is no allusion to the Urim and Thummim 
elsewhere in the New Testament ; where also 
Not Wj Pos, but AiOos (e.g. Luke xxi. 5 ; 1 Cor. 
iii. 12; Rev. iv. 3; xvii. 4; &c.) is used to 
denote “a precious stone” (p. 126). 

Perhaps the old interpretation of the tessera 
bospitalis, see (4) above, admitting to the 
heavenly feast (ch. iii. 20), is that which best 
suits the present passage. 


and upon the stone anew name written, 
which no one knoweth] Cf.1 John iii. 2; 
t Cor. xiii. 9. See vv. /I. 


save be that receiveth it.] I.e., receiveth 
the “aubite stone.” As “white” so also 
“ geey ” is one of the key-notes of the Apoc. 


“A truly Apocalyptic word” notes Bengel: 
—here, “a new name;” ch. iii. 12, “the zeep 
Jerusalem ;” ch. v. 9, “the mew song;” ch, 
xxi. 1, “‘a new heaven, and a meq earth?” 
ch. xxi. 5, “ Behold I make all things neq.” 
Here it is the “ ew name,’—some hold, of 
God, or of Christ (see ch. iii. 12, “ My new 
name”),—a revelation of glory, only in that 
higher state to be imparted to the redeemed, 
—Matt. xi. 27; cf. Rev. xiv. 1 (Trench, p. 
134). Itseems better, however, to say, in the 
language of symbolism, that we have here the 
symbol of a new and transfigured character 
(Plumptre). And to the same effect, the 
greater number (Bengel, De Wette, Ebrard, 
Disterd. Alf, &c.) understand the re- 
cipient’s own name,—a “ new name” reveal- 
ing his new relation to God (cf. Gen. xvii. 
5, 15; XxXxli. 28: see Isaiah Ixii. 2; Ixv. 
15; Rev. iii. 12; vii. 3; xiv. 1),—and exe 
cluding the reference to Christ. So Olse 
hausen (on Matt. xvi. 18) identifies St. Peter’s 
faith with his personality, “not with the old 
Simon, but with the new Peter:” cf. the new 
names, “ Cephas,” “ Boanerges.” Burger com- 
pares the giving a “‘ zeqw name” in baptism. 

Those over whom “the second death” 
(ver. rr) has no power, are now strengthened 
with heavenly food ;—they receive the token 
of their Divine calling, and bearing the “neq 
name ” are enrolled in the company of heaven. 

With this admission to the Divine Society 
the first group of Epistles closes. 


THE EPISTLE TO THYATIRA (18-29). 


The second group of four Epistles begins 
here. The Epistle to Thyatira is the longest 
of the Seven Epistles :—see on ver. 8. 


18. Thyatira] Thyatira, a Macedonian 
colony (Strabo, xiii. 4, 4, p. 625) called in 
old times Pelopia and Euhippia (Plin. v. 31), 
now dk Hisar (“the white castle”), was a 
town of Lydia, on the river Lycus, to the 
south-east of Pergamum, and north 
Sardis. In Acts xvi. 14 allusion is made to its 
famous guild of dyers, to which, doubtless, 
belonged St. Paul’s convert Lydia to whom 
this Church probably owed its origin. “A 
fane stood outside the walls, dedicated to 
Sambetha [see note E on ver. 20] the Sibyl 
who is sometimes called Chaldean, sometimes 
Jewish, sometimes Persian. . . . In Thyatira 
was a great amalgamation of races, .. . to- 
gether with a syncretism of different religions, 

.. If the Sibyl Sambetha was really a 
jewens lending her aid to [a syncretism of 

ifferent religions], and not discountenanced 


¥, 19—20.] 


19 I know thy works, and charity, 
and service, and faith, and thy pa- 
tience, and thy works; and the last 
to be more than the first. 





by the authorities of the Judzo-Christian 
Church,” the reference to “ Jezebel,” vv. 20- 
23, receives a Singular illustration if not ex- 
planation:—see Dean Blakesley, in Smith’s 
Dict. of the Bible, art. Thyatira. 

See also the note on ch. i. 11. 

saith the Son of God,| This title, frequent 
in St. John, occurs only here in the Revela- 
tion. It points to Ps. ii. 7;—as in vv. 26, 27 
the reference is to Ps. ii. 8,9. In ch.i. 13, 
the Lord had appeared as the “‘ Son of Man:” 
—cf. also His title in ch. xix. 13. 


who hath his eyes like a flame of fire,| For 
Christ’s attributes here see ch. i. 14, 15 :—cf., 
oo, the allusion at ver. 23 to this verse in 
the words “He which searcheth” &c.—the 
“eyes” searching every secret thought; and at 
ver. 27, where ‘the feet of brass’ trample to 
fragments everything impure. 


and his feet are like unto burnished 
brass;| See note E, on ch. i. 15. 


19. I know thy works, and thy love and 
faith and ministry and patience,| See 
wv. /l.:—Gr. “and the love and the faith 

. and the patience of thee.” 


and that thy last works [are] more 
than the first.| (See vv. //.). T.e., are more 
excellent than the first,—cf. Heb. xi. 4. 
This praise is to be contrasted with the cen- 
sure of Ephesus, ver. 5: cf. also Matt. xii. 
45; 2 Pet. ii. 20. On the constr. cf. ch. xi. 
3; and see Winer, § 53, 3. 


20. But I have [this] against thee, 
shat thou sufferest] See vv, Il.:—“that 
vhou leavest alone,” —“that thou 
hinderest not;” as the verb signifies in 
John xi. 48; xii. 7. 

the woman Jezebel,| The authorities for 
the reading, “thy wife” (which Words- 
worth and Alford favour), in place of “the 
woman” (see note F at the end of this 
chapter), are insufficient, although the read- 
ing is an ancient one. No historical foun- 
dation for such a reference is suggested ; and 
Alford merely observes that “ the conscience 
of the Thyatiran Church could not fail to 
apply the severe reproof to whatever influ- 
ence was being exerted in the direction here 
indicated;” and Words. notes: “ Doubtless 
a female false teacher.” Hengst. understands 
“heresy personified.” Ebrard and Bisping 
consider that false prophecy, fornication, and 
ldolatry, are symbolized by “the woman 
fezebel:” in these respects Thyatira sinned 
More than Pergamum which merely allowed 


REVELATION. II. 


20 Notwithstanding I have a few 
things against thee, because thou 


sufferest that woman ? Jezebel, which ?:Kim® 


calleth herself a prophetess, to teach 


the Nicolaitans, after the manner of Balaam, 
to seduce some; while Thyatira allowed the 
Nicolaitans a recognized position as a teaching 
and persecuting sect,—the position which 
Ahab allowed to Jezebel. This is an in- 
terpretation which may fairly be maintained. 
So also Trench, /. c., p. 139. 

Tertullian’s comment is: “An heretical 
woman, privily introduced into the Church, 
who had undertaken to teach what she had 
learned from the Nicolaitans.’—De Pudic. 19. 

Renan notes on “Jezebel:” “Some in- 
fluential woman of Thyatira, a disciple of St. 
Paul.”—/.c., p. 366; see on ver. 2. 

An historical foundation, however, for the 
reference here to a well-known female, a 
teacher of error, is suggested by Dean 
Blakesley on the evidence already given :— 
see on ver. 18. The evidence for this fact 
as stated above,—that there was at Thyatira 
a temple of the Chaldean or Hebrew Sibyl, 
who was known as Sambetha, and who is 
here referred to under the name Jezebel,— 
is very strong, and seems to clear up the 
meaning of this passage :—see note E at the 
end of this chapter. The existence of a 
Sibylline prophetess at Thyatira, in the age 
of St. John, would thus be in conformity 
with historical facts; and, this being ad-= 
mitted, Jezebel would be the symbolical 
name given to this woman. Jezebel’s hatred 
to God’s prophets, and devotion to the pro- 
phets of Baal, is recorded in 1 Kings xvi. 31- 
33; Xvlil. 4, 13,19. After Balaam (see ver. 
14), she is the chief representative, in Old 
Testament times, of heathenish seductions. 

which calleth herself a prophetess;| See 
vv. /l.:—the construction is a case of irre- 
gular appositional nominative, as in ver. 13; 
or, as Winer (§ 59, 11) explains, the words 
contain a mixture of two constructions :—he 
renders, “who, giving herself out for a 
prophetess, teacheth and seduceth;” cf. 
ch. vii.9. Jezebel was probably herself a 
prophetess of Baal, 1 Kings xvi. 31-33; xxi 
25. (Cf. the case of the damsel “having a 
spirit of divination” (ivéwvos), Acts xvi. 16: 
-—see also Acts xxi. 9; 1 Cor. xi. 5. 

and she teacheth and seduceth my 
servants| (See vv. /l.). The faithful_—see 
ch. vii. 3; xxii. 3. The public teaching of 
women is also condemned by St. Paul, 1 Cor. 
xiv. 34. 

Haupt on 1 John i. 8 (/.c., p. 44) notes 
that the verb to seduce (m\avay) is found 
oftener in the Apoc. than elsewhere m the 
N. T. It never denotes mere error as suck g 


527 


528 


and to seduce my servants to commit 
fornication, and to eat things sacri- 
ficed unto idols. 

21 And I gave her space to repent 
of her fornication ; and she repented 
not. 

22 Behold, I will cast her into a 
bed, and them that commit adultery 
with her into great tribulation, except 
they repent of their deeds. 


but always, as here, fundamental departure 
from the truth. 

fornication,| The sin also of Pergamum, 
ver. 14. For Jezebel’s impurities, see 2 
Kings ix. 22, 30; cf Jer. iv. 30:—cf. “be 
that worketh abomination” ch. xxi. 27. 

things sacrificed unto idols.] ‘This is the sin 
condemned bySt. Paul, 1 Cor. viii. 10 ; x. 7-11. 


21. and I gave her time] “Time” is 
not given to Pergamum, ver. 16. The word 
here used (ypdvos) “is time simply contem- 
plated as such; the succession of moments 
(Matt. xxv. 19; Heb. iv. 7).”—Trench, Syzon. 
of New Testament. See on ch. i. 3; x. 6 


that she should repent; and she is 
not willing to repent of her fornica- 
tion.] (See vv. //.). The verb“ to repent” 
is used here both absolutely as usual, and with 
the preposition ¢x (as in ver. 22; ch. ix. 20, 
a1; xvi. 11). Besides this use of the prep. 
€x, awo is used once, Acts vill. 22; and ei 
once, 2 Cor. xii. 21. On the construction 
here (with wa) cf. ch. viii, 3; ix. 5; xii. 14; 
xix. 8; John xvii. 4; 1 _John iii. 1, &e. :— 
(with the infin.) cf. ch. iii, 21; vil. 23 xiii. 7, 
14; Xvi. 8; xvil. 17; Johni. 12; ke. 


22. Behold,I cast her] The verb of it- 
self includes a reference to a bed of sickness, 
—see Matt. viii. 6, 14: “There where she has 
sinned shall she also be punished.” (Trench, 
p. 141.) 

into a bed,| On the word rendered “ bed” 
(kAim, Heb. YY, or 25WD, or MDD),—see 
the note on Ps. xli. 3, where the wordsdenote 
an entire change from sickness to health. 
Here the contrary is the case ;—cf. 2 Kings 
L 4. 

and them that commit adultery] The verb 
is changed ; that which is used here (poryeva, 
not wopvevw) embracing both the sins specified 
in ver. 20,—it is the term applied to idola- 
trous and rebellious Israel (Jer. ili. 9; Ezek. 
KVL. 32; xxiii. 37). We are to note also that 
the sin is of those who “commit adultery 
with her,” and that the idea of “adultery” is 
applied to the ~treged para only indirectly 
—eee on ch. 


REVELATION. IL. 


[v. 21—a4. 


23 And I will kill her children 
with death; and all the churches 
shall know that ‘I am he whiche 
searcheth the reins and hearts: and %> 
I will give unto every one cf you 
according to your works. 

24 But unto you I say, and unto 
the rest in Thyatira, as many as have 
not this doctrine, and which have 
not known the depths of Satan, s 


they repent of her works.] See vv. /l.:— 
“ they,” i.e., Christ’s “ servants” (ver. 20), led 
astray by her seductions; as distinct from “der 
children,” ver. 23. Archbishop Trench, howe 
ever, understands the chief abettors of her 
wickedness; “er children” being the less 
forward partakers in her sin. 


23. ber children) Her large adherents ; 
cf. John viii. 44; and see Isai. lvii. 3. That 
the history of Jezebel is used p Lanier in this 
passage, may be confirmed bearing in 
mind the slaughter of the sons of Ahab [and 
Jezebel], as told in 2 Kings x. 7. And thus 
the sect of the Nicolaitans is described (1) 
as Jezebel ; (2) as those “that commit adul- 
tery with her ;’—i.e., who allow themselves 
to be seduced by her; (3) as “her children,” 
who perpetuate her immoral practices 
(Ebrard) :—see on ver. 20. 


with death;| <A general threat of signal 
doom. Hengst. refers to the death of the 
adulteress, Lev. xx. 10; Ezek. xvi. 40: 
Bengel, Ewald, &c. to pestilence, cf ch. vi. 85 
xviii. 8—“ pestilence” (495, Ezek. xxxiii. 27 
being generally rendered “death” (@avaros 
by the LXX.: see the note on Job xxvit. 5. 
Others refer to the punishment 
1 Kings xviii. 40; 2 Kings x. 6, 7, 25. 


and all the churches| See on ch. i. 11; it. 7: 
—the Church Catholic consisting of its dife 
ferent local churches. 


unto each one of you according to your 
works.| The Lord’s own rule of judgment, 
Matt. xvi. 27; cf. Matt. vii. 16-20. 


24. But unto you I say, loves unto the 
rest that are in Thyatira,) Seevv.il. The 
particular address to this church is resumed 
with reference to ver. 20, and to the fact 
of its freedom from idolatry,—a fact which 
Jewish history (1 Kings xix. 18) illustrates. 

this doctrine,| Viz. that of Jezebel. 


they which have not known the depths of 
Satan, as they say;] Or the deep cine 
See vv. /i.,—omit and. The adjective is to 
read here, the substantive in 1 Cor. ii. 10; 
—cf. vv. 9, 13. The antinomian Gnostics 


a 


v. 25—26. ] 


they speak; I will put upon you 
none other burden. 

25 But that which ye have already 
hold fast till I come. 


known even in St. John’s day as Nicolaitans 
(see on ver. 6), are identified, in vv. 14, 1 5, 
with those who hold “the doctrine of Balaam.” 
The Lord, using their own technical phrase, 
“the depths,’ here denounces their so-called 
dnowledge (Gnosis,—“the knowledge which 
is falsely so-called,” 1 Tim. vi. 20) as “the 
depths ve Satan” [“ Altum est aiunt,” writes 
Tertullian of them (Adv. Val. 1); “ pro- 
funda Bythi,” writes Irenzus (ii. 22, 1)]. St. 
Hippolytus states that the Ophites (¢. ¢., the 
Naasseni—vaas Sé 6 ddis xadeirar) were me 
first who called themselves Gnostics, “ sayi 
that they alone know the depths” (ra Bien 
yivackev).— Rewut. omn. Her., v. 6, p. 132, 
ed. Dunker. For the Christian this expres- 
sion presented a fearful contrast to “the deep 
things of God,” of which St. Paul writes 
1 Cor. ii. 10. Archbishop Trench (p. 145) 
agrees with Hengstenberg in thinking that 
the Gnostics themselves talked of “the depths 
of Satan,” which it was expedient for them 
to fathom; and so Burger:—see also Baur, 
Das Chr. der drei ersten Jabrh. s.192. On 
the other hand, Ebrard, Stern, Bisping, and 
others, make the subject of the verb “ say,” 
to be “the rest that are in Thyatira” (see 
above), who thus express their abhorrence by 
designating Gnostic doctrine as “the depths 
of Satan.” 

However we may explain this, the em- 
phasis lies on the word “ depths. menereL Is; 
first, the “synagogue of Satan” in Smyrna 
(ver. 9); secondly, “the throne of Satan” 
in Pergamum (ver. 13); thirdly, here, the 
anti-Christian perversion which had arisen 
from these“ deep things,” or “depths,” as a 

e and a power. 


I cast upon you none other burden.| See 
wv. ij. Theellipsis is supplied by Acts xv. 28, 
29, where this very word “burden” occurs in 
the same sense of abstinence from idol-meats 
and fornication. On this use of the word 
“ burden” (Bapos), see Matt. xi. 30; where, 
however, a different noun Giepeee) 1 is used 
in the Greek (Trench, p. 146). Stier and 
Ebrard explain—‘none other than to re- 
gist Jezebel’s seductions and oppression.’ De 
Wette and Bisping understand the “ burden” 
of suffering implied in their “ patience” 
(ver. 19). Ebrard compares the Old Testa- 
ment use of the word “ burden” (Heb. SW) 
in prophecies announcing heavy calamities 

jab. i 1; Hab. i. 1);—a meaning which 

uld not be left out of sight here. 


95. Howbeit] The word rendered “how- 
New Test. —Vou. IV. 


REVELATION. II. 


26 And he that overcometh, and 
keepeth my works unto the end, to 
him will I give power over the 
nations : 


beit” (wA7yv), does not occur elsewhere in 
St. John’s writings [John viii. 10 cannot be 
regarded as an exception]; cf Acts xv. 28; 
xX, 23. 
.. that which ye have, hold fast] Cf. ch, 
iii. 11. 


till I come.) Or until what time I shall 
come:—the Lord speaks of His coming with 
designed indefiniteness, see ch. iil. 3. The 
“Day of the Lord,” as always in Scripture, 
not the day of death, is the close of the 
Christian conflict (Trench, p- 146). 


26. And he that overcometh,| Here 
is the promise connected by “And” 
what precedes; ver. 25 being, in fact, re= 
peated in this verse. Note that in this, the 
first of the second group of Epistles (see the 
remarks introductory to ch. ii.), the promise 
(wv. 26-29) comes before the proclamation; 
cf. vv. 7, 11, 17. Note also—as indicating 
how essential to the Christian life are personal 
purity and holiness—that this fourté Epistle 
repeats the object for which, as stated in the 
third Epistle (compare ver. 20 with ver. 14), 
the servant of God must strive. 


and he that keepeth my works] Le. 
commanded by me,—cf. John vi. 28, 29; and 
contrasted with “ fer works,” ver. 22. 


to him will I give| The verb refers to 
“be that overcometh.” Under the head “of 
some particular kinds of anacoluthon,’ Winer 
writes, on this verse: ‘“ At the head of a sen- 
tence there stands a zom. or an accus. with 
which the verb of the sentence does not agree 
(casus pendentes),’—l. c.,§ 63,2,d. Seech. ith 
12, 21; John vi. 39; vii. 38; 1 John ii, ag, 
27. 
authority over the nations:| Cf. Luke 
xix. 17. The reign of the saints is a pode 
thought in the Apocalypse; see ch. i. 6,9; 
ai We LOS XX5 4 KK be Christ hee shisee 
royal’ dignity with the inheritors of ime 
ae life (see vv. 7, 11, 17); and how and 
when this “authority” shall be the preroga- 
tive of the Church, Scripture again and again 
unfolds,—Ps. exlix. 5-9; Dan. vii. 22, 27; 
Matt. xix. 28; 1 Cor. vi. 2. In ch. xx. 6 this 
dignity is the privilege of those on whom 
“* the rane death” (see on ver. 11) “ bath 
pe a The import of the promise here 
from that in ver. 17; although, as 
noted above, the sins are the same which the 
Christian is called upon “to overcome” in 
Pergamum and Thyatira (see wv. 14, 20). 


LL 


$3$° 


OR. 29 


27 ¢And he shall rule them with 
a rod of iron; as the vessels of a 
potter shall they be broken to shivers : 
even as I received of my Father. 


REVELATION, IIL. 


[v. 27—29, 


28 And I will give him the morne 
ing star. 

29 He that hath an ear, let him hear 
what the Spirit saith unto the churches. 





27. and| In fulfilment of Ps. ii. 9, which 
sets forth the prerogative claimed for 
Christ in this place, in ch. xii. 5, and in 
ch. xix. 15 :—which three quotations are taken 
from, and therefore sanction, the LXX. ver- 
sion of these words of the Psalmist. 


be shall rule them| The Hebrew original 
admits of the rendering of the LXX. (tirhem, 
DY) = woipaveis adrovs) ; although, read with 
the vowel points of our Hebrew Bibles, the 
word denotes “thou shalt break them” 
(terobem, DYN). The Greek verb here sig- 
nifies literally “to tend as a shepherd;” it 
denotes the whole office of the Shepherd, 
leading, feeding, guarding his flock,—see ch. 
vii. 17; and cf. Matt. ii. 6. In Homer, kings 
are “shepherds of the people.” 


with a rod of iron,| The shepherd’s staf’ ; 
also a royal sceptre, Heb. i. 8. ‘The pastoral 
staff will become “a rod of iron” in the case 
of false teaching. Cf. Mic. vii. 14; and see 
the notes on Ps. ii. 9. 


as the vessels of the potter are broken 
to shivers;| Or, with a rod of iron; 
as the vessels of the potter are they 
broken to shivers. 


as I also have received from] Viz. 
in Ps. ii. 9; see also Luke xxii. 29. We have 
here the prelude to the promise in ch, iii. a1, 


28. the morning star.] According to His 
title in ch. xxii. 16 the Lord here promises His 
faithful ones that He will give to them Him- 
self, sharing with them His royal dominion 
(ch. iii, 21). The Star is the symbol of royalty 
in Matt. ii. 2, and is linked with the sceptre in 


Num. xxiv. 17. The beauty of the “ Morning 
Star” is the constant theme of poets — 


**Ceelo nitidissimus alto,” 
OvID, 7rzst. i. 3,705 
‘* Hesperus, that led 
The starry host, rode brightest,” 
MILTon, Par. Lost, iv. 605 ;— 


cf. Isai. xiv. 12. And “thus does he who is 
fairer than the children of men claim all that 
is fairest and loveliest in creation, as the 
faint shadow and image of His perfections” 
(Trench, p. 151). De Wette understands 
“the heavenly glory,” Dan. xii. 3; Matt. xiii, 
43; and Stier, a pledge of the spiritual 
light which will dawn hereafter,—referring 
the promise to a future reformation in the 
Church. Victorinus explains, “ He shall have 
part in the ‘first resurrection,’”—ch. xx. 6, 

According to Andreas, (1) Thyatira is 
Lucifer (Isai. xiv.; Luke x.) to be trodden 
down by the saints;—or (2) 2 Pet.i. 19 is 
referred to ;—or (3) we are to und 
Elijah and John the Baptist, who usher in 
the -F ae and Second Advents of Christ (7. ¢. 
p. 17)- 

It is more in accordance, however, with 
the context to understand that, in addition 
to the promises in vv. 7,17, Christ now pro= 
mises Himself, as the sum of every spiritual 
blessing (Trench, id.) 

The rule of the saints wno form the company 
of heaven (seé on ver. 17) commences here. 


29. He that hath anear] Note the changed 
position of these words, indicating the first 
Epistle of the second group of four :—see the 
remarks introductory to this chapter. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Chap. IL 


Nore A. THE PROPHETICO-HISTOBICAL IN= 
TERPRETATION OF THE SEVEN EPISTLES. 


This principle of exposition is very ancient ; 
Andreas, in his commentary on verse 5 (/. ¢. 
p- 12), mentions some who_ had applied 
that verse to the transfer of the chief juris- 
diction from Ephesus (rév dpxteparixoy ris 
ew Opévov) to Constantinople; and he 

rs ch. iii. 10 either to the cruel persecu- 
tion of the Christians by the rulers of Rome, 
or to the times of Antichrist. Coming down 
later, the Abbot Seam circ. A.D. 1200) 
and the Spiritualist Brethren—as subsee 


quently Mede—expounded the Seven ioe 
as prophetic of the Seven Ages of the Church, 
so that all good should there be prophesied of 
themselves and all evil of Rome (see Tren 
J. c., p. 228). Later still Vitringa expoun 
the Epistles on the same principle; and he 
writes (pp. 32-36): ‘“ Existimo Spiritum S, 
sub typo et emblemate Septem Ecclesiarum 
Asiz nobis. .. . voluissedepingere septem varie 
antes status Ecclesiz Christiane... . usquead 
Adventum Domini”; adding—‘‘ demonstratur 
illas Prophetice non Dogmatice esse expo= 
nendas.” 

Mede (“ Works,” Advert., ch. x, p. 998) 


REVELATION. II. 


tates his opinion more fully as follows: “ If 
we consider their number being Seven, which 
is a number of revolution of times, or 
if we consider the choice 0’ the Holy 
Ghost in that he taketh neither all, no nor 
the most famous Churches in the world, as 
Antioch, Alexandria, Rome, ... If these 
things be well considered, may it not seem 
that these Seven Churches, besides their 
literal respect, were intended to be as patterns 
and types of the several ges of the Catholic 
Church 4 principio ad finem? that so these 
Seven Churches should prophetically sample 
unto us a Sevenfold successive temper and 
condition of the whole visible Church ac- 
cording to the several dges thereof.... 
And if this were granted. ... then surely 
the First Church (viz., the Ephesian state) 
must be the first, and the Last be the last. . . . 
The mention of false Jews and the synagogue 
of Satan, &c. (Apoc. ii.) in the Five middle 
ones, will argue that they belong to the times 
of the Beast and Babylon. And for the 
Sixth in special we have a good character 
where to place it, viz., partly about the 
time the Beast is falling, and partly after 
his destruction, when the New Jerusalem 
cometh.” 

Brightman sees in the first four Churches 
the following periods typified: A.D. 30-100;— 
A.D. 100-382;—A.D. 382-1300 ;—A.D. 1300- 
1520 ;—and then in Sardis, the Lutheran ;—in 
Philadelphia, the Reformed ;—in Laodicea, the 
Anglican Church. L. Crocius (Spyntagma Sacr. 
Theol., 1636) sees in Ephesus, the “ Ecclesia 
Apostolica ;’—in Smyrna, the Church “ Mar- 
tyrumene ; —in Pergamum, “ Polemica” from 
Constantine to Charles the Great ;—in Thya- 
tira, ‘‘ Devota” from Charles the Great to 
Charles V.;— in Sardis, “ Politica” from 
Charles V. to A.D. 1636;—in Philadelphia, 
“ Fraterna” beginning in his own lifetime, to 
which the conversion of Israel is to belong ;— 
in Laodicea, an “Ecclesia Tepida” to be 
looked for hereafter. 

According to Sir I. Newton, the Epistle 
to the Church of Ephesus prefigures the 
condition of the Church Universal from 
St. John to the persecution of Diocletian (A.D. 
302) ;—the Epistle to Smyrna, thence to that 
of Licinius (A.D. 303-323) ;—the Epistle to 
Pergamum, the Church under Constantine 
and his sons (A.D. 324-340 ) ;—the Epistle to 
Thyatira, the Church under the divided rule 
of the sons of Constantine (A.D. 340-350) ;— 
the Epistle to Sardis, the Church under the 
sole rule of Constantius (A.D. 350-361) ;—the 
Epistle to Philadelphia, the faithfulness of 
the Church under Julian (A.D. 361-363) ;— 
the Epistle to Laodicea, the lukewarmness of 
the Church under Valentinian and Valens (a.D. 
363-378).—Workgs, vol. v. p. 452, ed. 1785. 

Stier (Words of the Risen Saviour, Clarke’s 
tr. p. 143) sees in these Epistles the Spirit of 


Prophecy embracing, in a parallel scheme, the 
times and history of the Old Test. and of 
the New, in their entire development :—(1) 
The primitive world, and primitive Christen- 
dom (Noah—Constantine); (2) The pre- 
paration of God’s people, and of the European 
peoples (Moses—Charlemagne); (3) Israel 
in its decline, and the Romish Church as 
the tolerated transition (Nebuchadnezzar— 
Hildebrand); (4) The Babylonish period, 
and the Papal-worldly period (Zerubbabel— 
Luther); (5) The Persian-Greek period, and 
the Protestant political age (Alexander— 
Napoleon); (6) The Greek-Roman period, 
and the second Reformation; (7) The Advent 
of Christ, and the Millennial kingdom. 


Nore B. ON VER. 6.—“ THE NICOLAITANS.” 


The sect of the Nicolaitans and its foundes 
are thus referred to by early writers :— 

E. g. “ Alter hereticus Nicolaus emersit: 
hic de Septem Diaconis fuit. Satis est nobis 
quod istam heresim Nicolaitarum Apoca- 
lypsis damnavit.”—Tertull., De Prescr. 463 
cf. adv. Marc. i. 29. ‘“ Nicolaite magistrum 
habent unum ex Septem qui primiad Dias 
conium ab Apostolis ordinati sunt. ... Plenis- 
simé per Johannis Apocalypsin manifestan- 
tur qui sint.”—St. Irenzus, Adv. Her., i. 26; 
cf. ili. 11. NuexoAaos .. . eis Tav entra ele 
dvaxoviay ind Ty amocrdA@y Katactabeis, d¢ 
amootas . . . edidacKev adiapopiav Biov .. , 
ov tovs padnras ... dua THs amoKadvipews 
"Iedvins jeyxe.— St. Hippolytus, Ref omn, 
Her., vii. 36. Clemens Al. (cf. Strom. ii. 20; 
ili. 4) and St. Ignatius (ap. Stephanum Go- 
barum, Phot. Cod. 232) merely deny that the 
founder of the sect was the Deacon Nicolas. 

To the statement of Eusebius in his 
Chronicle (Olymp. 221) that Simon son of 
Cleopas, bishop of Jerusalem, suffered martyr 
dom, in Trajan’s persecution, the Paschal 
Chronicle adds that he was “accused by the 
followers of Cerinthus, and by those who 
were called Nicolaitans ” (dsaBAneis vrs ray 
Ths potpas KnpivOov, kai Tov heyopevay Nixo= 
Aairay.—ed. Dindorf., i. p, 471). 

The word Nixddaos (i. ¢., vikdy Tov adv) is 
identified with Balaam (see ver, 14) after the 
following manner :—y$3 = fo destroy, to van- 
quish, and Dy = people (Witsius, Hengsten- 
berg) ;—or simply ya, with terminal p, = 
devourer, destroyer (Fuerst, Dietrich). On 
the other hand, Gesenius thus explains the 
word Balaam: “comp. ex S53 et py nome 
populus, fort. i. q. peregrinus” :—* All three 
derivations are admissible according to the 
rules of the language,” observes Kurtz (0. f 
Covenant, on Num. xxii.; cf. Keil and Dee 
litzsch, The Pentateuch, in Joc.). Cocceius 
(A.D. 1650) seems first to have suggested this 
identification of Nicolaosand Balaam. Philip 
of Aquino (0d. 1650), a converted Jew, also 

LL2 


53 


532 


identifies Balaam, the Old Test. type of Anti- 
christ, with the Armillus of the Targums,— 
pido = épnuddaos = Balaam (or Nicolaos, 
as above defined): so the Targum of Jonathan 
on Isai. xi. 4; see Gfrérer, Das Jahrb. des Hesls, 
ii.s. 406. Armillus is the name by which the 
final Antichrist who shall seduce the Chris- 
tians to their ruin, is known among the Jews: 
—see Eisenmenger, Entd. Judenthum, ii. p 
yos; and Trench, p. 83, &c. See also Stern 
Lc. pp. 141-145; Wieseler, Apost. Zertalt., 
@ 263. 


Norte C oF VER. 1o—‘ THE TRIBULATION 
OF TEN Days.” 


Mr. G. S. Faber (Sacred Calendar of Pro- 
phecy, 2nd ed, vol. i. p. 33) thus interprets 
this prophecy :—St. John “foretells a great 
persecution of the Church, which he limits 
to ten days. Now we find not recorded any 
cee of which the short period of ten 
iteral days was the precise limit. But we 
actually find it recorded that the final and 
pre-eminent persecution, which was carried 
on by Paganism [under Diocletian] against 
Christiunity, lasted ten complete years. Euse- 
bius (H. £. viii. 16) contents himself with 
roundly saying that that persecution entirely 
ceased in the tenth year, though at the end 
of the eighth year it had begun to experience 
some remission. But Lactantius (De Mort. 
Persec. 48) states it, with absolute precision, 
to have continued from February 23, A.D. 303, 
to June 13, AD. 313. Its exact duration, 
therefore, was: ten years, three months, and 
nineteen days. Or, in a round number, its 
duration was ten complete years.” 

If the latitude of “round numbers” is 
allowed, the range of interpretation may be 
considerably extended ; especially if the inter- 
preter is to be at liberty to lay daa his own 
theory. Mr. Faber adopts the “ Year-day ” 
theory; and considers that each day in the 
chronological statements of “ Daniel and St. 

ohn is not a natural day, but a year; and 
in opposition to ‘Mr. Fleming, and Mr. 

arshall, and Bishop Lloyd’ (p. 52),—he 
might have added Mr. Elliott and Mr. Birks] 
that each number is equivalent to a series 
not of years of 360 days each, but of natural 
solar years” (p. 56). Mr. Birks, who like- 
wise refers to the persecution under Dio- 
cletian, observes: “It is notorious that it 
lasted just ten years” (Elements of Prophecy, 
P- 374) ;—#.¢., on Mr. Birks’ system of years 
of 360 days, nine (ordinary) years, ten months, 
and fifteen days. See Introd. § 11. 


NoTE D ON VER. 10—2réqavos AND Arddnpa. 


It is important, with reference to the in- 
terpretation of future chapters, to fix the 
meanings of the words oréavos and d:adypa, 
and to mark the distinction between them. 


fundamental sense of ‘‘ surrounding,” 


REVELATION, II. 


The word 3d:ddnya is found in the New 
Test. only in Rev. xii. 3; xif. 1; xix. ra; 
and always denotes “the diadem of royalte.” 
“Tt is quite true,” notes Abp. Trench, as 
already quoted (/. c., p. 109), “that orépavos 
is seldom used in this sense; much oftener 
diadnua (see my Synonyms of the N. T., 
§ 23): yet the ‘golden crowns’ (orépavor) of 
ch. ix can only be royal crowns (cf. ch. v. 
10) :”—see, within, the notes on ch iv. 4, 10; 
v. 10. In his Synonyms, however (p. 74), Abp. 
Trench writes: “I greatly doubt whether 
anywhere in classical literature oréavos is 
used of the kingly or imperial crown. It is 
the crown of victory in the games, of civic 
worth, of military valour, of nuptial joy, of 
festal gladness—woven of oak, of ivy, of 
parsley, of myrtle, of olive, or imitating in 
gold these leaves or oth flowers, as of 
violets or roses (see Athenzus, xv. 9-33): 
the ‘wreath,’ in fact, or the ‘garland, the 
German ‘ Kranz,’ as distinguished from 
‘Krone;’ but never, any more than ‘corona 
in Latin, the emblem and sign of royalty. 
The 6d:adyya was this Bacideias yropiopa, 
as Lucian calls it (Pise. 35); being properly a 
white linen band or fillet, ‘tenia’ or ‘ fascia’ 
(Curtius, iii. 3), encircling the brow.” 

The diadem—the cidaris (see Ex. xxviii. 35, 
36; Ezek. xxi. 26, LX X.)—was the badge of 
Persian royalty! In Esther i. 11; ii. 17, 
diadnua is used by the LXX. as the equiva- 
lent of £ether (3m5): in both places, it isren- 
dered in the A. V. by “crown.” ! Curtius (lib. 
vi. c. 63 cf. iii. 3) mentions that Alexander the 
Great borrowed this emblem from the Persians: 
“ Purpureum diadema, distinctum albo, quale 
Darius habuerat, capiti circumdedit.” See 
Ezekiel Spanheim, De usu Numism. antig., 
Diss. v. i; and cf. Tacitus, Annal. xv. 
29. 

1 In Isai. lxii. 3, ‘‘ dtadem,” SidSnua, is the 
rendering of ¢zenifh (\)¥) in the A. V. and the 
LXX; and in both ‘‘crown” (orépayos) is the 
rendering of ’atérah. 

2 In Esther i. 11 the “‘ crows royal,” or ‘‘ ordi« 
nary head-dress of a Persian 4¢mg was a stiff cap, 
probably of felt or cloth, ornamented with a 
blue and white band or ribbon—which was the 
‘ diadem’ proper” (see note #7 oc.). In Esther 
viii. 15 ‘‘the great crown of gold” was “nota 
crown like the king’s (Zether), but a mere golden 
band or coronet [’a/érah]” (note ix loc.) The 
‘ diadem’ is often mentioned in the Apocrypha. 
—e.g. I Macc. i. 9; vi. 153 Vill. 14, &c. 
Among the Hebrews indeed, as among other 
peoples, the insignia of royalty included—to- 
gether with the sceptre, the gorgeous attire, and 
ornaments—the “ di » weer. Cease 
crown”), 2 Sam.i. 10; 2 Kings xi. 12; Ps. 
lxxxix. 40; or the ‘‘crown,” 'atdrah (7MYY), 
2 Sam. xii. 30; Ezek. xxi. 31 [26]; Zech. vi. 
II, 14 Both names are derived from the 

ene 
closing :”—by the former is also described the 


REVELATION. IL 


Selden (Works, vol. iii., London, 1726) in 
his treatise on “Titles of Honour,” distin- 
guishes the diadem from the crown. The 
diadem, he writes, “ was no other than only a 
fillet of silk, linen, or some such thing. Nor 
appears it that any other kind of crown was 
used for a royal ensign, except only in some 
kingdoms of Asia, but this kind of fillet, until 
the beginning of Christianity in the Roman 
Empire” (§ 8, c. 2, p. 249). “The coins of 
the old kings of Sicily .... have their 
heads circled with this fillet or diadem . : 
Neither was Alexander’s using of a diadem 
by that name singly, taken to be at all strange 
to his Macedonians, but the using of just 
such a one as the Persian kings had, and the 
wearing it upon his cawusia or Macedonian 
cap in such fashion as it was like the Persian 
cidaris. So must Justin be understood where 
he says: ‘habitum regum Persarum et dia- 
dema insolitum ante regibus Macedonicis, 
velut in leges eorum quos vicerat transiret, 
assumit ’ (Hist. xii.)”—ib., p. 254. 

Selden having referred to the probable use 
of the diadem by the early Roman kings, and 
to coins of the age of Pompey, observes that 
his “testimonies ” shew “that the Romans 
at that time conceived (as other nations) this 
diadem or fillet to be the proper ensign of a 
king, and therefore endured not the use of 
it while they hated the name of king. Thence 
is it that he that put a white fillet or diadem 
upon the laurel of Julius Czsar’s statue was 
committed to prison (Sueton. Julius, 79), as 
one that thereby derogated from the public 
liberty in giving him that which was proper 
to a king [see below]. . . By reason of this 
suspicion of the diadem . . the Emperors 
at first abstained from meddling with any 
diadem. Caligula indeed ventured to put 


po. head-dress (Ex. xxix. 6; xxxix. 30; 
V. Viii. 9) ; by the latter the garland of the 
newly-wedded (Cant. iii. 11), or of the revel- 
ler (Isai. xxviii. 1), as well as the head-dress of 
the ruler (Ps. xxi. 4; Esth. viii. 15). It is 
conjectured that together with the anointing of 
the king—which, like our crowning, typifiea 
the Divine consecration, but is not mentioned 
at each change of ruler—there was also united 
the imposition of the crown-diadem, as the 
token of royal dignity. Of this, however, we 
do net read before Joash : see the note on 2 Kings 
xi. 12. According to scriptural usage, ’a/drah, 
“‘crown,” is employed chiefly to denote an 
ornament of honour (Job xix. 9; xxxi. 6) for 
the most worthy, the most noble, the best 
(Prov. xii. 4; xiv. 24; xvii. 6) :—thus Zion is 
so named, Isai. Ixii. 3. As to the form of the 
Hebrew crown we know nothing. It is con- 
jectured that it consisted, like a diadem, of a 
circlet, over the forehead, with a broader orna- 
ment ; and that subsequently it assumed a form 
like modern crowns. See Schenkel, Zidel- 
Lexicon, att. Krone. 


it on, but durst pb jt use it! . . . None after- 
ward for about cclxxx years openly affected 
it..... The first of them afterward that 
wore it, and sometimes, perhaps, publicly, was 
Aurelian (A.D. 270).”— Jd. p. 257. And Selden 
quotes a passage from Eutropius (Hist. x.), 
which was misunderstood by a paraphrast of 
the Middle Ages, as if all Emperors “ before 
Diocletian had used diadems; when clearly 
none did otherwise than is before noted. 
. . . . Soon after Aurelian the diadem grew 
to be a principal ensign of the Empire” (Jé. 
p. 258). Constantine continually wore the 
diadem :—so “says Victor or his epitomator 

. . . and the author of the Chronicle of 
Alexandria ; Constantine first used a diadem 
of pearls and rich stones. "— Ibid. 

But further, in order to fill up the his- 
tory :—Plutarch describes the kingly crown 
which Antonius offered Cesar as d:adnua 
arepivy Sagrns repivendeypevov (Cas. 61). 
“Here the orepavos (‘ crown’) is only the 
garland or laureate wreath, with which the 
diadem proper was interwoven ; indeed, ac- 
cording to Cicero (P4il. ii. 34), Cesar was 
already ‘coronatus’ (=éoredavwpévos): this 
he would have been as Consul, when the 
offer was made. It is by keeping this dis- 
tinction in mind that we explain a version 
in Suetonius (Czs. 79) of the same incident. 
One places on Cesar’s statue ‘ coronam lau- 
ream candida fascia preligatam; .... on 
which the tribunes command to be removed, 
not the ‘corona,’ but the ‘fascia;’ this being 
the diadem, in which alone the traiterous 
suggestion that he should proclaim himself 
king was contained.”—Trench, Syzen., p. 75. 

Spanheim (/. c., Diss. viii.) concludes that 
the earliest of the Czsars who assumed the 
diadem occasionally was Caracalla (A.D. 212); 
and he shows that Sulpitius Severus is in 
error when he describes Vespasian as “ dia- 
demate capiti imposito ab exercitu Imperator 
consalutatus.” 

Gibbon (ch. xiii.) thus sums up the facts: 
“The pride, or rather the policy, of Diocle- 


? Aurel. Victor (Cesar 4) says of Caligula: 
‘His elatus dominum dici, atque insigne regni 
capiti nectere tentaverat ;” and in the ‘‘ Epitome” 
the same author asserts that Caius actually wore 
the diadem. Suetonius, however, merely says 
that he was very near assuming it, and only 
desisted on the assurance that he had risen 
above the highest eminence of kings and sove- 
reigns :—see Merivale, 4 ¢, v. p. 463. The 
words of Suetonius are: ‘‘ Hactenus de prin- 
cipe; reliqua ut de monstro narranda sunt 
Exclamavit, els  «olpavos fotw, fs  Baoe- 
Acés. Nec multum abfuit quin statim diadema 
sumeret, speciemque principatus in regni 
formam converteret.”—Ca/ig. 22. And more 
definitely still, Eutropius also says of Caligula: 
‘* Primus diademate imposito, dominum se 
appellari jussit.” 


533 


534 


tian engaged that artful prince to introduce 
the stately magnificence of the court of 
Persia. He ventured to assume the diadem, 
an ornament detested by the Romans as the 
odious ensign of royalty, and the use of 
which had been considered as the most 
desperate act of the madness of Caligula.” 

To suppose that St. John could have in- 
troduced the diadem into the symbolism 
which indicated the Roman Ceasars of his 
generation, is to contradict the most certain 
facts of history: see infra on ch. xiii. 1, and 
ch. xvii.; and note C on ch. xiii. 3. 


Nore E ON VER. 20.—THE SIBYL SAM- 
BETHA, 


I. The existence of a Hebrew, or rather 
Hebrzo-Gentile Sibyl is to be accounted 
for by the contact of Alexandrine Judaism 
with Greek literature. Friedlieb (Orac. 
Sibyl], 1852, Einl., s. xxxviii.) regards “the 
éul pre-Christian Sibyl of Erythre in Beeotia 
(known to Alexander Polyhistor, Varro, 
Josephus, &c., and quoted by Theophilus, 
Athenagoras, and Lactantius) as being the 
same as the Cumezan Sibyl of Virgil’s 
fourth Eclogue,—the Cumean Sibyl being 
assigned very different names by Varro. 
Josephus (Anitt. 1. 43) quotes from the 
Sibylline Books (Book iii. 98, &c.) an ac- 
count of the Tower of Babel, copied from 
Gen. xi. (LXX.)—a passage which had 
been referred to by the heathen writer 
Alexander Polyhistor, a contemporary of 
Sulla. From Judaism this Sibylline litera- 
ture passed over to Christianity; and Sibyl- 
line verses claiming prophetic authority con- 
tinued to be produced down to Cent. vy. 
These “ Oracles” are quoted with more or 
less respect by Justin M. (Aol. i. 20, 44, &c.), 
Clemens Al. (Strom. i. 21; v.14; &c.), Theo- 
philus Antioch. (ad Auto/. iii. 2), &c. Celsus 
(ap. Origen., ¢. Cels. v. 61,t. i. p. 625) scoffs at 
the Christians as 38ud\corad. Among West- 
ern writers Lactantius most frequently refers 
(e. gevii. 15) to the Sibylline Books. Eusebius 
and St. Augustine do not conceal how little 
value they attached to them. The earliest 
portion of the existing Sibylline Oracles is 
part of Book iii.’ (ver. 97, &c.), which is 
ascribed to a Jewof Alexandria. It is assigned 
by Ewald to B.c. 124; by others to B.c. 169: 
—see Pusey, “Daniel the Prophet,’ p. 362, 
&c.; “Oracula Sibyllina,” curante C. Alex- 
andre, Paris, 1869, p. 351; Delaunay, “ Moines 
et Sibylles,” p. 246; Edinburgh Review, July 
1877; The Sibylline Oracles,—Two Lectures 
by R. Gibbings, D.D., Dublin, 1878, &c. 


1 In Book iii, writes Mr. Drummond (Zhe 

ish Messiah, p. 13), ‘‘we possess by far the 

x part of the Verses (amounting, according 

to Lactantius, Div. Justt. i. 6, to about a thou- 
eand) of the old Hebrew or Erythrzan Sibyl.” 


REVELATION. II. 


Of the extan* collection of the “ Chnstian 
Sibyllines ’ Alexandre (/. ¢., Excursus v., pp. 
312-440) assigns B. i. and B. ii. to Cent. i 
after Christ; part of B. iii. (lines 1-96, 
295-488) to Cent. ii. and Cent. iv. after 
Christ ;! B. iv. to the age of Titus, A.D. 79 
(“ Vix de ejus etate ambigi potest ... sub 
Tito nempe, vel Domitiano.”—p. 326).? 

The popular notion was that the Sibyls 
were prophetesses who uttered predictions of 
evil as to cities and countries. As these 
“ Oracles” copied Homer, Hesiod, Euripides, 
&c., so they copied the LXX. (see above), 
and also the Apocalypse:—thus in “The 
Woe on Egypt” (B. iii. 317), Rev. vi. 8 is 
closely followed : 


‘Poudaia yap ro dvehevoerat aupeoa ceio. 
Zkopmicpos b€ re Oavaros kat ipods epeber, 


At vv. 319, 512 (“ Gog and Magog”), we 
recall Rev. xx. 8; Ezek. xxix. At vv. 396- 
400 (“the Ten Horns”), Rev. xvii. 12; && 


‘ Mr. Drummond however (4. ¢., p. 13) re 
gards lines 46-96 as ‘‘of Jewish and pre-Chris- 
tian origin ;” and assigns this section, from its 
clear allusion to the Triumvirs and to Cleopatra, 
‘*to the period immediately preceding the battle 
of Actium, 31 B.c.” The intervening lines (97- 
294, 489-828) of this third Book, Alexandre 
ascribes to the years between B.C. 170 and B.C, 
164. Hilgenfeld (Fd. Apok., s. 75) places 
B. iii. between 142 and 137 B.c. Friedlieb 
ascribes this Book to an Egyptian Jew, B.c. 160; 
—B. v. he also ascribes to an Egyptian Jew in 
the reign of Hadrian, A.D. 117-138 ; but Bleek 
ascribes it to a Christian on account of the re- 
ference in it to Nero as Antichrist, and because 
Hadrian is favourably mentioned: Mr. Drums 
mond, however, questions this conclusion of 
Bleek, because the opinion that Nero was Anti- 
christ (or Anti-Messias,—BeAlap, see B. ii. 167) 
might have been “‘held by a Jew; and at the 
time when the Book was composed Hadrian 
may not have begun to display his hostility 
towards the Jews.” 

There are in all fourteen Books. Of these, 
Books ix. and x. are still missing ; but these, 
Alexandre conjectures, are included in B. viii, 
(A.D. 211), where, at line 217, begins the well- 
known acrostic on the name of our Lord, quoted 
by St. Augustine, De Civ. Dei, xviii. 23. B. xii 
was printed for the first time in 1817 
Cardinal Mai, who has also published the last 
four collectively in 1828 in his Scréptt. Vett, 
Nov. Coll., vol. iii. pars. 3, p. 202. B. xii. is 
assigned by Friedlieb to an Egyptian Jew of 
Cent. iii. ; and the remaining books to Christian 
ar of Cent. ii., and Cent. iii., or, it may be, 

ter. 

* “‘Christianorum Sibyllinorum primus ha- 
bendus est” (4. ¢., p. 443). “It seems to have 
been composed about the year A.D. 80, while 
the panting of the Temple (v. 125) and the de 
struction of Herculaneum and as ag (vv. 13 
131) were still recent."—Zd. Rev., |. 4 Pe $5 


v. 1] 


II. As to the Sibyl Sambetha, Suidas 
(art. iBuhAa Xaddaia) writes : 1} Kat mpéds 
Tivev ‘EBputa dvopatopevn, 7 kal Tlepois, n 
Kupio ovépare kahoupery SapB7yOn, €k Tov 

«yous Tov pakapiwrarov Nae :—Of the ten 
Bovis adds Suidas, the Chaldean called 
Sambetha was the first. Lactantius (De falsa 
Relig. i. 6) states that M. Varro (od. A. U.C. 
72 7) mentions ten Siby/s, of whom he writes, 

rimam fuisse de Persis ;” and we read in 
‘lian (Var. Hist. xii. 35) that some count 
Sour Sibyls, to which number others add six 
—dy ceva xai tiv Kupaiay kai TH “lovdatav. 
Pausanias (Gree. Descr.; Phocia, lib. x. 12, 
Leipz. 1796, t. iil. P. 186) tells us that mapa 

‘EBpaios Tois | urmep TIS adaorivns yr?) 
XeNTPOASyos,, tous S€ avry 248Br Bypagou 
6¢€ eivar marpds . - pace ZaBBnv- of dé avrny 
BaBvA@viar, oan d€ SiBvAdAav Kadovow 
Alyurriav. Perizonius (in #lian., /. c.) notes 
that this Sabbe is the same as Sambethe—the 
letters M and B being interchangeable; add- 
ing: “ Ceterum hec Sambethe etiam Divinis 
honoribus seu sacellis videtur a quibusdam 
culta. Certe ad eam referendum quod 
legimus in illustri inscriptione Thyatirena 
apud Sponium.” In Spohn’s travels entitled: 
“ Voyage d’Italie et du Levant, fait aux Années 
1675, 1676, A la Haye, 1724 ”—this Inscrip= 
tion is to be found (vol. i. p. 316); and also 
in Boeckh, Corp. Inscr. Grac., § vii. Thyatir. 
Inscr. No. 3509 (vol. ii. p. 839), who states 
that at Thyatira, in the space surrounding 
the temple of a Chaldzan deity, Fabius 
Zosimus had deposited a chest, or r cinerary 
urn (copéy),—emt TOmov kabapod dvtos mpd 
THs Toews Tos TS VapBabeim ev TG Xaddaiov 
mepiBodo. And Boeckh notes: “ Sap@dGevoy 
est fanum Sambathe Sibylle Chaldez.” 
Photius (ap. Montfaucon., Bib/. Cotslin., p. 347, 
Questio 160) thus reports the ancient tradi- 
tion that of the ten Sibyls mparn évopa 
ZapBnGn, Xaddaiay d€ pac abray oi maXatot 
Adyot, oi dé paov ‘EBpaiay - kat 04 Kai évt 
maidav Nae eis yuvaika dppoobnva. This 
tradition is copied from the Scholiast on the 
Phedrus of Plato, 244 B. It was said, adds 
Photius, that she had predicted the fate of 


REVELATION. II. 


the Tower of Babel; and that, before the 
confusion of tongues, she had uttered her 
oracles in the Hebrew language. 


NOTE F ON VER. 20.—THE READING rip 
‘yuvaika gov. 


This reading is certainly ancient; it is 
supported by the MSS. A., B., together wth 
several’ cursives, among which is the cursive g 
(“ Parham, No. 17”), pronounced by Dr. 
Scrivener (Cod. Augiensis, p. Ixxii.) “to yield 
in value and importance to no copy of the 
Apocalypse except the three Uncials” (then 
known to him,—i.e, A, C, B):—see his 
collation, /.c., p. 533. It is supported by the 
Syriac Version and by St. Cyprian. Andreas, 
Arethas, and Primasius also adopt it. St. 
Cyprian (Epist. lii. ad Anton., p. 72) writes: 
“ Alio item loco pcenitentiz tempus datur, et 
peenitentiam non agenti Dominuscomminatur: 
‘ Habeo inquit, adversus te multa, quod uxorem 
tuam Jezabel, que se dicit propheten, &c.’” 
Andreas (/.¢., p. 15) quotes the verse, read- 
ing thy yovaixd gov, but thus interprets : 
ada oikaiws tpiy emipenopat, ors THY TOP 
Nixo\airav alpesty, THY Tpomikds avopac~ 
pévny “leCaBed, x. 7. X. And so Arethas (ap. 
Cramer, p. 212): Aéyer Se TpoTtkds Tavrny 
dia Tov Ts TeCaBed ovdpatos ths To ‘AxaaB 
cuvorxnodons, k. T. A. Primasius (ed. Migne, 
t. lxviil. col. 807) also reads “thy wife”: 
—“Sed habeo adversus te multa, quod 
sims uxorem tuam Jezabel, que se dicit pro- 
phetam,” &c. 

For the omission of cov the Uncials 8, C, P 
testify; many cursives, e. g. 1, 7, 36, 38, 953 
together with the Vulgate, Coptic, Arm, 
and thiopic versions. T ertullian also 
adopts the reading ryv yvvaica:—“ Joannes 
in Apocalypsi .... ubi ad angelum Thya- 
tirenorum Spiritus mandat Aabere se adversus 
eum, quod teneret multerem Jezabel, quod se 
prophetin,” &c.— De Pudicit., c. 19. 


1 Tischendorf (8th ors notes: ‘*Gb, Sz, 
Ti, add gov cum AB al‘ syr And*? Are 


535 


536 


CHAPTER III. 


@ 1% angel of the church of Sardis is reproved, 
15 centorted to repent, and threatened if he do 
mot repent. & The angel of the church of 
Philadelphia 10 is approved for his diligence 
and patience. 15 The angel of Laodicea 
rebuked, for being neither hot nor cold, 19 and 
admonished to be more zealous. 20 Christ 
standeth at the door and knocketh. 


REVELATION. III. 


[v. s—2 


ND unto the of the 
church in Sardis write; These 
things saith he that hath the seven 
Spirits of God, and the seven stars ; 
I know thy works, that thou hast a 
name that thou livest, and art dead. 
2 Be watchful, and strengthen the 
things which remain, that are ready 





[Ver.1 [T.R.omits rst ér7a]—om.r0. Ver. 2 €uedXov.—om. ra [So A, C ;—-¥X, B, P read ra ‘eya} 
—rov Geod pov. Ver. 3 om. 1st emi oe [notin 1, but added by Er. after the Vulg.]. Ver. 4 a 


Exets—om. 1st kai. Ver. 5 ovrws.—épuodoynuw [the words ék ris BiBA. . 


. + Td dvopa avroi, 


omitted in 1, were supplied, after his manner, by Er. from the Vulg.]. Ver. 7 6 adnéivds, 6 
éyios [so N, A;—C, B, P read 6 dy., 6 ad.].—xKXetoet.—kdeiwy [so 1; but Er. altered this i 
= the “ claudit” of Vulg., although «\eiwy was confirmed by Valla].—[A, C, P, 1 read avotyen 


&, Bread avoife.]. Ver. 8 jv for xai bef. ovdeis. 


Ver. 9 7£0vcw.—mpockuyncovow. Ver. 11 om. 


i8ov [so also 1; the Vulg. has ecce], Ver. 14 ris €v Aaodixia exkA.—é adnOuwés [so S, C]. Ver. 1§ 


#s [The words of T. R. dpedov puxpés eins } Ceords are not found in the text of 1; but 
im the beginning of the Commen we read: 6 Geoddyos pyoi Tpnydptos + Spero ¥exe 
fe, (eords. eins is due to Erasmus]. Ver. 16 (eards ovre Wuypds. Ver. 17 ovdev. Ver. 18 


éyxpica. Ver. 20 [A, P, 1 omit (before cicedevoopar) the kai, which is read by &, B].J 


THE EPISTLE TO SARDIS (1-6). 


1. in Sardis] Sardis, the ancient capital 
of Lydia and residence of its kings until 
Creesus, was situated, to the south of Thya- 
tira, and three days journey to the east of 
Ephesus, at the northern foot of Mount 
Tmolus. Pactolus, of the golden sand, a 
brook which came from Tmolus, ran through 
the agora of Sardis, and beside the great 
temple of Cybele. Sardis was remarkable in 
antiquity for its riches and its luxury; it 
was nearly destroyed by an earthquake under 
Tiberius, but was restored by that Emperor 
(Tac. Ann. ii. 47). Although of diminished 
importance, it was still a considerable town 
(Strabo, xiii. 4, 5); and so continued down 
to the end of the Byzantine Empire. In Cent. 
xiii. it was destroyed by Tamerlane. Melito, 
who wrote a commentary on the Apocalypse 
(Euseb. iv. 26), was Bishop of Sardis, circ. 
A.D. 170. See Introd. § 2 (a). 

that hath the seven Spirits of God,] For 
the attributes now ascribed to Christ, see on 
ch, i. 4, 16. This description is new in form 
rather than in meaning,—see ch. iv. 5; v. 6. 
Christ, as Son of God, 4as the Spirit of God. 
By the Spirit, the Lord addresses the Churches 
(ch. ii. 7, 11, 17, &c.); and to a church, as 
here, “sunken in spiritual deadness . . . He 
presents himself as having the fulness of all 
spiritual gifts” (Trench, p.154). The phrase 
important as bearing upon the “ Procession ” 
of the Holy Ghost from the Son ;—cf. ch. v. 6. 
This reference to the Spirit, “the Giver of 
Life’ (76 (woroiov of the Constantinopolitan 
Qreed,.—that Divine Life of which all “the 


Seven-fold Gifts” are but forms,—bears upon 
the spiritual condition of Sardis: see below, 
“thou hast a name that thou livest” (Plump- 
tre, p. 157). 

and the seven stars;| Cf.ch.i. 16, 20; and 
the note on ch.i.16. This “is the only ap- 
proach to a repetition in the titles cf the 
Lord throughout all the Epistles. . . But the 
repetition is only apparent ”’:—see ch. ii. 1. 
In the combination here we have “a hint of 
the relation between Christ, as the giver of the 
Holy Spirit, and as the author of a Ministry 
of living men in his Church,”—for “ the 
Stars are the Angels” (Trench, ib.). Cf. Eph. 
iv. 7-12; John xx. 22, 23; and see on ch.i. 20, 
The Lord speaks as about to withdraw that 
Spirit, and to let that Star fall from His hand. 


a name that thou livest, and thou art 
dead.| Spiritually dead: see above, and ver. 
2; cf. Luke ix.60. Some writers make the 
fantastic comment that, in the words “thou 
fivest,’ there may be an allusion to the name 
of the bishop of Sardis, which may have been 
Zosimus or Vitalis. 


2. Be thou watchful,| “Become watoh- 
ful,” which thou art not now: “ Awake and 
watch,”—see on ch. i. 9; cf. Eph. v. 14. 

and stablish the things that r 
The parts of the church which i 
(Bleek); or the graces not yet extinct (Bengel, 
Ewald, Alf.). Others, regarding the neuter as 
denoting a fallen condition (cf. 1 Cor.i 27; 
Ezek. xxxiv. 4; Zech. xi. 9), ane 
sons,—those members of the Church whi 
yet remain, which are not pet dead though at 


the point to die;—so De Wette, Bie 
ping; and see Winer, § 27, 0 ee 


he fast, and repent. 


v. 3—4.] 


to die: for I have not found thy 
works perfect before God. 

3 Remember therefore how thou 
hast received and heard, and hold 
¢If therefore thou 
shalt not watch, I will come on thee 


REVELATION. I11. 


as a thief, and thou shalt not know 
what hour I will come upon thee. 

4 Thou hast a few names even in 
Sardis which have not defiled their 
garments; and they shall walk with 
me in white: for they are worthy. 





Trench (Auth. Vers. of the New Testament, 
p. 167) writes: “ The Angel . . . isnot bid- 
den to strengthen the graces that remain in 
his own heart, but the few and feeble believers 
that remain in the Church over which he pre- 
sides.” Burger denies this reference to the 
“ few names” or persons, who, he observes, are 
spoken of in ver. 4. He understands the great 
majority of the members of this church, who 
are now sunk in spiritual sleep; and he con- 
giders that to rouse them up from their 
slumber is the duty here imposed on their 
Bishop. 

which were ready to die:] See vv. /J.:— 
ahings, or persons, as before. The past tense 
is either “the epistolary aorist,” as in ch. i. 2; 
or it is meant that the Lord, Who is the 
speaker, looks back to His inquiry into the 
state of this Church (De Wette). 


for I have not found thy works perfect before 
my God.} Or I have found no works of 
thine fulfilled, or “complete,” so as to 
reach the standard which God requires ;— 
see vv. Hl. See also John vii. 8; xv. 11; Xvi. 


24. 

In the words “my God” (see ch. ii. 7), 
the judgment of the speaker is bound on to 
that of God (Alford). In Sardis only which 
is “dead,” and in “/ukewarm” Laodicea (ver. 
16) is there no mention of foes within or 
without. How often has the coldness ofa 
church been the result of its repose ? 


8. Remember therefore] See ch. i. 19 on 
word ¢herefore (ody), found twice in this verse. 


bow thou bast received| On the thought 
here cf. Col. ii. 6: note also the perfect 
tense. The doctrine had not suffered from 
. Sardis had kept what she had re- 
ceived, but had lost te Jow,—the manner 
in which she had once received it (Ebrard, 
Dusterd.). Vitr. De Wette and Hengst. also 
refer not to the manner of receiving but to 
ewhbat had been received, “qualem doctrinam 
ab apostolis acceperis” (Grotius). On the 
other hand,—the Lord is reminding Sardis 
of the heartiness, the zeal, the love, with 
which she received the truth at the first 
eee. Pp. 159). Burger would unite both 
the manner, and the matter,—cf. 1 Thess. i. 9; 
© 13. 
and didst hear;] The tense is changed: 
—how thou once didst hear: the perfect 
implies the possession of the truth ; the aerist 


points to the want of works corresponding. 
Ewald explains, “the receiving” the gifts of 
the Holy Ghost, which remain; and then the 
“ bearing doctrine preached,” which was a 
momentary act. 


and keep [it], and repent.] ‘The present 
tense (“keep”) denotes an abiding habit. 
Note the use of the verb “ keep” absolutely; 
the word is characteristic of St. John, signify- 
ing to “keep” my word, my commandments, 
&c.:—cf. ver. 8; John xiv. 15; 1 John ii. 3; 
and Introd. §7, m1. (d), 1. In the aorist 
(“ repent”) is implied “a quick and decisive 
act of amendment ” (Alf.). 

shalt not watch,| This warning, and taat 
in ver. 18, are combined in ch, xvi, 15. 


I wil] come asa thief,] See vv. //.; and 
cf. ch. xvi. 15. He comes not “ quickly,” as to 
Pergamum (ch. ii. 16); nor after “a time,” as 
to Thyatira (ch. ii. 21); but unexpectedly “as 
a thief.’ The stealthiness of the thief, not the 
violence of the robber, is implied in the original. 
The Lord repeats his own words, twice 
spoken, Matt. xxiv. 42, 43; Luke xii. 39, 40; 
words which profoundly impressed the early 
Church, cf. 1 Thess. v. 2, 4; 2 Pet. iii. 10° 
—see Trench, p. 160. This is a striking 
instance of the fact referred to in the notes 
on ch. i. 3; ii. 16, viz. the association of lan- 
guage specially referring to the Second Ad- 
vent, with some signal judgment about to 
overtake the church of Sardis :—cf. ch. ii, ag. 


what hour| Diisterd. points out that this 
is not a Hebrew construction (De Wette, 
Ebrard), but regular Greek ;—cf. John iv. 53 
and Winer, § 32, s.205. From the similarity 
of the warnings here, and in ch. xvi. 15, 
Ebrard infers that Sardis (and also Laodicea, 
see ver. 18) will exist at the time of the sixth 
Trumpet and sixth Vial ;—see on ver. 10. 


4. But thou bast a few names in Sardis] 
See vv. //. Perhaps there is a reference here 
to “thou hast a mame,” ver. 1; or “names” 
may be used for “ persons,” as in ch. xi. 
13; Num. iii. 40; Actsi. 15. Bengel notes 
that these few had not separated themselves 
from the church of Sardis, fallen though it 
was. Cf. Matt. xiii. 30, 47. 


which did not defile their garments :} 
For ye metaphor he see Jude 23 :—their 
spiritual attire, the robe of baptismal purity, 
Gal. iti. 27; Eph. iv. 24; not the © white 


537 


538 


He that overcometh, the same 
shall be clothed in white raiment; 
and I will not blot out his name out 


as of the “book of life, but I will con- 
fs fess his name before my Father, and 


before his angels. 


REVELATION. III. 


lv. 5—% 


6 He that hath an ear, let him 
hear what the Spirit saith unto the 
churches. 

7 And to the angel of the church 
in Philadelphia write; These things 
saith he that is holy, he that is true, 





garments” twice referred to in the context, 
and which are assumed at the Resurrection,— 
ch. vi. 113; Vii. 9. 

with me} Cf. John xvii. 24. 

in white; | Hereafter. “ In white garments,” 
“white” is the colour of heaven, see on 
ch. i. 14 :—the ellipsis is filled up in ver. 5. 

worthy.| Meet for the robes of heaven, cf. 
Matt. x. 10, 13, 37 :—‘t There-is another very 
fearful ‘ They are worthy’ in this Book (xvi. 
6)” (Trench, p. 164). 


5. He that overcometh, shall thus be 
arrayed} (See vv.//.). I.e.,—as those just 
mentioned ; or, “ thus” may be pleonastic, see 
on ch. ii. 15. See ch. vii. 13. 


in white garments;| See on ver. 4:— 
cf. ch. vii. 14; xix. 8. White represents the 
effulgence of light; and we are reminded of 
the words “Then shall the righteous shine 
forth as the sun,” Matt. xiil. 43; cf also 
Ps. civ. 2; Dan. xii. 3. 

andi willin no wise Jd/ot out His name] 
See John vi. 37. The benefit here is personal. 
We thus iearn that a name, though written in 
“the Book of Life,” may be blotted out :— 
the result is told in ch. xx. 15. 


out of the book of life,| See ch. xiii. 8; 
xvil. 8; Xx. I2, 15; xxi. 27; and compare 
Ex. xxxii. 32; Ps. Ixix. 28; Isai. iv. 3; Ezek. 
xiii. 9; Dan. xii. 1; Phil. iv. 3 (in addition to 
which express mention of “ the Book of Life,” 
St. Paul elsewhere refers, without an image, 
to God’s eternal purpose of love toward his 
saints, Eph. i. 4, 5:—see Trench, Studies in 
the Gospels, p. 234). Im ch. xili. 8 we read 
of “ the Book of Life of the Lamb ;” and the 
Lord speaks of those whose “ames are 
quritten in heaven,’ Luke x. 20; compare 
Heb. xii. 23. Some see here an emblem of 
“the Divine memory,”—cf. the words of 
St. Augustine quoted on ch. xx. 12. Others 
{Vitringa, Schéttgen, Ziillig) derive the 
image from the genealogical tables of the 
priests: see Ezra ii. 62; Neh. vil. 64. 

In ch. vii. Dan and Ephraim, both leaders 
of apostasy, are omitted from the names of the 
Twelve Tribes. There is not, however, in the 
entire Scripture any mention of a contrasted 
‘book of death: ’— see on ch. xx. 12; and 
cf. Isai. xlvili, 19. 

and I will confess his name| Here are 
combined the “confessions,” of Matt. x. 32 


and Luke xii. 8 ; “ What I say unto you I say 
unto all.” The Lord is now setting His seal 
from heaven upon His words uttered on earth. 
(Trench, p. 168.) 

The promise in this verse to him “that 
overcometh” is threefold, as in ch. ii. 17, 26— 
29:—(1) the vesture of the company of 
heaven (see ch. xix. 14); (2) eternal life 
secured; (3) the public recognition that he 
is Christ’s. The kingly rule of the saints 
had been indicated in ch. ii. 27, 28; here 
their priestly functions are implied in their 
white raiment :— see Ex. xxviii. 39, 42 ; Ezek. 
xliv. 17, 18. 

The words—“ out of the book of life, and 
I will confess bis name”—omitted in his 
manuscript, were supplied by Erasmus after 
the Vulgate: see vv. //. 

6. He that hath an ear,| See on ch. ii. 29. 
This Epistle is in a great part woven together 
of sayings of the Lord preserved in the first 
three Gospels, rather than in St. John’s: eg. 
the watching and the coming as a thief, see ver. 
3 (compare Mark xiii. 37);—“ The Book of 
Life ” (cf. Luke x. 20), with the “ confessions,” 
see ver. 5 ;—and also the words common to 
all these Epistles,—so constantly on our 
Lord's lips, and yet never found in the fourth 
Se He that hath an ear, let him 

ear.” 


THE EPISTLE TO PHILADELPHIA (7-13) 


7. And unto the angel of the churchin Phil- 
adelphia| This city on the eastern frontier 
of Lydia, to the south-east of Sardis, on the 
little river Cogamus, at the foot of mount 
Tmolus to the north-west, was built by 
Attalus Philadelphus, king of Pergamum, B.C. 
138. Nocity of Asia Minor suffered so much 
from earthquakes by which it was nearly 
destroyed, A.D. 17 (Tac. Ann. ii. 47; Strabo, 
xili. 4). To this event allusions have been 
found in the words “ thou hast a little power,” 
ver. 8 ; and in the image of a “ pil/ar,” ver. 12: 
—see on ver. 14. Ignatius writing to this 
church, calls it in the salutation of his epistle, 
“ Philadelphia in Asia,” to distinguish it from 
other cities of the same name. Its modern 
name is Allah Scaabr, and under this name 
it alone is included in the list of modern 
cities: it still retains a Christian population ; 
it has several churches, and an active trade, 

In the “ Apost. Constitutions” (vii. 46) we 
read: “ Demetrius was appointed bishop of 


v. 8.} 


he that hath the key of David, he 

that openeth, and no man shutteth ; 

and shutteth, and no man openeth ; 
8 I know ths wo-ks: behold, I 


REVELATION. III. 


have set before thee an open door, 
and no man can shut it: for thou 
hast a little strength, and hast-kept my 
word, and hast not denied my name. 





Philadelphia by me”—doubtless the Apostle 
John, who is referred to just before as having 

inted the bishop of Ephesus; see on ch. 
ii. 1. This is probably the Demetrius men- 
tioned in 3 John 12. 


he that is true, he that is holy,] See 
wv. H, These are titles which, in their 
absolute sense, belong to God only, see ch. iv. 
8; vi. 10; John xvii. 3, 11 ;—-cf. “ Very God, of 
very God” in the Nicene Creed. The anti- 
thesis, according to the well-known distinction 
between adnéuwds here (a word which is found 
in the New Testament in Luke xvi. 11; in 
1 Thess. i. 9; three times in the Epistle to the 
Hebrews; and twenty-three times in St. 
John’s writings, of which fen cases occur in 
this Book), and ddnéns (not found in the 
Apocalypse),—is not between the frue (John 
fii. 33) and the fa/se (Titus i. 2), but between 
the perfect (John i. 9) and the imperfect (see 
on ver. 14). Hence no contrast is intended 
here between “ truth ” and “ falsehood,” as in 
ver. 9. 

The title “oly” is emphatically ascribed 
to Christ in John vi. 69 (according to the 
true reading, “the Holy One of God’’), and 
finds its explanation in John x. 36. The 
fundamental idea of aysos—* a word of rarest 
use in Attic Greek ”—is “ separation,” “ con- 
secration and devotion to the service of 
Deity.” Thus the Jews were “oly,” for 
God is “oly” (Lev. xix. 2). Hence the 
*Trisagion’ of ch. iv. 8. For the word éctos, 
which also denotes “‘ 4o/y,” see on ch. xv. 4:— 
cf. Trench, Syn. of the N. T., p. 313- 


he that bath the key of David,| The “key” 
is the symbol of authority,—see on ch. i. 18. 
Christ’s authority is exercised over the king- 
dom of God—to open its doors and invite ali 
to enter—as being supreme Lord, and heir of 
the throne of David ;—see ch. v. 5; xxii. 16, 
and cf. Luke i. 32. Of His own right the 
Lord “ 4ath” this key; which was only en- 
trusted to, or “/aid upon the shoulder” of 
Eliakim (2 Kings xviii. 18), in that passage of 
Isaiah (xxii. 20-22) which is plainly referred 
to here. Eliakim had been installed as 
steward of the king’s household; and “te 
key” had been committed to him as the 
symbol of his office. The historical bearing 
of this reference falls into the background. 
The words are chosen because they describe, 
in terms which the prophecy had made 
familiar, that aspect of the highest sove- 
feignty which was now most needed (cf. 
Plumptre, p. 177). David is ever the type 


of the supreme ruler of the Theocracp— 
Jer. xxx. 9; Ezek. xxxiv. 23; xxxvil. 24; 
Hos. iii. 5. The “4ouse of David” is, in 
the Old Test., the typical designation of the 
“ Kingdom of David” (Ps. cxxii. 5; Isai. vii, 
2); and the true kingdom of David is the 
Kingdom of Jesus Christ—the Church of 
God of which the Lord Himself has “ tbe 
keys,” and the power of admitting thereto 
(Matt. xvi. 19; xxviii. 18). 

he that openeth,| There is more than one 
explanation, not altogether satisfactory, here: 
such as a reference to ch. i. 18 ;—ar to the 
power of opening out the sense of Scripture, 
ch. -v. 9; Luke xi. 52; xxiv. 32 ;—or, near] 
to the same effect, that of Irenzus (iv. 20, 2 
who applies these words to the opening of 
the Sealed Book, ch. v. 4, 5. 

and 20 man shall shut, and that shutteth, 
and no man openeth ;| (See vv. //.). “He has 
not so committed the keys . . . to any other 
... but that He still retains the highest 
administration of them in His own hands.” 
Trench, p. 173. 

The attributes which the Lord here as- 
cribes to Himself are not taken so fully from 
ch. i. as in the case of the other addresses. 
In ch. i. 13, 14, He appears as the Holy One, 
but is not so named ;—in ch. i. 18, He holds 
the “ eys,” but not in the same sense as in 
this verse. Hengst., however, takes the sense 
te be the same: ‘‘ To whomsoever He opens 
with the key of David, for him He shuts 
death and Hell.” 


8. I know thy works] Either put abso- 
lutely, conveying comfort, and without refers 
ence to the words which follow, “because 
thou hast” &c.;—or, as Bengel, De aber 
Ewald, explain, wit/ that reference, 
defining “ t4e works,” the intervening clause 
being parenthetic, viz—""I know thy works; 
.- + that thou bast,” as in vv. 1,15: ch ch 
ih 12 

(dehold, I have set before thee a door 
opened, which no man canshut),, (Le, 
I have given, Gr. dé5axa. See vv. i). 

A metaphor often used by St. Paul,—Acts 
xiv. 27 ; 1 Cor. xvi. 9; 2 Cor. ii. 12; Col. iv. 3. 
Christ, Who “sath the key of David,” has 
opened the door for the Gentiles of Phil- 
adelphia; and, in general, for the missions of 
the Church, —see ver. 9; cf. Matt. xi. 12; 
Col. i. 13. Some take the words to mean 
“entrance into the joy of thy Lord,” Matt. 
xxv. 21; 2 Pet.i.11; others, “into the hid- 
den meaning of Scripture;” &e. 


539 


54": 


9 Behold, I will make them of the 
synagogue of Satan, which say they 
are Jews, and are not, but do lie ; 
behold, I will make them to come 
and worship before thy feet, and to 
know that I have loved thee. 


REVELATION. IIL. 


~ 


[v. 9—ta 


10 Because thou hast kept the 
word of my patience, I also will keep 
thee from the hour of temptation, 
which shall come upon all the world, 
to try them that dwell upon the 
earth. 





Ebrard connects “ dehold” here, with 
“ behold” which occurs tawice in ver. 9 :—(1) 
the blessing which the Lord has given ; (2) 
the opposition which He gives; (3) the 
victory which He will give. 

On the redundant pronoun here, frequent 
im relative sentences, cf. ch. vii. 2, 9; xx. 8: 
see Winer, § 22, 4,4. 

that thou hast] Or, because. Either 
“T know thy works... that thou hast,” @'c., 
as in ver. 1; or—without the parenthesis— 
giving the reason of the privilege just stated. 


a little power,| Thus rendered, the 
words express one of three good qualities, here 
stated, which mark this Church. The ma- 
jority, however (omitting theindefinite article), 
understand “thou hast little power, and 

et,” &c. :—‘they were poor in number and 
in wealth compared with the Jews.’ 


and didst keep my word,| See on ver. 3. 


and didst not deny my name.] The 
tenses denote a past occasion in which Phil- 
adelphia had been faithful: or, “and yet 
thou didst,” &c.,—see above. 


9. Behold, I give of the synagogue of 
Satan,| ‘‘The partitive genitive” (Winer, 
§ 59,s. 466),—“ certain persons from out 
of the synagogue.” ‘The present tense “ I 
give” is taken up below in the formal 
future “I will make.” Disterd. rejects the 
senses “patiar” (Wolf); “TI give to thee” 
(Hengst.). Not false Christians, but Jews 
are meant; Jews of the class referred to in 
ch. ii. 9. See Introd. § 4, b. 


of them which say they are Jews, and, 
they are not,] In apposition with “the syn- 
agogue of Satan :?’—see on ch. ii. 9. 

but do lie; behold, I will make them] Viz. 
“ them which say.” 

to come and worship before thy feet,| The 
tenses here are in the future, see vv. /l.,—a 
construction characteristic of St. John, “that 
they shall come and worship;” cf. ch. xiii. 
12; John xvii. 2: see Winer, s. 258, and 
Introd. § 7, iv.(/). There is areference to the 
fulfilment of Isai. lx. 14 (cf. Zech. viii. 20-23); 
and to “the opened door,” ver. 8. What is 
said in Isai. xlix. 23, is here said of certain of 
the Jews. In this one instance Israel appears 
to submit to the Cross. Commentators of a 
certain school place the restoration of the 
Jews under the sixth Vial, where we meet 
again the warnings of this chapter, vv. 4, 18; 


see ch. xvi. 15. Archbishop Trench (p. 177) 
refers to St. Ignatius (ad Philadelph., 6), whose 
words imply the actual presence in this Church 
of Jewish converts, who preached the faith 
which once they persecuted. 


and to know that I have loved thee.) 
The “I” is emphatic. Note here the form 
1yamyoa, and see on ver. 19 where a different 
verb occurs expressing greater tenderness and 
personal affection; cf. John xxi. 16, 17; and 
Trench, Sy. of N.T., p. 38. Dtsterd. illus- 
trates the strictly aoristic sense (“that I 
loved thee”) by 1 John iv. ro, 11. 


10. didst keep the word of my patience,] 
To “my word” (ver. 8) is added “of my 
atience” ; “the whole Gospel, teaching as 
it does the need of a patient waiting 
for Christ” (Trench) ;—or understand “ the 
word” enjoining that patience which be- 
longs to me and mine, ch. i. 9 (De Wette); as 
Mr. Green translates, “ My patience-enjoin- 
ing word ;”—or, the special saying of Christ 
enjoining patience, Matt. x. 22; Luke viii. 15, 

Jrom the hour of trial, that [hour 
which is tocome on the whole world, 
Or, the hour of temptation which is about 
to come. For the language and meaning 
here, cf. John xvii. 15: see aiso ch. vii. 3, 14. 
The reference is to the predicted trial, Matt. 
xxiv. 21, &c.; and so it is said, ver. 11, “I 
come quickly.” Philadelphia, notes Ebrard 
on ch, xvi. 15, is to exist under the sixth 
Trumpet; but shall be preserved from the 
hour of trial which is to come “ on the whole 
world” (ch. xvi. 14) :—its “trial” or “ tempe 
tation” is to be that of the sixth Trumpet and 
sixth Vial:—see on ver. 3. (World, or ine 
habited earth,—oixoupern). 


t. try them] Or to tempt them. 


that dwell on the earth.| Meaning, ace 
cording to the usage of the Apocalypse (ch. 
vi. 10; Vill. 13; xi. 10; xiii. 8, 14), the mass 
of mankind as contrasted with believers ree 
deemed from “‘every people and tongue,” ch.v.9 
(Disterd.); the redeemed being “ contem- 
plated as already seated in heavenly places 
with Christ ” (Trench). They “ that dwell 
on the earth” are opposed to those “ that 
tabernacle” in heaven,—cf. ch. xii. 12; xiii, 
6. Zullig sees the fulfilment of this promise 
in ch. vii. 1, &c. 

Here only, in the Seven Epistles, is there 
some degree of consent among comment 


v. ci—r 2.] 


11 Behold, I come quickly: hold 
that fast which thou hast, that no 
man take thy crown, 

12 Him that overcometh will I 
make a pillar in the temple of my 
God, and he shall go no more out: 


tors that Antichrist is spoken of:—see “J 
come quickly,” ver. 11; and cf. Andreas in 
foc. Different writers discover here refer- 
ences to the persecutions under Nero, or 
Domitian, or Trajan (Dusterd. in /oc.). 
Ebrard understands the time of the sixth 
Trumpet and Vial: see above. 

ll. I come quickly :] (Omit “ Bebold,’—see 
vv. /l.). This key-note of the Apoc.—at times 
(ch. ii. 16) a word of fear—is here a word 
of comfort; cf. ch. xxii. 7, 12, 20 (Trench, 
Pp. 179) :—it is an exhortation, too, the only 
one that Philadelphia needed. The expres- 
gion has also reference to “ the Sour” in ver. 
To. As to the distinction between absolute 
and relative duration, see on ch. i. 1; viii. 1. 

bold fast that which thou bast,|) Viz. 
that strength and faithfulness described in 
wv. 8-10 :—Ephesus, too, “ 4ad” a hatred of 
the works of the Nicolaitans, ch. ii. 6. This 
possession each one must “4o/d fast” in 
order to retain the “crown:” ch. ii 25; 
Matt. xxiv. 13. 

that no man take thy crown.] See on ch. ii. 
to. De Wette, followed by Archbishop 
Trench and others, explains, “to take away,” 
“ wegnehmen,” “ auferre,’? as in ch. Vi. 4. 
Archbishop Trench regards the words as 
exactly equivalent to Col. ii. 18. Others, 
with the Vulgate, “ accipiat,” “receive” (cf. 
Matt. vii. 8; Luke xi. 10; John xvi. 24), 
i.e. ‘in thy stead, the place of glory de- 
signed for thee ;” as David succeeded Saul 
(1 Sam. xvi. 1),—or Matthias Judas (Acts 
i, 20, 25),—or the Gentiles the Jews (Rom. 
xi. 11): cf. ver. 5. On the word “crown” 
see note D. on ch. ii. 10. 


12. He that overcometh, him will I 
make] For the constr. cf. on ch. ii. 26. 
a pillar] A promise of permanence is con- 
ed by this expression, not a title of dignity 
asin Gal. ii. 9 (Trench). The “ Candlestick” 
ch. ii. 5) may be removed ; the pi//ar remains 
ed. Disterd.(with Bengel, Ewald, Hengst., 
Ebrard) takes the words as referring to future 
glory,—the community of believers forming 
the Temple of God (see ch. xiii. 6 ; 1 Pet. ii. 5), 
and the individual saints appearing as pillars 
Gal. ii. 9),—an explanation not very different 
m the preceding. Various other references 
are given: Eichhorn refers to Isai, xxii. 23 ;— 
Stern to Jer. i. 18 ;—Vitringa, Ztllig, &c. 
to 1 Kings vii. 15, 21; Jer. lii. 20; and 
they compare the two pillars called “ Ja- 


REVELATION. III. 


and I will write upon him the name 
of my God, and the name of the 
city of my God, which is new Jeru- 
salem, which cometh down out of 
heaven from my God: and J will 
write upon him my new name. 


chin” and “Boaz,” names which probably 
signify ‘God will establish in strength, or 
firmly, the Temple and the religion connected 
with it’ (see the note on 1 Kings vii. 21). Both 
the names signify permanence, notes Words., 
who adds, that in the ancient temples of Asia 
to which St. John wrote, and of Greece, pillars 
of temples were often sculptured in 4uman 
shape, such as the Caryatides at Athens, and 
the Atlantes still visible at Pompeii. 

This figure of permanence may be used in 
contrast to the earthquakes frequent at Phile 
adelphia, see on ver. 7. Compare the remarke 
able words of Gibbon, quoted on ver. 13. 


in the temple of my God,| Properly “Sano- 
tuary,” Naos; the ‘Temple, in its more 
limited and more august sense, as the ‘ habita- 
tion’ (vaiw, habito) of God ; into which Zacha- 
rias entered to burn incense (Luke i. 9), but 
into which the Lord, not being of the Levi- 
tical Priesthood, never entered during His 
ministry on earth (Trench, Syzoz., p. 11) :— 
see on ch. xi. 1,2; and cf. ch. vii. 15; xxi. 22; 
John ii. 19-21. Note,—The word Hieron 
(iepov, templum) which signifies the whole 
compass of the sacred enclosure, and which 
is frequently found in the Fourth Gospel, 
does not occur in the Apocalypse. When 
the Apocalypse was written, the ‘Temple’ 
had been destroyed for more than a quarter 
of acentury. There is no Temple indeed 
in the heavenly Jerusalem (ch. xxi. 22), but 
the City is all Temple. The saints are no 
longer the stones merely, as in the imagery 
of the Church Militant (1 Cor. iii. 16; Eph, 
ii. 19-22), but the pillars themselves ;—cf. 
Alf. in Joc. 

The image of the pil/ar is now dismissed, 
and “the Conqueror” alone remains. 

The Visions with which the Apocal 
closes are anticipated here,—the spiritual 
Temple, the Holy City, the impress of the 
Divine Name :—see ch. xxi. 10, 22; xxii. 4. 

and he shall go outthence no more:] Le, 
from the heavenly Temple. Cf. the thought 
expressed in John viii. 35; x. 28, 29; Matt. 
XXV. Io. 

and I will write upon him] Not upon the 
pillar (Grotius, De Wette), but upon the 
conqueror shall be written #/ree names :— 

(1) the name of my God,| Diisterd. (after 
Ewald, &c.) suggests a reference to the High 
Priest’s frontlet (Ex. xxviii. 36-38), illustrate 
ing this by the seal on the brow of the faithful, 


541 


542 


13 He that hath an ear, let him 
hear what the Spirit saith unto the 
churches. 

14 And unto the angel of the 


ch. vii. 3 ; ix. 4; xiv. 1 5 xxii. 4;—this dignity 
being common to all who share in the royal 
priesthood, ch. i. 6; 

(2) and the name of the city of my God,]| 
Viz. “ Jehovah-shammah,” “the Lord is 
there,” Ezek. xlviii. 35 :—cf. ch. xxi. 11, 23. 
While on earth the citizenship of the saints 
(Phil. iii. 20) is latent; hereafter, thus sealed, 
it is their right to enter in by the gates into 
the City, ch. xxii. 14 (Trench, p. 183). Pro- 
fessor Plumptre (p. 187) prefers the name 
“ Jehovah-Tsidkenu,” “ The Lord our Right- 
eousness” which was to be the name of the 
City in its glorified state, no less than of the 
Anointed King (Jer. xxiii. 6; xxxili. 16). 

the new Jerusalem,| Omit which is. In 
ch. xxi. 2, 10, the title “ 4o/y” is given it, as in 
Matt. iv. 5; xxvii. 53; (cf. Neh. xi. 1; Isai. 
xlviii. 2); but this title the earthly city had 
forfeited for ever. In Gal. iv. 26, we read of 
“ Jerusalem which is above ;”—in Heb. xii. 22 
of “the city of the living God, the heavenly 
Jerusalem” (Trench, p. 184). 

St. John uses, in his Gospel, only the Greek 
and civil form of the name Jerusalem; in the 
Apocalypse always the Hebrew and more 
holy appellation, as writing of the Heavenly 
City which is described in ch. xxi. 2, 10; 
xxil. 5 ;—see Introd. § 7, iv. (a). 

which cometh down out of heaven from my 
God.| The construction is an instance of 
“ irregular apposition,’—Winer, § lix. 11. 
In ch. xxi. 2, the City is the glory of “ the 
new earth;” and its spiritual character is 
here represented by its descending from God. 
Its citizens are to bear its name when finally 
transferred to heaven. 

Archbishop Trench happily quotes on 
these words the lines of Bernard of Clugny 
in his Laus Patrie Calestis -— 


“Me receptet Sion illa, 
Sion, David urbs tranquilla, 
Cujus faber Auctor lucis, 
Cujus portz lignum Crucis,” &c. 


G3) and mine own new name.] Omit the 
in italics, I will write upon him. The 
ancommunicated Name, ch. xix. 12 (cf. ch. ii. 
17),—not that in ch. xix. 13, or 16:—see on 
ch. vii. 3. The name ’Apviov, “the Lamb,” 
—which is applied to Christ 28 times in the 
Revelation, and not elsewhere,—has been 
suggested as being “the new name” here 
(see Plumptre, p. 188) :—but for this sug- 
gestion there seems to be no sufficient reason. 

In these three names, we seem to have 
the baptismal formula of Heaven: the Name 


REVELATION. III. 


[v. 1314 


church ‘of the Laodiceans vrite;! 
These things saith the Amen, the 
faithful and true witness, the begin- 
ning of the creation of God ; 





of God the Father ;—the Name of the Son; 
—the Name of this City, or Tabernacle, built 
up of the redeemed as “living stones,” “ the 
Temple [vads] of the Holy Ghost” (1 Cor. iti, 
16; vi. 19; 1 Pet. ii. 5):—cf. ch. xiii. 6. 

The expression “my God” occurs four 
times in this verse,—see ver. 2. 

13. He that hath an ear) See on ch. ii, 7. 

Gibbon having touched upon the present 
condition of the other six Churches, writes —= 
“ Philadelphia alone has been saved by pro 
phecy or courage. At a distance from the 
sea, forgotten by the Emperors, encom 
on all sides by the Turks, her valiant citizens 
defended their religion and freedom above 
fourscore years, and at length capitulated 
with the proudest of the Ottomans. Among 
the Greek colonies and churches of Asia, 
Philadelphia is still erect—a column in a scene 
of ruins—a pleasing example that the paths of 
honour and safety may sometimes be the 
same.”— Decline and Fall, ch. \xiv. 


THE EPISTLE TO LAODICEA (14-22). 


14, in Laodicea] (See vv.//.). Laodicea, at 
first Diospolis (its tutelary deity was Zeus), 
then Rhoas (Plin. v. 29), was lastly named by 
Antiochus ii., one of the Seleucid kin 
(B.C. 261-246), after his wife Laodice. T 
modern Turkish name is Eshi-Hissar, “the 
Old Castle.” It was situated on the Lycus 
a tributary of the Mzander, in the south- 
west of Phrygia, not far from Colossz 
and Hierapolis (Col. iv. 13), and forming 
with the other Apocalyptic Churches a sort 
of semicircle round Ephesus, “ Laodicea 
and Hierapolis stand face to face, being 
situated respectively on the southern and 
northern sides of the valley [of the Lycus 
at a distance of six miles, and within sight 
each other, the river lying in the open plain 
between the two. The site of Colossz ig 
somewhat higher up the stream.”—Bishop 
Lightfoot, Epp. to the Col. and to Philem., p. a. 
A powerful Jewish colony seems to have 
existed in Laodicea, Col. ii. 1; iv. 13-16, 
It was specially called ‘ Laodicea on the 
Lycus” (A, 7 émt Avxm) to distinguish it 
from several other cities of the same name, 
Under the Romans it became one of the im- 
portant seats of commerce in the interior of 
Asia Minor; its trade consisting in the ex- 
change of money, and in woollen manufactures 
(Cic. ad Div. ii. 17; Strabo, xii. 8, 16)j 
the “raven-blackness” of its fleeces being 
much esteemed:—see Lightfoot, Ac, p. 43 
cf. vv. 17, 18. Of Ephesus and Laodices 


REVELATION. III. 


alone among the Seven Churches do we 
read elsewhere in the New Testament; see 
the references above, and note B, on ch, i. 
4. The cities it the valley of the Lycus 
were exposed to constant danger from earth- 
quakes ; and similar catastrophes befel the 
meighbouring cities of Sardis, and Smyrna, 
and Philadelphia (Tac. Ann. ii. 7; Strabo, xii. 
8; Chron. Pasch. i. p. 489). Laodicea the 
flourishing and the populous was laid in ruins 
about A.D. 63. Tacitus places the earthquake 
in the year 60. [‘‘ Eodem anno ex inlustribus 
Asie urbibus Laodicea, tremore terre pro- 
lapsa, nullo a nobis remedio propriis opibus 
revaluit.”— Ann., xiv. 27]. As here stated, while 
other cities, prostrated by a like visitation, had 
sought relief from Rome, “it was the glory of 
Laodicea that she alone neither courted nor 
obtained assistance but recovered by her own 
resources,” and rose again with more than 
her usual splendour (Lightfoot, /.c., p. 43). 
In these facts we have the best illustration of 
wv. 17, 18. Neither metropolitan Ephe- 
sus, nor imperial Sardis could lay claim to 
such independence: “ No one would dispute 
her boast that she had ‘gotten riches and 
had need of nothing’” (5, p. 44). Subse- 
quently, at the outset of the Paschal contro- 
versy, A.D. 165, her bishop Sagaris, a name 
held in great honour, fella martyr at Laodicea 
(Euseb. iv. 26); and the fact that Laodicea 
became the head-quarters of this contro- 
versy (see Hefele, Concil. Gesch., i. 297 ff.) 
testifies as to the prominence of this Church 
at the end of Cent.ii. From century to cen- 
tury, however, its influence declined. Bishop 
Lightfoot sums up its history (/. c., p. 64, &c.): 
—Having accepted the Nicene decisions in 
the Arian controversy (Labbe, Concil., t. ii. 
Pp. 236), Laodicea, through its bishop, joined in 
the condemnation of Athanasius at the synod 
of Philippopolis, A.D. 347 (Labbe, id., p. 744). 
At the “ Robbers’ Synod” of Ephesus (A.D. 
449) its bishop adopted the pclicy of Diosco- 
rus, and the opinions of the heretic Eutyches. 
Two years later, at Chalcedon (A.D, 451) the 
bishop of Laodicea sided with the orthodox 
party, and condemned the Eutychian heresy 
which he had so lately supported (Labbe, /. c. 
iv. p. 82, &c.), and the same vacillation and 
infirmity of purpose characterized this Church 
amid the religious troubles of later times, e.g. 
in the matter of Photius and the Eighth 
General Council (see Hefele, Concil. Gesch., 
iv. s. 378). “At length the name of this 
primitive Apostolic church passes wholly 
out of sight. The Turkish conquest pressed 
with more than common severity on these 
districts. When the day of visitation came, 
the church was taken by surprise . . . The 
long impending doom overtook her, and the 
golden Candlestick was removed for ever from 
the Eternal Presence. ”—Lightfoot, id., p. 72. 
For the remains of Christian churches at 


Laodicea, see Fellows, sia Minor, p. 282; 
Pococke, Description of the East, ii. p. 74. 

The ‘ Apostolical Constitutions’ (vii. 46 ; 
see note F on ch. i. 20) name Archippus as 
first bishop of Laodicea ; and St. Paul’s words 
(Col. iv. 17) have suggested that the Archip= 
pus there spoken of, may have been the 
negligent “Angel” here addressed. The 
name Archippus also occurs, Philem. 2; and 
were he, as is most probable, son of Philemon, 
a principal convert in the Colossian church,— 
and whose son might well have been chosen 
to the office of bishop,—“ it would be nothing 
strange to find him some thirty years later 
holding his office still” (Trench, /.c., p. 190). 
That the ministry of Archippus was exer- 
cised at Laodicea is regarded as most probable 
by Bishop Lightfoot (/c., p. 375) ;—see note A 
on ver. 19. Here, too, in Cent. iv., was held 
the Council whose sixtieth Canon contains 
a list of the Books of the Old and the New 
Testament “‘«qwhich were to be publicly. reaa 
in the Church” (see Hefele, /.c.,1. p. 749) ;—a 
definition which explains the absence of the 
Apocalypse from that list: see Introduction, 
§ 3. 


These things saith the Amen,| This title, 
“ Amen,” is used here only as a proper name, 
—cf. 2 Cor.i. 20. See the note on Isai. Ixv. 16, 
where the remarkable expression, “ the God of 
Amen” (jON,—LXX. adnOivés), is found, 
The absolute certainty ef what the Lord 
will announce to this “ Angel,” is implied in 
the verse, 

the faithful and true witness,| See vv. 
l.; and the same epithets (without the 
articles) in ch. xix. 11 :—the epithet “true” is 
applied absolutely to Christ in 1 John v. 20. 
This explanatory note on the word “ Amen,” 
is quite after the manner of St. John,—see 
on ch. ix. 11. The language, too, is chae 
racteristic of the Apostle,—cf. John iii. 11, 
32, 333 xviii. 37; see on ch. i. 5. It is 
to be noted, moreover, that our Lord is 
“ faithful” only in the sense of “trust- 
worthy,” “to be believed,” as the word is 
used 1 Johni. 9; cf. 1 Thess. v. 24; 2 Tim. 
ii. 11;—not in the sense of “trusting” or 
“believing,” as the word is used John xx. 27. 
Man may be “ faithful” in both senses; God 
only in the former. And thus the “truthfule 
ness,” or “veracity,” of Christ is asserted in 
the word “ faithful,”—not in the other epithet 
“ true,” which asserts “that he realized and 
fulfilled in the highest sense, all that be- 
longed to a witness” (Trench, p. 193): see 
on ver. 7. 


the beginning of the creationof God;| Not, 
as the Arians held, ina passive sense, ‘ the 
first created,’—a sense excluded both by the 
context, and by the whole conception of the 
Lord’s Person in this Book (see ch. i, 85 
xxi. 6 ;—xxii. 13:—how, asks Disterd. “ 


543 


544 


15 I know thy works, that thou 
art neither cold nor hot: I would 
thou wert cold or hot. 

16 So then because thou art luke- 
warm, and neither cold nor hot, I 
will spue thee out of my mouth. 


REVELATION. III. 


{[v. 15—7& 


17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, 
and increased with goods, and have 
need of nothing; and knowest not 
that thou art wretched, and miserable, 
and poor, and blind, and naked: 

18 I counsel thee to buy of me 





every creature in Heaven and earth, ch. v. 13, 
adore Him, if He Himself were one of them, 
ef. ch. xix. 10?”),—but in an active sense, 
‘the Beginner’; in the words of the Creed, 
“by Whom all things were made” (John i. 
1-3; Heb. i. 2; cf. Rev.iv. 11). He isprinci- 
pium, not initium; and that, too, as “princi- 
pium principians,” not “ principium principia- 
tum ;” —‘the Beginning’ (Col. i. 18) from 
which all Creation emanates; as the ‘ Last’ 
(ch. i. 17) signifies the end to which all 
Creation tends. In a word, He is the source 
not only of the first Creation, but also of the 
sew Creation, which springs from Him as the 
second Adam :—“ Behold I make all things 
New,” ch. xxi. 5. 

15. I know thy works,| Partly a menace 
(ver. 16), partly a counsel (ver. 18). 

I would} In form a wish,—in reality a 
regret (Trench). On the text of this verse, 
see vv. // 


thou wert cold or hot.| Dusterd., followed 
by Alf., understands the fervent zeal of the 
true believer (Rom. xii. 11), on the one 
hand; and active hostility to Christ, on the 
other,—the “‘ /ukewarm ” state being specified 
in ver. 16. Archbishop Trench more justly 
explains “cold” to mean “one hitherto un- 
touched by the powers of grace ;” “ /ukewarm” 
to mean “one who has tasted of the good gift 

. . . but in whom that grace has failed to 
kindle more than the faintest spark.” ‘“ The 
publicans and harlots were cold; the 
Apostles 4ot; the Scribes and Pharisees 
fukewarm;” cf. Luke vii. 36-50, and the 
thought conveyed in John ix. 41 :—so also 
Bengel, Bhar &c. The reproof of “ /uke- 
warm” Laodicea is specially characteristic, 
by contrast, of the Apostle who records this 
message,—St. John, the Son of Thunder, 
whose zeal had not lost its old intensity; cf. 
2 John, ro, 11 (Plumptre, /c., p. 199). 

16. So because thou art lukewarm, and 
acither hot nor cold,] (Seevv.//.). “Thus,” 
“So then,” Sic igitur,—cf£ Rom. i, 15; see 
also on ver. 5. 

I will spew thee] Note the announcement 
of the certainty of judgment expressed by the 
absolute future in ch. il. 5, 16, 23; iii. 3; while, 
here, the pests of yet averting that judg- 
ment is expressed by pedAo (cf. ver. 2). 

out of my mouth.) Archbishop Trench 
prefers to connect this verse with ver. 17 ;— 


placing asemicolon here at the end, and a full 
stop at the end of ver. 17. So also Burger, 
who takes ver. 18 as a new proposition placed 
in contrast to vv. 15-17. The question is 
“whether Christ threatens to reject him, 
because he says I am rich, °c. ; or whether, 
because he says he is all this, therefore 
Christ counsels him,” as in ver.18. The A. V. 
adopts the latter connexion. 

For the subsequent religious history of 
Laodicea, see on ver. 14. 


17. Because thou sayest,| The punctuation 
of the A. V. is adopted by Bengel, Ebrard, 
Dusterd., Alf.:—the analogy of vv. 8, 10; 
or of ch. xviii. 7, 8, may be quoted as aue 
thority for either view as to the connexion. 

Iam rich,] Spiritual riches are, of course, 
the predominant idea; but the reference to 
the worldly prosperity of Laodicea need not 
be excluded :—opulent in worldly riches, she 
was spiritually destitute. For the pride in 
her wealth and grandeur which Laodicea 
manifested, see on ver. 14. 

and have gotten riches, and have need 
of nothing;| Gr. “in nothing,” see vv. JL, 
Writers find here a climax—riches gradually 
increasing to self-sufficingness, cf. 1 Cor. iv. 8 i 
Hos. xii. 8, “two passages of holy irony 
(Trench). 

and knowest not that thou] ‘Thou of all 
others, —observe the emphatic pronoun. 

art wretched,| Gr. “the wretched one:” 
—this adjective (ra\aizwpos) is found only 
here and in Rom. vii. 24. 

and miserable,| And é\eewwos also, only here 
and in 1 Cor.” xv. 19. It seems better to 
render thus, than to take the last four adjec- 
tives as subordinate to the article before the first 
of the five.—“the wretched and miserable 
...and naked one.” Archbishop Trench, 
accepting the authority for reading an article 
before the second adjective also, renders,— 
“that thou art the wretched and the 
miserable one, and poor,” &c. (A, B=4 
édeew.). The three concluding adjectives 
would thus correspond with the three clauses 
of ver. 18, although in a different order. 

and poor, and blind, and naked:] See on 
ver. 18. 

18. I counsel thee] The question whether 
a new sentence begins here, summing up the 
result of the previous remonstrance; of 


v. 19—20.] 


gold tried in the fire, that thou 
mayest be rich; and white raiment, 
that thou mayest be clothed, and that 
the shame of thy nakedness do not 
appear; and anoint thine eyes with 


@Prov. 3. eyesalve, that thou mayest see. 


hs. 12. 


1g “As many as I love, I rebuke 


REVELATION. IIL 


and chasten: be zealous therefore, 
and repent. 

20 Behold, I stand at the door, 
and knock: if any man hear my 
voice, and open the door, I wiil come 
in to him, and will sup with him, and 
he with me. 





whether this verse has to be connected with 
ver. 17, has been stated in the note on ver. 16. 

to buy of me] Or “from me,”—the words 
are emphatic; cf. Isai.lv.1. In Christ are 
hidden “all the treasures of wisdom and know- 
edge: —so St. Paul had told the Colossians 
(Col. ii. 3), and had desired (Col. iv. 16) that 
his Epistle should be read at Laodicea. But 
the Laodiceans “had not learned their lesson ” 
(Trench, p. 202.) 

gold refined by jire,] Le. fresh burnt 

out of the fire,—“not only tried by the 
cess, but bright and new from the fur- 
nace” (Alf:): see on ch. i. 15, and cf. Zech. 
xiii. 9 (LXX). This may be regarded (see 
on ver. 17) as taking up the epithet “ poor.” 
that thou mayest become rich;| Cf. ch. 
ii. 9; 1 Cor.i. 5; Eph.i. 18. 

and white garments, that thou mayest 
clothe thyself,| See on vv. 4,5. On this 
clause, cf. ch. xvi. 15. 

and [that] the shame of thy nakedness be not 
made manifest;| Je., either now, or at the 
Last Day when each guest must have “the 
wedding garment,”—Matt. xxii. 11-13: see 
on ch. xix. 8. This clause may be regarded 
as taking up the ¢vird epithet, “naked,” in 
ver. 17; cf. Isai. xlvii. 3. 

From the similarity of the language here 
to that of ch. xvi. 15, Ebrard infers that 
Laodicea, as well as Sardis and Philadelphia, 
will exist under the sixth Trumpet (s. 439); 
see ON VU. 3, IO. 


and eye-salve to anoint thine eyes,]| 
(See vv. I.) “ Eye-salve,” or™collyrium, was 
an ointment made up in the long and round 
form of a cake of bread, collyra:— cf. 
1 Kings xiv. 3 (LXX.); Hor. Sat. I. v. 30. 
Spiritually understood (cf. Ps. xiii. 3; xix. 
8) the unction of the Holy Spirit is denoted 
(see 1 John ii. 20, 27), as by “gold” the 
muine Christian graces are intended, and 
y “white garments” the righteousness of 
which they are the symbol, as in ch. xix. 8. 
As before, the epithet “ d/ind” in ver. 17, is 
now taken up. Under the light of these 
words we can discern the spiritual significance 
of John ix. 6, 41. 
19. ds many as I love,| Note the em- 
tic position of the personal pronoun at the 
ginning,—the prerogative here assumed by 
Christ. Note also the verb (@:AG), different 


New Test—Vou. IV. 


from that used in ver. 9, now expressive of 
personal affection. The menace of ver. 16 is 
softened here. 

I reprove] See John iii. 20; viii. 46; xvi. 
8,—Gr. conviot. The verb implies that the 
person reproved is convinced (cf. 2 Sam. xii. 
13); it expresses an essential element of the 
chastening which follows. 

and chasten:| Hitherto, from verse 15, the 
Lord has exercised the force of conviction; 
this, as well as His chastisement, He here 
declares to flow from His /ove. The verb 
rendered to chasten means in Scripture, ‘to 
educate by means of correction :—both ideas 
are combined in Heb. xii. 5,6. As in2Sam. 
xii. 14, so here the correction follows the 
conviction (Trench, p. 210). 


be zealous] This word ({ndeve, through 
(dos connected with (é,and thus with ¢egrés, 
ver. 15) is chosen as the word of exhortation, 
with special reference to the /ukewarmness 
of Laodicea (cf. Trench, p.210). Addressed 
to the “ Angel” of the Church—and most 
probably to Archippus (see on ver. 14)— 
these words are the counterpart of the “‘ take 
heed” of St. Paul, Col. iv. 17:—see Note A 
at the end of this chapter. 


20. Behold, I stand at the door| Diisterd. 
thinks the meaning to bg merely “‘I come 
quickly,” as in ch. ii. 5, 16; iii. 3, 113 ch 
James v. 9. The usual interpretation, which 
refers to “the door” at which the Lord 
“ stands and knocks,” —the door of the heart,-= 
is far better. 


and knock:| Ebrard explains by Luke wit 
36; but the greater number of writers by 
the parallel words in Cant. v. 2,—the 
obvious bearing of which passage is of 
itself an answer to Ewald’s and De Wette’s 
assertion that there is no allusion to the 
Song of Solomon in the New Testament. 
The whole tenor, however, of the imag 
which represents the relation of the Church 
to Christ as that of the Bride to the 
Bridegroom, is founded upon that Book, 
—see ch. xix. 7. “ Between sleeping and 
waking, [the Bride] has been so slow to 
open the door, that when at length she does 
so, the Bridegroom has withdrawn (Cant. 
v. 5, 6) .. This exactly corresponds to the 
lukewarmness of the Angel here” (Trench, 
p- 214). 

MM 


545 


546 


21 To him that overcometh will 
I grant to sit with me in my throne, 
even as I also overcame, and am set 
down with my Father in his throne. 


REVELATION. III. 


|v. 21—08, 


22 He that hath an ear, let him 
hear what the Spirit saith unto the 
churches. 


TE 


I will come in to him, and will sup with 
bim,| Cf. ch. xix. 9; Matt. xxii. 2. 

and be with me.] Compare St. John’s usual 
style,— John vi. 56; xiv. 20; xv. 4; xvii. 21, 
23. Indeed the parallel between this verse 
and John xiv. 23, is very remarkable. In 
both passages the Divine Presence is condi- 
tional,—cf. ch. ii. 5, 16; iii. 3. 

This conclusion of the Epistle contrasts 
strongly with its beginning (ver. 16): “No 
other opens with such sharp unsparing seve- 
ity; no other closes with such yearning 
tenderness, and a promise so exceeding glori- 
ous” (Plumptre, p. 207). 

21. He that overcometh, to him will 
I give] See on ch. ii. 26. 

to sit down with me in my throne,| “A 
magnificent variation of Christ’s words, spoken 
in the days of his flesh,—John xvii. 22, 24” 
(Trench). Here only inthe New Testament 
is the preposition iz (not upon) twice used 
with “ throne,” denoting admission into, ses- 
sion in, the same throne; not the act of 
taking a seat upon a separate throne:—cf. Matt. 
xix. 28; Rev. iv. 2,9; &c. (Words.). Matt. 
xxiii. 22 is not an exception. 

The full glory of the “ Conqueror” is eternal 
communion with the Father and the Son; or, 
briefly, to reign with Christ,—ch. xxii. 5. The 
fulfilment of this pledge is to be looked for in 
eternity, as the prize of the victory over the 
world, over death, andoversin. Inthis wesee 
the accomplishment of the function committed 
tothe Son, John v. 22, 27, with which words 
this passage isin perfect harmony. Hence 
the futility of Scholten’s assertion (/. c., s. 9), 
that St. John could not have written the 
Apocalypse, because this promise contradicts 
the saying, “ts not Mine to give,”—Matt. xx. 
23; Mark x. 40. 

as I also overcame,| (Omit even). This 
thought is echoed at ch. v. 5; John xvi. 33. 

and sat down with my Father in his 
throne.| The tenses point to the historical 
facts of the Resurrection and Ascension. 
Some erroneously distinguish here between the 
thrones of the Father and the Son, in opposi- 
tion to ch, xxii. 1; cf. Mark xvi. 19; Heb. xii. 2. 

More than was promised to the Elect 
Twelve (Matt. xix. 28) is here promised to 
every believer ; and, as being the last of the 
promises to the Seven Churches, this is the 
climax of all (cf. Trench). 

22. unto the Churches.] See on ch. ii. 7. 
The fact already noted (see on ch. i. rr) that 
the Seven Epistles form a body of instruc- 


tion addressed to the Church Universal, of 
itself suggests the thought that the promises 
annexed to each Epistle are not to be ree 
garded as unconnected ;—that each reward has 
a wider application than to the particular 
victory which has in each several case been 
won ;—that the promises, in short, do not 
relate to distinct places or gradations of glory, 
to be assigned hereafter according to that 
degree of faithfulness which had been mani- 
fested in the different Churches, but that 
the Seven Promises combine to form one 
picture of the future bliss of heaven. The 
different forms in which Christian faith, during 
every stage of the Church's progress, may be 
exhibited are, first of all, exemplified in the 
different Epistles: (1) In the first (ch. ii. 
2-4), patient endurance and the rejection of 
evil, the faith that labours and does not feel the 
toil, which preserves the freshness of its first 
love ;—(2) In ch. ii. to, the being faithful 
unto death in days of suffering and perse- 
cution ;—(3) In ch. ii. 14, the rejection of 
idolatry and all appeals to sensuality (4) 
In ch. ii. 20, so essential to the Christian life 
are purity and personal holiness, the same 
object as in the third Epistle is repeated, and 
for this the servant of God must strive ;—(5) 
In ch. iii. 2, 3, watchfulness and repentance ;— 
(6) In ch. iii.8,the keeping Christ’s word, and 
the not denying His name ;—(7) In ch. iii. 
18, the coming to Christ Himself for strength. 
In each case, the promise forms the sequel. 
Distinct promises, however, are not made to 
distinct classes of those who fight the good 
fight of faith. The promise annexed to each 
Epistle is designed to set forth a particular 
aspect merely of the general condition re- 
served for a//.who shall have “ come out of 
the great tribulation” (ch. vil. 14); and to 
which, in ch. xxii. 17, “the Spirit and the 
Bride” invite the Reaeemed. No support. 
in a word, is given in these two chapters 
to the conclusion that there is to be an 
advance from glory to glory; or that the 
different stages must be traversed in succese 
sion, Were this so, the glory promised in 
the first Epistle would be by “the 
circle of light” most remote from the Divine 
Presence ; whereas in ch. xxii. 2, the same 
romise of the Tree of Life is the crowning, 
lessing of the saints. Nor are the rewards 
to differ in degree; for the promise to the 
faithful in each church, although not exe 
|: g ail that will be their portion, cannot 
regarded as less glorious in one instance 
than in another :—nay, it is expressly declared 


REVELATION. _ II. 


fa ch. xxi. 7: “He that overcometh shall 
deberit these things,”—that is to say, all the 
blessings of “a new heaven and a new earth.” 
Least of all can we conclude that the faithful 
in Smyrna and Philadelphia—churches which 
alone are not censured—have certain stages 
of progress te pass through hereafter; while 
the faithful in Laodicea at once attain the 
Divine Presence. The result, accordingly, is 
that we are here given, separately, the outlines 
of the picture which represents the condition 
of the Redeemed after this life ; and that the 
picture itself is only then complete when these 
different outlines are combined. This fact is 
declared in ch. xxi. 7: and the description 
must necessarily (1 Cor. ii. 9) be conveyed 
either by means of human conceptions; or 
by means of what has been already revealed 
in Scripture or in the system of the Church. 
The unity of this picture may be illustrated 
by the fact that the Seven Promises at length 
find their complete fulfilment in the splen- 
dours of the New Jerusalem, described at 
the end of the Book. 

These Seven aspects of the future of the 
Redeemed are as follows: I. The first 
promise, ch. ii. 7—is Immortality ; I. In the 
second, ch. ii. 11,—“‘ He that overcometh 
shall not be hurt by the second death ;” 
III. In the third, ch. ii. 17,—The heavenly 
food imparts the New Life; announces a 
share in Christ’s priestly character, and, to 
those who bear the “new name,” enrolment 
in the company of heaven; IV. In the fourth, 
ch. ii. 26-28,—Share in Christ’s royal domi- 
nion is conferred; V. In the fifth, ch. iii. 5,— 
The vesture of heaven is assumed, full se- 
curity is pledged, the conqueror’s name is 
confessed; VI. In the sixth, ch. iii. 12,—The 
pledge of security is repeated, introducing 
the inscription of the Three Names,—the bap- 
tismal formula of Heaven; VII. Inthe seventh, 
ch. iii. 21,—The promise “ He shall sit with 
me iz my throne ” completes the picture. 

A different view is here taken by Archbishop 
Trench. Writing (p. 217) of “the order 
in which the promises of the Seven Epistles 
succeed one another,” he considers that “it 
is impossible not to acknowledge such an 
order here,—an order parallel to that of 
the unfolding of the kingdom of God from 
its first beginnings on earth to its glorious 
consummation in heaven.” We are led from 
Paradise (ii. 7),—to the Fall (Gen. ili. 19; 


Rev. ii. 11),—to the Church in the wilder- 
ness (ii. 17),—to the triumph of David and 
Solomon over the nations (2 Sam. viii. 1-13; 
Rev. ii. 26, 27). The scenery now changes 
from earth to heaven. The fifth promise holds 
forth “the Book of Life” (iii. 5), with the 
attendant glories ;—then comes the “ New Je= 
rusalem” (iii, 12) ;—and then the admission 
to the throne of Christ (iii.21): ‘It is here, 
to compare Divine things with human, as in 
the Paradiso of Dante. There, too, there 
are different circles of light around the throne, 
each, as it is nearer to the throne. of an in- 
tenser brightness than that beyond it and more 
remote, till at last, when all the others have 
been past, the throne itself is reached, and the 
very Presence of Him who sits upon the 
throne, and from whom all this light and this 
glory flows.”—p. 219. 

“The general idea of this picture,” writes 
Godet (/c., p. 294), “contains the representa 
tion of all the shades (nuances), and, in some 
sort, the statistics, of all the spiritual states, 
good or evil, in which terrestrial Christianity 
can be found. .. . The number Seven denotes 
here, as elsewhere, a totality. But, according 
to the thought of the Book, the subject is a 
simultaneous, and not a successive totality, as 
those wish who see in these Seven Churches 
the representation of the principal phases of 
the history of the Church.” It is the point 
of departure, however, of the Lord’s progress 
that is indicated here: —“‘ This point of 
departure is the condition of the Church at 
the moment of the Vision, and not the un- 
rolling of her future history which is com- 
prised in the Visions that follow.”—Jb. 

In this opening Vision, contained in ch. it 
and ch, ili, Ebrard understands St. John to 
see the Son of Man in His relation as Shep- 
herd to the Church—cf. ch. ii. 27. 





_According to the general opinion the first 
division oftthe Apocalypse ends here ; whether 
the first three chapters be regarded merely 
as the Prologue to the Revelation Proper; or 
whether—as is far more consistent with the 
character of the Book—they themselves con- 
stitute the First Vision vouchsafed to the Seer, 
who describes beforehand (see ch. xxii, 17) 
the state which awaits those who have passed 
through “the great tribulation,” the various 
aspects of which form the theme of the Apo- 
calypse. 


ADDITIONAL NOTE on Chap. IIL 19 


Nore A ON VER. 19.—THE ALLEGED OPPO- 
SATION BETWEEN ST. JOHN AND ST. PAUL. 


It is necessary to consider with care the 
theory which places the Apocalypse in oppo- 


sition to so important au element of the New 
Testament as the writings of St. Paul. 

It is a fixed idea with the rationalistic 
school that St. John had no other object in 
the Apocalypse than to uphold the jewish 


M M 2 


547 


548 


cf Christianity in opposition to the, so- 
ed, Pauline; and that the Book through- 
out has “a tendency which beyond mistake 
denies the teaching of Paul” (Max Krenkel, 
i. c., s. 21). Everything breathes, we are 
told, the fierce and wrathful spirit of Judaism ; 
and the writer’s design is to appear as the 
open antagonist of the Gentiles: e.g. the 
Apocalypse condemns unconditionally those 
who “eat things sacrificed to idols” (ch. ii. 
14,20; cf. 1 Cor. x. 25-31) ;'—it denounces 
marriage between Christians and the heathen 
as ropveia (ch. ix. 21), in contradiction to 
1 Cor. vii. 12-16 ;—it manifests this hatred by 
likening all who adopt any heathen usage to 
Balaam and Jezebel (ch. ii. 14, 20) ;—in fact, 
the Book everywhere exhibits hostility to the 
Apostle of the Circumcision. Carrying out 
this theory, Baur (Christenthum der drei erst. 
Jabhrb., 2° Ausg., s. 83) asserts that St. Paul is 
never named, or, if ever, only in the way of 
hostile allusion, by the ecclesiastical writers 
of Asia Minor in the period following that of 
St. John ;—while the writer on the Apocalypse 
in Schenkel’s Bibel-Lexicon (s. 163) alleges 
that St. John is “ best satisfied with Ephesus, 
which is precisely the Church where Paul 
had met with the sharpest resistance (Rev. ii. 
1-7; Acts xix. 9, 29; 1 Cor. xvi. 9).”? 
Writers argue thus:—Keim (/. ¢., s. 158), 
having noted that St. Paul (Gal. ii. 9) reckons 
St. John, after James and Peter, as the third 
representative of “ the Judeo-Christian Jeru- 
salemitish tendency,” alleges that if we add 
the Apocalypse to the Gospels of Mark and 
Luke, “we get a decisive proof that, from 


1 Thus Aubé (Hist. des Persécutions, Paris, 
1875), asserting that the Seven Epistles have 
this antagonism as one leading object, adds, 
with reference to the eating ‘‘¢hings sacrificed 
to idols”, “‘le dernier trait est évidemment 
dirigé contre les disciples de Paul” (p. 111). 

* In reply to this latter statement, we need 
only read Rev. ii. 5. And in reply to the former, 
we can refer to the Epistle of St. John’s dis- 
ciple Polycarp, in which St. Paul is the only 
Apostle, and St. Paul’s Epistles the only Apos- 
tolic writings, mentioned by name (see Bishop 
Lightfoot, Contemp. Rev., May, 1875, P. 832) ; 
or, again, to the sayings of the ‘‘ Presbyters,”’ 
which are still to be read in the writings of 
Irenzus, who insist alike on 1 Cor. xv. 25, 26, 
and John xiv. 2. So far is i 
from seeking to efface the influence of St. Paul 
that he represents the church of Ephesus as the 

wine preserver of Apostolic tradition because 

t. Paul was its founder, and because St. John 
laboured there till the reign of Trajan (Adv. Her., 
fii, 3). Least of all, indeed, if we bear this fact 
in mind, could this church of Ephesus have re- 
garded these their two Apostles as hostile to each 
other,—the one (St. Paul) as a false Apostle ; 
the other (St. John) as ‘‘the Judzo-Christian 
disturber of the Gentile-Christian Paulinism.” 


REVELATION. III. 


the year 70 to the year 100 [s.¢., from the 
years in which, according to Keim, these two 
Gospels were written], John has been ace 
counted a strictly Judzo-Christian Apostle.” 
Thus in Rev. xxi. 14, the Twelve—a number 
which includes John, and excludes Paul—are 
associated as “foundations” of the future 
Jewish Jerusalem;! just as the Book, by 
contrasts easy to be recognized, assails and 
denies the position of Paul. Keim, indeed, 
will not go so far as Volkmar (/. ¢., s. 25 f) 
in identifying St. Paul with the False Prophet 
of Rev. xiii. 11; but he argues that in the 
Seven Apocalyptic Epistles, especially that 
to Ephesus (ch. ii. 2), the reference to the 
Paulinians—especially including their Apostle 
himself—is not to be mistaken, cf 1 Cor. ix. 
1, 2, and even Acts xv, 25, &c.; as to the 
disputes at Ephesus, see Rom. xvi. 17-20 
Gas s.160,Anm.). Krenkel(/. ¢., 8. 104 ff), 
iffering from Keim, attributes the Apocalypse 
to St. John, and believes that he resided at 
Ephesus ; but he makes the two Apostles to 
differ altogether in their mode of i 
the Roman Empire, comparing Rom. xii. 
with Rev. xiii, where St. John ascribes the 
power of Rome to the Devil. Further, 
Krenkel (agreeing with Volkmar) asserts that 
St. John, in Rev. fi. 2, as clearly as the Apoe 
calyptic form admits, condemns St. Paul 
who, on his side, states that Ephesus was the 
seat of the opposition to his Apostolic autho- 
rity (see 1 Cor. xv. 32; xvi. 8, 9; 2 Cor. i, 
8, &c.). If St. Paul speaks of his knowled: 
of what were “the deep things of God” 
(1 Cor. ii. 10), this is styled in Rev. ii. 2 
“the deep things of Satan”; and K 
contemplates with pity “ the tragic conflict of 
these two followers of Christ,”—understande 
ing St. Paul’s words in Gal. i. 8, 9, and St. 
John’s words in Rev. xxii. 18, 19, as di 
against each other. The same conclusion is 
asserted by Renan (Saint Paul, p. 303, &c.) 
who maintains that St. Paul was regarded 
a party in the Church, from A.D. 54 (Acts 
xvii.) and his rupture with St. Peter (Gal. ii. 
11), aS a most dangerous heretic;—a false 
Jew (Rev. ii. 9 ; ili. 9) ;—a false Apostle (Rev. 
li, 2);—a false prophet (Rev. ii. 20%) ;—a new 
Balaam (Rev. li. 6, 14, 15; cf 2 Pet. ii. 15; 
Jude 11);—a wicked one who ush in 
the destruction of the Temple Clement. Hom. 
ii. 17);—a Simon Magus: enan dwells 


1 See Introd. § 7, L (y). Bengel acutely notes 
that St. Paul, as Apostle of the Gentiles, could 
not be included here,—see Matt. xix. 28. 


Paul et ses amis.”—Jb, p, 367. 
* «Tl n’est pas douteux que sous le personnage 


REVELATION III. 


particularly on St. Paul’s toleration of mixed 

marriages (see above) as identifying him, in 

the Jewish mind, with Balaam who seduced 

the Israelites of old (Num. xxxi. 16) ;—cf. 

Acts xv. 20; xxi. 25: “‘ Cette wopveia en re- 

lation avec Balaam est l’étincelle électrique 
ui fait suivre dans les ténébres le courant 
le haine contre Paul.”—Jb. p. 304. 

Without dwelling minutely on this tissue 
of extravagance, and arbitrary assumption, 
and criticism run wild,—which Renan with 
unconscious truth describes as proceeding 
“in the dark,”—it may be well to note how 
accordant in tone of thought, and often in 
language, is the teaching of St. John and of St. 
Paul. It is easy to recognize the accordance 
of Rev. xviii. 20 with Eph. iii. 5 (“ His oly 
Apostles and Prophets”); as well as of Rev. 
xxi. 14 with Eph. ii. 20 (“the foundation of 
the Apostles and Prophets” )—the idea ex- 
pressed by GeyuéAios being a favourite one 
with St. Paul, e.g. Rom. xv. 20; 1 Cor. iii. 
Id, 11, 12): but the essential agreement of 
the two writers appears everywhere. 

In Rey. i. 4 St. John adopts the Pauline 
form of salutation “grace to you and peace” 
(Rom. i. 7) which is found in all St. Paul’s 
Epistles (except the Pastoral, where “ mercy” 
is added, as it is in 2 John 3) ;—Rev.i. 5; 
iii. 14 are to be compared with Col. i. 15-18; 
—Rev. xvii. 14 with Rom. viii. 30, 37, and 
1 Tim. vi. 15 ;—Rev. v. 6, 9 with 1 Cor. 
v. 7, the sacrifice of Christ being regarded 
by both as representing that of the true 
Paschal Lamb. Where, we may challenge 
the objector to point out, is there a trace 
in history of the existence of a “ Johan- 
nean” party in the Church, by the side of a 
“Pauline”? St. Paul in 1 Cor. i. 12 refers 
to the tendency, which he explains more 
fully in Gal. ii.; but his only reference to St. 
John—and that too in the only place where 
St. John’s name is found in his writings—is that 
St.John had given him “the right hand of fel- 
lowship” (Gal. ii. 9). That the spirit of St. 
John’s writings is in close harmony with the 
spirit of the elder revelation is, of course, 
obvious; and every reader of the Apocalypse, 
and indeed of St. John’s Gospel and Epistles, 
can at once discern how he is disposed to 
adopt (while investing them with an elevated 
and spiritual meaning) the symbols and forms 
of Judaism, rather than to disown them :— 
see e.g. Johniii. 14; vi. 31; vii. 38. But does 


de Simon le Magicien l’auteur des Homeélies 

seudo-clémentines ne veuille désigner souvent 
Papétre Paul :"—cf. avOéornedas po, and 4 «i 
xareyvwopuevoy pe Aeyes, Hom. xvii. 19, with 
Gal. ii. 11; also Hom. xvii. 12-17 with 1 Cor. 
xii. 1; Hom. ii. 17 with Acts xxi. 28. Renan 
places the date of these ‘‘ Homilies” in A.D. 
150 or 160:—‘‘ Pour leur caractére d’hostilité 
contre Paul, voir surtout Hom. ii. 17; ili. 59; 
Wil. 4, 8; Recogn. iv. 36.” —Jbid., p. 304. 


St. Paul disown the elder revelation? We 
need only turn to such passages as Rom. vii. 
12, or to such teaching as Gal. iii. 24, for the 
answer. If we find echoes of Old Test. 
doctrine (e. g. Canticles passim) in John iii. 
29; Rev. xix. 7; xxi. 2, 9, do we not read 
to the same effect in 2 Cor. xi. 2; Eph. v. 25, 
27? Ifthe Apocalypse abounds with Old 
Test. imagery and its doctrinal application, — 
have we not in the Pauline Epistles the 
“allegory” of Hagar, and the conception of the 
spiritual Jerusalem (Gal. iv.), and the 

idea of “the Israel of God” (Gal. vi. 16)? 
History places beyond a doubt the true sense 
of Rev. ii. 2, 20, 24; 1 John ii. 18; iv. 1, 
when, as time went on, heresy, and false pro- 
phets claiming divine illumination, and the 
practice of gross licentiousness under the 
pretext of freedom from the slavery of the 
Law, had begun to prevail. But from first to 
last there are no traces of Jewish nationality, 
or of a preference for Christians of Jewish 
descent. The Apoc., no doubt, bears witness 
to a definite type of doctrine characteristic of 
St. John, as clearly as does the Fourth Gospel— 
especially in its explicit teaching as to the 
Logos, which no refinement can explain away, 
e.g. ch 1.17; iii, 14; xix. 13: cf, too, ch. 
vii. 17 with John vii. 37-39. Together with its 
strongly-marked Jewish element there is 
stamped upon the whole Book a character 
which could only be impressed upon it by the 
creative breath of the transforming Spirit of 
Christ,—whether we read the description of 
the glorified (ch. vii.),—or of the splendours of 
the perfected Theocracy (ch. xxi.)—or of the 
universal Priesthood (ch. i. 6; v. 10),—or, in 
the Seven Epistles (ch. ii., iii.), the Lord’s 
exhortations to the Church Catholic. “Ofany 
polemical tone,” writes Neander, “directed 
against the Apostle Paul, not a trace can be 
found in the Book. It cannot be taken as a 
proof of this that in ch. xxi. 14, according te 
the Twelve Tribes of the Theocratic people, 
only Twelve Apostles are mentioned as the 
foundations of the spiritual Jerusalem.” 
(Pflanzung, Bohn’s transl. vol. ii. p. 163). “It 
is not by any means incredible” writes Mr. 
Sanday (The Fourth Gospel, p. 156) “that St. 
John should actually have seen the Pauline 
Epistles . . . . Pauline doctrine is not repro- 
duced crudely, but is assimilated with the 
rest of the Johannean system, and has received 
the genuine Johannean stamp.” If the Old 
Test. descriptions of Israel and Jerusalem 
are transferred in the Apocalypse to Chrise 
tianity, what is this but the echo of uch 
references as we meet with in the Epistles of 
St. Paul—say in Gal. iii. 29; iv. 26; vi. 16. 
If in Rey. vii. 4, 144,000 are sealed from the 
Tribes of Israef—at ver. 9 the Redeemed 
are a multitude “from all nations, and 
Tribes, and peoples, and tongues” (see also 
Rey. v. 9; xix. 6; xxi. 24). Could St. Paul 


549 


55° 


sccognize more fully the calling of the Gen- 
? 


In his Commentary on the Epistle to 
the Colossians (p. 41) Bishop Lightfoot 
poit.ts out “Correspondences between the 
Apocalypse and St. Paul’s Epistles.” The 
message, he observes, “communicated by St. 
ane to [the neighbouring Church of] 

odicea prolongs the note which was struck 
by St. Paul in the letter to Colossz.” After 
the interval which elapsed until St. John 
wrote, “the same temper prevails, the same 
errors are rife, the same correction must be 
applied :”—(1) “St. Paul finds it necessary to 
enforce the truth that Christ is the image of 
the invisible God, that He is the primary 
source (dpx7), and has the pre-eminence in 
all things (Col. i. 15-18),”—St. John in almost 
identical language, “ speaking in the person of 
our Lord, declares that He is the Amen, the 
primary source (dpy7) of the Creation of 
God (Rev. ili. 14)” The phrase 7 dpyn tis 
krigews TOU Qeov, so Closely resembling St. 
Paul’s language, does not occur in the messages 
to the other six Churches as a designation of 
our Lord, nor do we there find anything re- 
sembling it: “If St. Paul entreats the 
Colossians to seek those things which are 
above (Col. iii. 1) . . . and in the companion 
Epistle, which also he directs them to read, 
reminds the churches that God raised them 
with Christ (Eph. ii. 6); . . . in like manner 
St. John gives this promise to the Laodiceans 
in the name of his Lord” (Rev. iii. 21). 
These words do not occur in the other six 
Epistles, or any words resembling them: 
*This double coincidence affecting the two 
ideas which may be said to cover the whole 

und in the Epistle to the Colossians, can 
Rardly, 1 think, be fortuitous, and suggests 
am acquaintance with and recognition of the 
earlier Apostle’s teaching on the part of St. 
John” (é., p. 42). 

(2). “After a parting salutation to the 
Church of Laodicea, St. Paul closes with a 
warning to Archippus, apparently its chief 

tor, to take heed to his ministry (Col. 

.17).! Some signs ofslackened zeal seem to 


1 “*Where,” asks Bishop Lightfoot else- 
where (Z fist. to Philem., p. 375), ‘‘ was Archip- 
pus exercising this ministry, v. hatever it may have 
peen? At Colossz or icea? His con- 
pexion with Philemon (ver. 2) [we may infer 
that he was a son of Philemon and Apphia] 


REVELATION. III. 


have called forth this rebuke. It may be ap 
accidental coincidence, but it is at least 
of notice, that lukewarmness is the 
sin denounced in the Angel of the Laodiceans, 
and that the necessity of greater earnestness 
is the burden of the message to that Church.” 
“If the common view, that by the ‘Angel’ 
of the Church its chief pastor is meant, were 
correct, and if Archippus (as is very probable) 
had been living when St. John wrote, the 
coincidence would be still more striking 
(ib., p. 43, note). See note F. on ch. i. 20. 
(3). “In the Apocalyptic message the pride 
of wealth is sternly condemned in the 
Laodicean Church ” (Rev. iii. 17, 18). Having 
been laid in ruins by an earthquake, Lao- 
dicea became famous from the fact that 
unaided by imperial assistance, she recovered 
her former importance. “But is there not 
a second and subsidiary idea underlying the 
Apocalyptic rebuke? The pride of intellectual 
wealth, we may well suspect, was a temptation 
at Laodicea hardly less strong than the pride 
of material resources. When St. Paul wrote, 
the theology of the Gospel and the com- 
prehension of the Church were alike en- 
dangered bya spirit of intellectual exclusiveness 
in these cities. He warned them against a 
vain philosophy . . . (Col. ii. 8, 18, 23). He 
tacitly contrasted with this false intellectual 
wealth ‘the riches of the glory of God’s 
mystery revealed in Christ’ (Col. i. 27; ii. 2, 
3) . . . May not the same contrast dis- 
cerned in the language of St. John? The 
Laodiceans boast of their enlightenment, 
but they are blind, and to cure their blind- 
ness they must seek eye-salve from the hands 
of the great Physician ” (#b., p. 44). 


would suggest the former place. But in the 
Epistle to the Colossians his name is mentioned 
immediately after the salutations to the Lao- 
diceans and the directions affecting that church ; 
and this fact seems to connect him with Lao- 
dicea. On the whole this appears the more 
probable solution.” Theodore of Mopsuestia 
adopts this conclusion: “AAAos 5€ gnaw, ds 
éorw ex Tov ‘yeypaupévwy ecixndoa, mapa Aaods- 
xedow oSytt Kal thy Siaxovlay eyxexepioudve 
ris diaxovias.—ap. Cramer, Catenain Ep, ad Col. 
iv. 17. Theodoret argues against it on critical 
grounds, without alleging any traditional support 
for the objection :—rwes tpacay tovroy Aaode 
elas yeyevicOa di8doKadrov, GAA’ Hh pds SAG 
pova émororh diddoxe: @s ev KoAacoais obree 
Gee te yap SAfpors kal rovroy ovrrdrres 





©. t.] 


CHAPTER IV. 

2 John seeth the throne of God in heaven. 4 
The four and twenty elders. 6 The four 
beasts full of eyes before and behind. 10 The 
elders lay down ther crowns, and worship 
him that sat on the throne, 


REVELATION. IV. 


FTER this I looked, and, be- 
hold, a door was opened in 
heaven: and the first voice which I 
heard was as it were of a trumpet 
talking with. me; which said, Come 





[Ver. 1déyor. Ver. 2 0m. 1st kai.—émi tov Op. Ver. 3 om. jv.—oapdio. Ver. 4 [A, & read 
Opdvous ctx. réecoapes (sic),—“réooapas sine teste,” Tisch. ;—B, P read Opévor].—om. eidov 


Tovs.— om. €axovr. 


Ver. 11 6 Kvpios Kal 6 Oeds nuov.—ijoar.] 


Cuap. IV.-XXII. 5. 
II. THE REVELATION PROPER. 


The second of the three great Divisions of 
the Book. 
Cuap. IV. 
The First chief Vision of the Revelation 
Proper opens here :—see Introd. p. 89. 


THE PRELUDE (iv.-v.). 


As the first appearance of Christ (ch. i. 13) 
is closely related to His introductory warning 
to His Church (ch. ii. ; ch, iii.), so is God’s ap- 
pearance (ch. iv.) the prelude to the revela- 
tions of coming judgment. In like manner, 
the taking of the Sealed Book, together with 
the adoration of the Lamb (ch. v.), is the 
introduction to the imagery of the succeed- 
ing Visions, and the disclosure of their 
theme. The object which the Seer has in 
view throughout is to place before the eye 
of faith that Heaven to which Christ has 
gone before, and whence He will return to 
judge the world. The symbolic veil had been 
rent in twain when the Lord had suffered 
(Matt. xxvii. 51); and now the entrance to 
the true Sanctuary, of which the Temple of 
old was but the shadow (Heb. viii. 5), is 
entirely and for ever thrown open. We are 
shown the Temple of God with its Altar of 
Incense and its Altar of Sacrifice,—with its 
inner Court and its outer Court,—with the 
“ Ark of His Covenant,” and the ‘“ Taber- 
nacle of the Testimony ” (ch. vi. 9 ; viii. 3; xi. 
I, 2, 19; xv. 5). The Visions of the Holy 
City, and of the Mount Zion, and of the New 
Jerusalem, complete the Apocalypse (ch. xi. 2 ; 
Xiv. 1; xxi. 2); and the Book closes before the 
throne of God and of the Lamb (ch. xxii. 1). 

The four and twenty Elders (ver. 4) and 
the four Living Beings (ver. 6) are the re- 
presentatives of the Church and of animated 
Creation. 


THE APPEARANCE OF GOD (1-11). 

1. After these things] J.e., ‘after re- 
ceiving the Seven Epistles’ (see ch. i. 11)—a 
formula frequent in this Book, and usually in- 
troducing a new Vision, or form of Vision, e. g. 


Ver. 5 davai x. Bp.—d éorw. Ver. 6 ws Oar. 
Ver. 8 ra réao.—ev kal’ Ev avrav.—txav.—yepovow. 


Ver. 7 dvOparov. 
Ver. 10 mpookuynoovow.—Barovow. 


ch. vii. 9; xv. 5; xviii. 1; xix. 1—cf. on ch. 
xxii. 2,and see ver. 2, below. Some (Eichhorn, 
Bengel, Hengst., &c.) consider that an intere 
val had occurred at the end of ch. iii., during 
which St. John was no longer “‘ in the Spirit ;” 
and during which, as at the close of the 
successive scenes of the entire Vision, he 
committed to writing what he had seen and 
heard,—in this case the Seven Epistles. On 
the other hand, Ebrard and Diisterd. justly 
observe that, from ch. i. 10 to ch. xxii. 16, 
no break occurs in the ecstatic condition of 
the Seer, there being throughout but one 
Revelation with its changing though cone 
nected images. 

In fact, the formula “after these things” 
(uera tadra) introduces a new and more 
striking scene ; and the formula “ I saw” (or 
“T heard”) indicates the varying features of 
the successive Visions—e.g. ch. i. 10; v. 1, 
6, 11; vi.1; &c. Hence, there is no special 
reference here to the End of all things; or 
to the Church, as it will then be, triumphant. 


I saw,] Inthe Spirit, as inch.i.10. The 
Vision is presented to the Seer; and he then 
proceeds to record it:—see ch. i. 2; and cf. 
ch. vi. 2, 5, 8. 


and behold, a door opened in heaven,] ‘A 
door set open’ (see ch. iii. 8),—7.e., ‘ the image 
of an open door was before me,’ after the 
figure of “ the gate of heaven,” Gen. xxviii. 17 
(cf. Ezek.i.1; Matt. iii. 16; Actsx. 11): and 
the meaning clearly is that St. John may be- 
hold, as through an opened door, what takes 
place in heaven, as in Acts vii. 56. Some, how- 
ever,—De Wette, Alf, Bisping,—suppose 
that the Seer was taken up through the door 
into heaven ; and that “‘ henceforth, usually, he 
looks from the heaven down on the earth.” 

Victorinus understands by “‘ the openea 
door,” the preaching of the Gospel. 


and the first voice which I heard,[a voice 
as of a trumpet speaking with me, 

‘The voice which I heard at first in ch. 1. 10. 
The construction is “Behold,a door...and 
the voice...saying.” Whose voice is not 
defined (cf. ch..x. 4, 8)—see on ch. i. 10, 
where the voice is followed at ver 17 by that 


551 


552 


up hither, and I will shew thee things 
which must be hereafter. 

2 And immediately I was in the 
spirit and, behold, a throne was 


REVELATION. IV. 


[v. 2—3 


set in heaven, and ome sat on the 
throne. 

3 And he that sat was to look 
upon like a jasper and a sardine stone : 





of Christ, not loud as “ of a trumpet,” but 
as “of many waters,” ver. 15. On the other 
hand, Stier, relying on the words “JI will 
shew thee,” protests against any interpretation 
which introduces here a personal Angel dis- 
tinct from Christ.—Reden Jesu, Engl. tr., vol. 
Vill. 93, 207. 

saying,| The gender (masc.) of the par- 
ticiple denotes that the “ voice” is put for the 
“ speaker ” (cf. ver. 8; ch. xi. 4, 153 xix. 14; 
Mark ix. 25, 26; Eph. iv. 17, 18) —that 
speaker, although left indefinite, being the 
same already heard. 


Or one saying,| See Winer, § lix. 4,and 
11—the nominative in irregular apposition 
(cf. the Hebrew idiom, 7,5). 

Come up hither,| In spirit :—the Seer now 
attains a higher spiritual standpoint. 

and I wili shew thee] In answer to 
Stier’s inference from these words that the 
speaker must be Christ, see on ch.i. 1; and 
also, ch. xxi. 9, To. 


the things which must come to pass] 
As being divinely determined—see on ch. 
i. 1; and cf. Matt. xxiv. 6. 

hereafter.| After the things now present, 
as in ch. i. 19; ix. 12 :—so the A. V. 

Or, with a full stop at pass, translate After 
these things—words which may very well 
be taken as the beginning of ver. 2; see above, 
on the use of this formula. 


2. Immediately] (Omit “ And ;” see vv. /].). 

Or “After these things immediately 
I was in the Spirit:”] See on ver. 1—a 
new scene being now presented to the Seer. 

I was in the Spirit:| “1 found myself in 
the Spirit”—see on ch. i. 9. Ziillig would 
interpret, “my spirit was caught up thither, 
while my body remained on earth;” but 
this is certainly wrong,—see on ch. i. ro. 
Already, “in the Spirit,’ the Seer had beheld 
the door set open; and a fresh outpouring of 
the Spirit is now granted him, in order to gaze 
upon this new, and more sublime Vision: cf. 
Ezek. xi. 1, 5. This Vision, in its full sig- 
nificance, reveals Gop as the Gop of the 
Redeemed, the Father upon the throne ;—in 
the midst of the throne (ch. v. 6) the Lamb 
still bearing the tokens of the Cross ;—and be- 
fore the throne the Seven-fold Spirit with His 
lamps of fire (ver. 5). In the four and twenty 
Elders, the Church of the Old and the Church 
of the New Covenant are imaged forth; and 
in the four Living Beings, we see the symbolic 
representatives of Creation. From among 


the “innumerable company of angels,” one 
Angel, throughout this Book, acts as “a 
ministering spirit” (Heb. i. 14)—as the 
Angelus interpres: see on ch. i. 1. We may 
here compare the Vision of Micaiah :--see 
the note on 1 Kings xxii. 19. 


and behold, there was a throne set 
in heaven,| See Ezek. i. 26-28. Here, in 
Ezek. i., and in Ezek. x. 19, the throne cor- 
responds to the place on which the cloud 
of glory rested between the Cherubim ;—see 
Note C,on Gen. iii. 24. The expression 
“was set” simply indicates position, after the 
manner of St. John, see John ii. 6; xix. 29; 
xxi. 9,—as Diisterd. points out in opposition 
to Bengel who sees in this verb (€xe:ro) a re= 
ference to the breadth of the throne; and in 
opposition to Hengst. who explains the phrase 
by the throne resting on the Cherubim: cf. 
ver. 6. 

and one sitting upon the throne;| (As 
to the preposition here, see the note on ch. i. 
20). Observe the title so constant through- 
out the Book, “ He that sitteth on (or upon) 
the throne,”—e. g. ch. Vii. 10; XiX. 43 XXL. 
5; cf Dan. vii. 9. The great maiority of 
writers take this title to mean the Eterna: 
Father, as distinguished from the Son (“ the 
Lamb,” ch. ¥. 6; vi. 16; vii. 10), and from 
the Holy Spirit (ver. 5):—see above. On 
the other hand, N. de Lyra, C. a Lapide, 
Caloy., Words., understand the Triune God, 
—Gop in His absolute Being,—as indicated 
by the Jrisagion, ver. 8, from Whom the 
Lamb may fitly take the Sealed Book, ch. 
v. 7: cf. Dan. vii. 13, and such passages 
as Isai. vi. 1-3; John xii. 41. C. a Lapide 
comments: “The Son as Man may well 
be said, especially in a sublime Vision like 
this, to come to Gop,”—see Words. in loc. 
The references, in ver. 5 and in ch. v. 6, to 
the Second and Third Persons of the Trinity 
do not oppose this view; neither does the 
doxology in ver. 11. The Person is not 
specified, because only what is seen is de- 
scribed. Ewald would explain, ‘ because the 
name of Jehovah is incommunicable ;’ and 
De Wette, ‘out of a sense of holy reverence, 
as in ch. xx. 11’ (in opposition to this latter 
interpretation, cf. ch. xii, 5; xix. 13; xxii. 1). 

8. and he that sat [was] to look upon.] For 
the omission of “was,” see vv. //. Alford 
translates, “And he that sat, like in ap- 
pearance to ’—as if one of aseries of nomi- 
natives placed correlatively after “ debold” 
in ver. 2; see also ver. 1. Or “like in 


v. 4.J 


and there was a rainbow round about 
the throne, in sight like unto an 
emerald. 


REVELATION. IV. 


4 And round about the throne 
were four and twenty seats: and 
upon the seats I saw four and twenty 





sight,” as the A. V. renders in the next clause. 
The Greek term (épacis) is translated 
“Vision” in ch. ix. 17, and in Acts ii, 17— 
the word being found in the New Test. only 
in these two places and twice in this verse. 
For the imagery and language, see Ezek. i. 
26, 27, LXX.; cf. also the description in Ex. 
XxiV. Io. 


like a jasper stone and a sard:] (See 
vv. /l.). The /ast and the first stones in the 
Breastplate, Ex. xxviii. 17, 20. Jasper (Heb. 
Yaspeh, Gr. iaoms, Lat. Jaspis, Arab. Jasp,) 
is the first of the Twelve Foundations in 
ch. xxi., where this stone is described (ver. 
11) as being “clear as crystal.” ‘“ Greenness, 
and more or less translucency, were the two 
essential characters of the ancient jaspis.” The 
modern jasper is quite opaque, and corresponds 
to the achates of the Romans. The /aspis 
of the ancients was our chalcedony (silica 
and alumina) :—see King, Precious Stones, pp. 
202, 206. The antique sard (Heb. Odem, Gr. 
cdpd.or, Lat. Sarda, Vulg. Sardius, see ch. xxi. 
20) or oriental carnelian—the sixth Foun- 
dation in ch. xxii—was a dull red cloudy 
stone of many gradations of colour. The 
name is derived, writes Mr. King (/. c., p. 296), 
from the Persian sered, yellowish red,—al- 
though Pliny (H. N. xxxvii. 31) derives 
the name from Sardis, where it was first dis- 
covered. Its modern name carnelian is 
usually derived from carneus, as if the colour 
of raw flesh. 
On this Vision of the Divine Glory, cf. 
Ezek. i. 4, 26; x. 1; Dan. vii. 9. 
and [there was|a rainbow] Here and in 
ch. x. 1 St. John uses the word Iris ;—cf. 
Ezek. i. 28. The Septuagint Version—shun- 
ning, as is probable, the allusion to heathen 
mythology—always uses for “a rain-dow” 
the word which expresses the “ ow” as a 
weapon of war (roéov); and which is so em- 
loyed in ch. vi. 2. As to the occurrence 
in the Apocalypse of heathen symbolism, see 
on ch. ii. 10. 


Or translate and a rainbow] 
above, after dehold. 


round about the throne,| As the emblem of 
God’s covenanted mercy,—Gen. ix. 16. This 
symbol, as Burger well remarks, casts light 
upon all the Visions that follow; in which 
God is revealed only as One Who keeps His 
Covenant and promise. 


like] In the masc., 6uoros,—which Winer 
(§ 11, s. 64) takes to be an adjective of two ter- 
minations, asin Attic Greek adjectives in -10s, 
(cf. Luke ii. 13 ; Acts xxvi. 19; 1 Tim. ii. 8, 


A nom,, as 


9; Tit. ili. 9; James i. 26),—although the 
feminine termination occurs in ver. 6; ch. ix, 
10, 19. Ewald (Comm., ed. 1828, p. 46) sug- 
gests the rendering: “Iris circa thronum ; 
similis est ¢Hronus smaragdo ;” in his edition 
of 1862, he adopts the usual rendering, “a 
rainbow like.” (Licke suggests a various 
reading, duola as, OF dpuolws). 

an emerald to look upon.|] Or, as in 
the alternative rendering at the beginning of 
this verse, “like in appearance unto an 
emerald.” Alford translates, “like to the 
appearance of an emerald,”—taking opap- 
aydwos to be “the possessive adjective of 
two terminations ” :—the substantive occurs 
in ch. xxi. 19. 

The emerald, of bright green colour, “ was 
the most precious gem in the Roman jewel- 
ler’s list. . . . The Romans were plentifully 
supplied with the true emerald. The 
smaragdus of Nero’s age must be restricted 
to the true emerald, perhaps including the 
green ruby :’—King, /. c., pp. 167, 311; and 
Nat. Hist. of Precious Stones, p. 288; see also 
Pliny, H. NV. xxxviii. 16, &c. It is the fourth 
Foundation in ch. xxi. 19; cf. ch. xxi. 20, 
on the word “déery/.” St. John describes 
exactly what he saw ; although, as not exist- 
ing in nature, his imagery cannot be exhibited 
by means of sensible representations, either 
by the form of the rainbow, or by its colour 
—as he beheld it—green. 

The imagery of this passage is plainly 
founded on the words of Ezekiel: “‘ As the 
appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in 
the day of rain, so was the appearance of the 
brightness round about.’”—Ezek. i. 28. Dis- 
regarding this fact, Bisping concludes that, 
as the word Iris denotes, in general, every 
coloured circle,—e.g. the pupil of the eye, 
the fringe around flame, the halo round the 
moon,—a rainbow cannot be intended; and 
this he infers from the fact that a rainbow 
is characterized by seven colours, while the 
Iris here is of ome colour, namely that of an 
emerald. It would be difficult to quote a 
more jejune interpretation. 

The pagan affinities which may be traced 
in the writings of Renan have led him to 
observe of the description here, that “the 
Olympian Jupiter was a symbol far superior 
to this.”—/. c., p. 473. 

4. And round about the thro-e [were] four 
and twenty thrones:| Or render with 
Alford, as above, “ And he that sat like in 
appearance to...; and round about 
the throne four and twenty thrones:” 
the nom. again following “‘ deho/d” in ver. 3 


553 


554 


elders sitting, clothed in white rai- 
ment; and they had on their heads 
crowns of gold. 


REVELATION, IV. 


(v5. 


5 And out of the throne proceeded 
lightnings and thunderings and voices : 
and there were seven lamps of fire 





The chief manuscripts, however, read here 
the accus. (@pdvovs)—see vv. //.; which is 
an argument against this construction. 

On the word “ thrones,” see on ch. ii. 13. 


and upon the thrones [I saw] four and 
twenty elders sitting,| “I saw” is not in the 
Greek—see vv. //.; and the accusative de- 
pends on the verb («idov) understood (De 
Wette, Disterd.). Alf. regards the accusative 
as “loosely placed” with the nominatives after 
behold,’—see on ver. 2. Note also the omis- 
sion of the article (‘te four and twenty 
Elders”) which is read in the Textus Receptus. 
In the Old Test., “the Elders” are the 
chiefs and natural representatives of the 
people of Israel; see Ex. iv. 29; xii. 21; 
xix. 7; xxiv. 1, &c.; cf. Heb. xi. 2. In the 
New Test. the early representatives of each 
church were also thus named, Acts xiv. 23 ; 
XX. 17; xxi. 18, &c. Here, accordingly, the 
“ four and twenty Elders” (cf. “ the Ancients,” 
Isai. xxiv. 23, LX X.) are the representatives 
of the universal Church of God, and their 
number symbolizes the Twelve Patriarchs, 
and the Twelve Apostles:—so Victorinus, the 
earliest extant commentator. To this same 
effect Bossuet writes iz /Joc.: “It is the collec- 
tive body of the Saints of the Old and the 
New Testaments, who are here represented 
by their chiefs and their leaders.” This 
follows (1) from ch. v. 8-10; (2) from 
Matt. xix. 28; Luke xxii. 30,—cf. Eph. ii. 4- 
6; (3) from ch. xxi. 12, 14, where the Twelve 
Tribes and the Twelve Apostles are conjoined; 
(4) from the union of the Old and the New 
Covenants in ch. xv. 3; (5) from the func- 
tions, aistinctly representative, of the Elders, 
as described in ch.v. 5,8; vii. 13. Burger’s 
interpretation, that Tavelve is the number of 
the Church saa Introd. § 11); and that the 
doubled tawe/ve signifies the Church trium- 
phant, consisting of its two elements—the 
Church of the Old, and the Church of the 
New Covenant—does not essentially differ 
from this conclusion. 

St. Hippolytus (in the Arabic version of his 
commentary,—see Note A on ch. xii. 3) under- 
stands the Great and the Minor Prophets. 

Reuss (who for “ Elders” substitutes “ old 
men,” “viei/lards,”) insists that they are Angels 
of higher rank, placed immediately round the 
throne of God :—they represent, as their 
“white garments” prove, the celestial priest- 
hood; and their number, 24, recalls the 
classes of the Levitical priests. It isan error 
to hold that the Oriental imagination repre- 
sents Angels as young persons of perfect 
beauty. But, on the other hand— 


That they are not Ange/s (Hoffmann and 
others), their name “ E/ders” proves;—their 
number, twenty-four, is not borrowed from 
the number of the courses of the priests, 1 
Chron. xxiv. (Vitr., Ewald), for there is here 
no reference to the priestly ie ;—nor do 
they represent “the elders” of the church at 
Jerusalem (Grotius), for there 1s no proof 
that the number of the elders at Jerusalem 
was twenty-four: for a catalogue of similar 
opinions, see Disterd. in Joc. By a needless 
modification of the ancient opinion, Bleek and 
De Wette argue that the number of the 
Twelve Tribes is here doubled, in order to 
denote the accession of the Gentiles. Words. 
(after St. Jerome, Pro/. Galeat.) takes the 
“ Elders” to typify, primarily, the twenty-four 
Books of the Old ‘Testament (see the cata- 
logue in the sixth of the Thirty-nine Articles 
of the Church of England); and, in a@ secon- 
dary sense, the Jewish Church; while the 
Four Living Beings (ver. 6) represent, in a 
similar manner, the Four Gospels, and the 
Christian Church. 


arrayed im white garments; and upon 
their heads] Omit “ they 4ad,”—see vv. 
Zi. On the colour “ white,” see on ch. i. 14 
and cf. ch. iii. 4, 5; vil. 13, 14. 


crowns of gold.| The conqueror’s crown 
(1 Cor. ix. 25), the emblem of the victory 
of the Church; see Note D. on ch. ii. 10, 
where it is shown that the “ crown” (oré- 
gavos)—the term employed in this verse— 
does not denote the emblem of royalty, as 
it does in modern times: see, on the other 
hand, the argument of Archbishop Trench, 
quoted on ch. ii. 10. Dean Vaughan (/. ¢., 
Pp. 129), likewise considers that kingly crowns 
are signified here. In ch. v. 10, observes 
Dean Vaughan, the Elders describe them- 
selves as priests and kings ; the white raiment, 
and the ‘holy crown of pure gold,’ with its 
well-known inscription, is the peculiar posses- 
sion of the Levitical priests; see Ex. xxxix. 
30. The twenty-four Elders represent the 
Redeemed made priests as well as kings to 
God. And he notes again (p. 160),—we 
have here “the white robe of priesthood, 
and then the kingly crown.” As stated, 
however, on ch. i. 6, the concrete term 
“king” is not applied to Christians in the 
New Testament ; and thus there can be no 
reference here to the kingly crown. 


5. proceed /ightnings| Not the past tense, 
as the A. V. renders here and elsewhere. 
“The present tense,” writes Archbishop 
Trench, “is used in the New Testament, and 


v. 6.] 


burning before the throne, which are 
the seven Spirits of God. 

6 And before the throne there was 
a sea of glass like unto crystal: and 


especially by St. John in the Apocalypse, to 
express the eternal Now of Him for Whom 
there can be no past and no future.”—On the 
Auth. Vers. of the New Test., p. 143. 


and voices and thunders.] See vv. /l. 
Cf. the imagery in Ex. xix. 16, which explains 
the reference in the word “woices,” as to 
which commentators differ. De Wette and 
Ebrard would limit the imagery to God’s 
power over Nature; to which Bisping adds 
His revelation by Nature to the reason of 
man,—Gen. i. 2; Ps. civ. 30: but the present 
description (cf. ch. viii. 5; xi. 19; xvi. 
18) rather sets forth, as‘Diisterdieck observes, 
the unlimited power of God, as it is repre- 
sented in the language of the Old Testament. 

Aretius applied this clause of the verse to 
the Holy Spirit, in consequence of the use of 
the word “ proceed,” —see John xv. 26. 

And (there were] seven lamps of fire| Pro- 
perly torches (Aaymddes, cf. Ezek. i. 13, 
LXX.; Matt. xxv. 1, &c.; Acts xx. 8, cf. 
ch. viii. 10; John xviii. 3; and see on ch. i. 
12). The former construction, as at the 
beginning of ver. 4,isresumed. Alford omits 
“there were,’ and understands, as before, a 
nominative after “ behold” in ver. 2; see also 
verse 6. 

which are the seven Spirits of God;| See 
on ch.i. 4. The peculiar expression “torches 
of fire” in this place, and the parallel expres- 
sion “ seven eyes” (ch. v. 6), point to the 
all-searching, all-illumining operation of the 
Holy Spirit Who is beheld in this Vision 
under the symbol of the “ Seven Lamps of 
Fire”—see on verse 2; and cf. Ps. cxxxix. 
7; 1 Cor. ii. 10. 


THE Four LIvinG BEINGS (6-8). 


6. and before the throne,as it were a sea of 
glass| Or a glassy sea. See vv.//. The 
meaning is, either ‘as if the material of the 
sea were of glass,’ or as if it were in appear- 
ance transparent as crystal:—cf. ch. xv. 2; 
xxi. 18, 21. Perhaps the heavenly counter- 
part of the azure vault as seen from earth 
(Stern, s. 204). To the same effect De 
Wette com Ex. xxiv. 10; Ezek. i. 26; and 
Diisterdieck’s objection, that the sea is not 
beneath but before the throne, has not much 
force. Ebrard thinks that as the stormy 
sea represents the godless nations (ch. xvii. 
15), so here the pure and calm sea repre- 
seats Creation in its true relation to its 
Creator. Burger notes:—In Dan. vii. 2, 3 
(cf. Isai. vii. 20) the confusion of nations is 


REVELATION. IV. 


in the midst of the throne, and 
round about the throne, were four 
beasts full of eyes before and be- 
hind. 





represented by the winds striving upon the 
great sea ; from whence, as in Rev. xiii. 1, the 
forms ascend which symbolize the successive 
Empires of the world. The troubled surface 
which Daniel beheld becomes, when seen 
before the throne of God, calm and clear; 
reflecting, as from a mirror, every fulfilment 
of the Divine purposes,—especially ‘those 
which relate to the stability of the Church 
on earth, amid the commotion of Empires 
and of peoples. And thus, in absolute con- 
trast, the dark and troubled sea of Daniel’s 
vision, is here seen by St. John “as it were a 
sea of glass, like unto crystal.” In ch. xv. 2, 
where the image recurs, the sea of- glass is 
“ mingled with fire,’ because the fiery wrath 
of God is hastening to the Judgment, and is 
there, in like manner, reflected from the 
untroubled surface of that sea. 

De Burgh sees here and in ch. xv. 2 a 
reference to “the molten sea” or great laver 
of brass in Solomon’s Temple (1 Kings vii. 
23-26, 38), now introduced in order to 
typify the purification by baptism of all who 
are made kings and priests, see ch. v. to:— 
so also Victorinus, Beda, De Lyra, &c. 


like unto crystal;| Compare Ezek. i. 22, 
—* And the likeness of the firmament upon 
the heads of the living creature was as the 
colour of the terrible crystal.” 

Crystallus, “rock-crystal” —cf. ch. xx. 
11; xxii. 1. “The crystal (pure silica); is 
reckoned by Theophrastus (30) amongst the 
stones used in rings, where he speaks of it 
with the amethyst; adding ‘both are trans- 
parent.’ ... The crystal was in enormous 
request amongst the luxurious Romans under 
the Empire for the purpose of making drink- 
ing-cups. . . Glass had been brought tosuch 
perfection when Pliny wrote, as to imitate 
the crystal with wonderful exactness... . 
This colourless transparent glass, approaching 
as nearly as possible to the true crystal, was 
much admired.”—King, /.c., pp. 173, 178; 
see Pliny, H. N. 1. xxxvii. 9, &c. 


and in the midst of the throne, and round about 
the throne,| Not as being under the throne, 
supporting it (Reuss), for they are free to 
move, see ch. xv. 7 ;—nor as bending over it, 
as it were overshadowing it (Hengst.) ;—nor 
“in medio illius aree semicircularis que erat 
ante thronum ” (Vitringa) ;—nor again as De 
Wette and Bleek who regard the throne itself 
as being semicircular with two Cherubim 
at the centre, and two in the circumference 
behind (Bisping places ome in the centre, 


555 


550 


REVELATION. IV. 


7 And the first beast was like a 
lion, and the second beast like a calf, 
and the third beast had a face as a 


{v. 7—8 


man, and the fourth beast was like a 
flying eagle. 
8 And the four beasts had each of 





three in the circumference of the semi- 
circle) ;—but, one at each of the four sides 
of the throne, and in the middle of the side: 
so Ziillig, Dusterd., &c. See ch. v. 6. 

four living beings] (Omit “ were ?’— 
the constr. as before). We should not, with 
the A. V., render (éov by “ deast,” for this 
properly belongs to a different word, @npiov, as 
in ch. vi. 8; xi.7; &c. (compare the use of 
the two words in ch. xiv. 3, 9);—nor, as Alf. 
observes, can we well render (éa by “ Living 
Creatures,’ as in the Authorized Version of 
Ezek. i. 5, en account of their being now 
conjoined with the idea of Creation in vv. 9,11 
(cf. ch. v. 13, 14);—but simply “Living 
Beings,” a name which is both indefinite, and 
expresses the conception of Life as the symboi 
requires: see below on verse 8, and Note A 
at the end of this chapter. 

JSull of eyes} In these Four Living Beings 
the Seer has combined the Seraphim of Isaiah 
vi. 2, 3 (from which description are bor- 
rowed the six wings as well as the Trisagion 
of ver. 8), and the Cherubim of Ezekiel (see 
Ezek. 1, 5, 6; x. 5, 12)—whence, more directly, 
are borrowed the “ Four Living Creatures,” or 
“Beings,” together with the “faces” (here se- 
parated, there united), as wellas the “ body full 
of eyes round about.” See ch. xv. 7, where— 
apparently from before the throne (ch. xv. 
2-4)—one of the Living Beings delivers to the 
Seven Angels the Seven Vials. See on ver. 8. 

%. <And the frst living being [was] like a 
fion,| The constr. as in ver. 5. Alford, as 
before, omits “qwas;” and understands a 
nom. following ‘‘ deso/d,’ in ver. 2. In 
Ezekiel (i. 6, 10; x. 14) the Cherubim have 
each “four faces”; here they have but one 
face each. For the etymology of the word 
Cherubim, and the traditional accounts re- 
specting them, see Note B at the end of this 
chapter; and Note C on Gen. iii. 24. 

and the second living being Hike a calf,] 
The noun here rendered “calf” (as also 
in Luke xv. 23; Heb. ix. 12—pdcyos) 
denotes in the LXX. an ox, a steer: e.g. 
Ex. xxii. 1; Ezek.i. 10. It is used by Herod., 
ii. 41; iii. 28 for “a young bull,’—a form 
which the god Apis was believed to assume. 

and the third living being had its 
face as of a man,|] See vv. //. In Ezek. 
i. 5, the human form predominates; and the 
form here seems to be the same,—cf. ch. v. 8; 
xix. 4 (so Vitr., Hengst.). Bengel, on the con- 
trary, infers from this verse, not ahuman form, 
but a human countenance. All, however, that 
this verse tells us is that the human counten- 


ance was the characteristic of the third Living 
Being, as the characteristic of the fourth 
was to fly. 


and the fourth living being [was] like 
a flying eagle.| See Note B. 

These four forms are to be taken as the 
heads of the four classes of animated crea- 
tures—rational beings, birds, tame animals, 
and wild animals. That is, we have here, 
ideally represented, the collective, living 
Creation on which the judgments of the 
first four Seals (ch. vi. 1-8) are inflicted— 
each of the Living Beings inviting the Seer to 
behold. So also, when the wrath of God is 
poured out on the created Universe (ch. xv. 7; 
ch. xvi.), one of the Living Beings gives to the 
ministering Angels the Seven Vials. The 
number Four, too, is the recognized “signa- 
ture” of the assemblage of created life: it is, 
in fact, the “signature” of the world (¢f. ch. 
vii. 1; xxi. 13),—not of the world as “ with- 
out form and void,” but as a Cosmos, as the 
revelation of God so far as Nature can reveal 
Him; see Introd. § 11 (a), The later inter- 
preters of these mysterious forms (Victorinus, 
Andreas, Beda) see in St. John himself the 
eagle that soars into the highest heaven, and 
looks upon the unclouded sun. In the 
words of Adam of St. Victor :— 


** Coelum transit, veri rotam 
Solis vidit, ibi totam 
Mentis figens aciem ; 
Speculator spiritalis 
Quasi Seraphim sub alis, 
Dei vidit faciem.”—ag. Trench, 
Sacred Latin Poetry, p. 71. 


The earlier interpreters (e.g. Iren. iii, 11 
8) made St. Mark answer to the Eagle, and 
St. John to the Lion:—see Note B at the 
end of this chapter. 

Mr. F. D. Maurice sees here “ of 
powers met with in the worship and the art 
of all the nations of the earth” (/.c., p. 76) 
—the Lion, the first Asiatic conqueror; 
Calf, the worship of the Egyptian and thc 
Hindoo; the Human figure, the ideal ob 
the Greek ; the Eagle, the dominion of Rome. 
The Seer beholds what was to prepare him 
for the downfall of his own country’s worship, 
Each idolatry was a perversion of a truth. 
Each had its “eyes behind,” which turned to 
Him that sat on the throne. The “eyes 
before” looked to the work of His hands.” 


8. And the four living beings,] See vv. /L 


having each one of them six wings, 
Gr. “one by one of them having siz 


v. 8] REVELATION. IV. 557 
them six wings about him ; and they *Holy, Holy, holy, Lord God Al-?™&» 


1Ge. tey were full of eyes within: and 'they mighty, which was, and is, and is to 


bere? rest not day and night, saying, come. 


wings apiece” (see Johnii. 6; ? viii.9). The 
gender of the participle (masculine, ¢ywy,—see 
vv. /].), is conformed to the personality of the 
Being signified:—see on verse 1. Cassiodorus 
(Complex. in Apoc.,ap. Migne, t. Ixx., p. 1408) 
explains the “ six wings” as signifying “ the 
Age of the world ”—* qui tali numero com- 
leri posse dignoscitur” (see Note A on ch. 
X. 2, as to the six Ages of the World.) 


are full of eyes round about and 
within:] See vv. J. The statement of 
ver. 6 is repeated here, in order to include the 
wings, as in Ezek. x. 12:—around and inside 
each wing, and on the part of the body beneath 
it. Ewald and Hengst. refer “ round about” 
to “ before” in verse 6: and “within” to “ be- 
bind,” i.e., towards the throne. Reuss, who 
maintains that the throne was supported by 
‘he Four Living Beings (see Ezek. 1. 26; Ps. 
Wiii. 19), understands by “ within” the part 
seneath the throne —for the result of this 
erroneous interpretation see on ch.v.8. The 
“ six wings” in Isai. vi. 2 (each Seraph “ with 
twain covered his face, and with twain covered 
bis feet and with twain did fly,”) denote awe, 
for the Living Beings dare not look upon 
God,—4umility, for they stand in His pre- 
sence,—obedience, for they are ready to execute 
His commands. The “eyes” on the whole 
body signify the never-resting, wakeful activity 
of organic life—the vitality of organic Crea- 
tion: see the next clause. After the fourth 
Seal (ch. vi. 7) and the Adoration in heaven 
(ch. vii. 11), the Four Living Beings again 
appear in ch. xiv. 3; xv. 7; xix. 4. When 
the state of perfection has arrived in which 
the Divine idea of Creation is realized (ch. 
xix. 6), they disappear from the Apocalypse. 

and they have no rest, day and night, 
saying,| “ Day and night” may be taken 
with “rest,” or with “saying.” Sleep is the 
brother of Death, and hence these emblems 
of organic Life know no sleep: the expres- 
sion of their life isa never ceasing song of 
praise, Ps. xix. 1-3. Of this unceasing activity 
the “‘ eyes,” as stated above, are the symbol. 
\s to the gender (masc.) of the participle 
“saying,” see on Ver. I. 


THE TRISAGION 

“ Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God, the Almighty,| 
Cf. ch. xv. 3. Or, “Holy, holy, holy [is] 
the Lord God, the Almighty.” The 
Trisagion answers to the Hymn of the 
Seraphim in Isai. vi. 3. On the title, “the 
Almighty,” see on ch. i. 8. 

which was and which isand which is 





tocome.] Or which cometh (6 éepyopevos). 
See on ch. i.4; and note the different order 
here—past, present, future. Some (e.g. I. 
Williams, p. 71) refer “wich was” to the 
Creator; “ which is” to the Redeemer; 
“aubich is to come” to the third Divine 
Person:—but cf. ch. xi. 17. See on ver. Io. 
It is generallyadmitted that the Four Living 
Beings here, and in Ezek. i. 5, are of the 
same character as the Cherubim of the 
Tabernacle of Moses (Ex. xxv. 20 ; XXxvii. 9), 
and of the Temple of Solomon (1 Kings vi. 
24). From this general pattern we cannot 
suppose that they greatly deviated. That 
pattern, as described in Ezek. i. 5, 10° (cf. 
Ezek. x. 1), consisted of four elements—a 
man, a lion, an ox, an eagle. When the 
different descriptions are compared, it results 
that the figure of the Cherub had no fixed, 
definite form; and that the conception was 
that of a symbolical image. Thus, in Ezek. 
i. 6; x. 14, each Cherub has four faces and 
four wings ; and of the four faces of each, that 
only is precisely described which was in front, 
and presented itself first to the beholder. In 
Ezek. xli. 18, 19, “every Cherub had two 
faces.” In Ex. xxv, 20, the faces look one to 
another and also “toward the Mercy-seat ;” 
accordingly each could have had but one face. 
Nor is the description of either writer uniform. 
In Ezek. i. 10, there are four faces; in xli. 18, 
but fwo. In Ezek. x. 14, where it is said 
‘“‘ the first face was the face of a Cherub,” the 
rest of the verse shows that this was the face 
of an ox, first presented to the prophet’s eye: 
—cf, also Ezek. x. 8, with Ezek. viii. 3, and 
i, FO; Eq in, Ex, xxvii iF 631 /5)XxxvVE85135, 
the curtains of the Tabernacle were em- 
broidered with coloured figures of Cherubim, 
and so was the Veil of the First Temple 
(2 Chron. iii. 14); in Ex. xxv. 20, 21 (ch 
Kings vi. 23-30) “two Cherubim of gold, of 
beaten work,” covered “the Mercy-seat 
with their wings.” And thus the repre- 
sentations of this symbol were not the same , 
—in the one case there was a picture, in 
the other a sculptured shape. They were 
also the mark or token of the furniture of 
God’s house (1 Kings vi. 29, 35), where they 
are connected with palms and flowers thus 
representing the animal and the vegetable 
creation united :—cf. Ezek. xli. 18, 19, 25 
In Ezek. i. 18, 19, the “ wheels” alone seem 
to be “ full of eyes” (for the connexion of 
the Cherub with “‘ qw4eels ” cf. 1 Kings vii. 29, 
30, 33; 1 Chron. xxviii. 18, “the chariot of 
the Cherubim”): here, and in Ezek. x. 12, the 
body also of the Cherub is included. This 


REVELATION. IV. 


g And when those beasts give 
glory and honour and thanks to him 


[v. 9. 


that sat on the throne, who liveth for 
ever and ever, 





absence of fixed form excluded idolatry ; for 
the indefiniteness of the whole conception 
proved that nothing more than a symbol was 
intended. The form varied according to 
circumstances—one or other element pre- 
dominating with a view to what was signified ; 
and hence it is not necessary to suppose that 
the form varied at different times. Accord- 
ingly, at any one period, there may have been 
four, or two, or one face,—six, or four, or two 
wings,—predominance given to this or that 
anima! form (see Ezek. i. 5); provided that 
the four chief elements in any manner showed 
themselves. And thus, all four together formed 
but ove existence, called by Ezekiel (in ch. 
i. 20, 213 X. 15, 20) “the living creature,” or 
“being” (Heb. 1*N—which the LXX. renders, 
in the first two places, by (wn, ‘‘life;” and 
elsewhere by 76 (doy, as St. John in the 
Apocalypse). In fact, as the Cherub was but 
asymbol, and the only matter of moment was 
its meaning, its precise appearance and form 
were merely collateral details. 

This diversity of form, as well as the 
analogous forms to be found among other 
ancient peoples, has led Dillmann (Schenkel’s 
Bibel-Lexicon, art. Cherubim) to deny that any 
form was prescribed in the Mosaic revelation 
(see, however, Ex. xxv. 18-22). The texts 
Gen. iii. 24; Ps. xviii. 10 (“He rode upon a 
Cherub”); Ezek. xxviii. 14, taken together, 
as well as in connexion with kindred con- 
ceptions to be traced among different nations, 
render it probable that we have here to deal 
with a conception common, from the earliest 
times, to the Israelites and to other races. 
The similarity is adduced of the Indian 
Vishnu seated on the Garuda, described as 
a being “lighting up the whole world” 
(“sarvi vidyotayan dicah,’—Mahdbhdrata, 
i. 1239 ff.) ; and of the Greek Okeanos (sch., 
Prometh., 286) seated on the griffin (tb. 395). 

As to the griffin (ypvyy) it has been noted 
that while the serpent from the earliest ages 
has been a symbol of both good and evil, and 
the dragon only of evil, the griffin is the 
symbol only of good (see Smith’s Dict. of the 
Bible, and Dict. Christ. Antig.; Jameson, 
Sacred and Leg. Art, p. XXxvi.). 

The word Cherub, it should be observed, 
has no etymology in the Hebrew, or, generally, 
in the Semitic languages. Jewish theologians 
in the time of Christ—distinguishing them 
from the Angels generally, or Messengers of 
God, on account of their standing nearer to 
the throne, and on account of their name and 
torm—placed the Cherubim, and the Seraphim 
(Isai. vi. 2), and the Ophanim (“ wheels,” Ezek. 
i. 16), in the highest rank of spiritual beings in 


heaven: “ Then the Seraphim, the Cherubim, 
and Ophanin surrounded it ; these are those 
who never sleep [cf. Rev. iv. 8], but watch the 
throne of His Glory ” (Book of Henoch, \xx. 9, 
Laurence’s transl. p. 83; cf. lx. 13, p. 66). 

Dillmann considers that all such concep- 
tions, whether Jewish or Heathen, are to be 
traced back to Gen. iii. 24:—see Note A at 
the end of this chapter; and also Buhr, 
Symbolik des Mos. Cultus, i., S. 311 ff. 

As no significance is attached in the Old 
Test. to any single element of the Cherubim, 
so in the Apoc. there is no special significance 
attached to any one of the Four Living 
Beings. Each of them may perform a dis- 
tinct office (see ch. vi. 1-7; xv. 7), but it is 
in their combination only that the Living 
Beings symbolize animated Creation. Each 
of them represents the highest form of the 
different orders of created Life. 

The result, therefore, s that the throne 
of God is surrounded (1) by the Church of 
all time—symbolized in ver. 4 by the “ Four 
and twenty Elders ;’ and (2) by His animated 
Creation—symbolized in ver. 6 by the “ Four 
Living Beings” who represent the creaturely 
life of Nature. Hence, the grand doxology of 
the Church Universal or mankind redeemed, 
and represented by the Twenty-four Elders 
(vv. 10, 11),—a toxology of which Creation 
is the theme. 

“Redemption ” is first referred to in ch. 
Vv. 9. 

9. And when the living beings shall 
give] ‘‘ As oftenas (érav), whensoever they 
shall give,’—the future tense implying the 
eternal repetition of the act: “a frequentative 
signification after the manner of the Hebrew 
imperfect” (Bisping); see Litcke, s.451. De 
Wette insists on the force of the future, 
“henceforth, for all time to come,”—“pre- 
viously, it was not so” (cf. ch. vii. 15-17); for 
not until the Redemption had been accome 
plished could the Church Universal (see on 
ver. 4) join in this adoration. 

glory and honour and thanks] Compare cb. 


Vil. 12. 


to him that sitteth on the throne,] See 
on verse 2. 

to him that /iveth for ever and ever,| See 
on ch. i. 6 :—the essential title of God, cf 
verse 10; ch. vii. 2; Deut. xxxii. 40, 

Reuss, who rejects the opinion that either 
Angels or created existences were intended by 
the author, sees in the Four Living Beings 
merely symbols of ‘force,’ ‘ creative power,’ 
‘wisdom,’ and ‘omniscience’:—‘“ There is 
here an idea at once theological and philo- 


REVELATION. IV. 559 


to The four and twenty elders 11 ‘Thou art worthy, O Lord,“®*+™ 
fall down before him that sat on the to receive glory and honour and 


throne, and worship him that liveth power: for thou hast created all 
for ever and ever, and cast their things, and for thy pleasure they are 


v. 10—I1.] 


crowns before the throne, saying, 


and were created. 





sophical and above all profoundly true, under 
this figure of symbolized attributes proclaim- 
ing the glory of God, which the conception 
of created existences does not attain to.” 


10. the four and twenty elders| See ch. v. 
8, 14; x1. 16; xix. 4. 

shall fall down Jefore him that sitteth 
on the throne, and shall worship him that 
liveth for ever and ever, and shall cast] 
The tenses fal] down, and worship, and cast 
are all future,—see vv. //., and on verse 9. 

The words Aim that sitteth . . . him that 
liveth are repeated from verse 9, and give St. 
John’s interpretation of the doxology in 
verse 8. 

their crowns| The heavenly prize :—the 
emblem ofimmortality (see on ch. ii. ro) ;—or, 
it may be, which they wear as the Redeemed, 
as representatives of the victorious Church. 
Writers here quote Tacitus (Amn. xv. 29) 
who tells how Tiridates cast down his diadem 
(“‘insigne regium”) in homage before the effigy 
of Nero: so also Dion Cassius (/#b, xxxvi) 
tells how Tigranes cast down his diadem 
before Pompeius ;—cf. Joseph. Antz. xv. 13. 
On this subject, see Note D on ch. ii. 10. 


11. Worthy art thou, our Lordand our 
God,] See wv. //. Some authorities add, 
the Holy one (6 dyos,—so B, the Syriac, 
And*). Disterdieck would restrict “our” to 
the twenty-four Elders as representing the 
Redeemed; but Alford justly replies that 
“Creation is only a part of Redemption” 
—see below. Compare the doxology in 
ch. xi. 17. 


to receive all glory, and honour, and power :| 
Gr. “the glory and the honour, and the 
power:”—the article expresses universality 
(see on ch. i. 6; vii. 12), or, as Bengel notes, it 
may refer back to the ascription of “ glory” ds*c. 
by the Living Beings in ver. 9. Diusterd., 
however, considers that the Living Beings 
there ascribe “ thanksgiving” to their Crea- 
tor ; while the Elders here, although belonging 
to Creation, yet, looking on Creation from 
without, in place of “ thanksgiving,” render 
praise as a tribute to God’s creative “power,” 
which they proceed to specify in the words 
that follow. It may be noted that in ch. i. 6; 
v. 13, “ dominion” (kpdros) is ascribed to God 
or Christ ;—in ch. v. 12; vii. 12, “ might” 


(icxus) j;—here, “ power” (Sivays). God, it is 
true, has all “poqwer” in heaven (see ch. xv. 
8); but the wor/d is not yet brought into 
subjection to the Divine power; and so we 
read of the ascription of “power” here, and 
in ch, v. 12 ; vii. 12 ; xii. 10; xix. 1, to God as 
due to Him on Earth. In ch. xi. 17, He is 
represented as having “ taken” that “power.” 

for thou didst create all things,| The 
article before “a// things,” in the Greek, 
signifies that the Universe is meant. Crea- 
tion, as has been noted above, is the theme 
of this doxology,—see on verse 8. 


and because of thy will] Or, “by 
reason of,” ‘on account of’ (da ro OA, 
so Winer renders, § 49), cf. ch. i. 9; xii. 113 
xill. 143; John vi. 57 :—Vulg. “ propter volun= 
tatem tuam.” 

they were,] Seevv./), “ They existed,” — 
implying the fact of deing, as contrasted with 
previous zon-existence. Soin Gen. i. 3, “ Let 
there be light, and there was light: ”—not eyé= 
vovro, or eyevnOncav, “came into being,” as 
in Ps. xxxili. 9, LXX. (De Wette, Hengst., 
Ebrard), which is but equivalent to “ were 
created” in the next clause, and is not 
the sense of joav;—nor “in Thy eternal 
purpose, before they were created” (De 
Lyra) ;—nor “all things were, and were 
upheld, from the Creation to the present ” 
(Bengel) ;—nor “ were created, and [cf. the 
next clause] were created anew by Christ ” 
(Grotius). See Diisterd. in Joc. 


and they were created.| These words 
give expression to the definite fact on which 
the statement “they were” depends. 

Mede observes that this passage is the Eue 
charistic Hymn of the Ancient Liturgies, 
Hengst. notices the recurrence of the number 
three in vv. 8-10, viz. “ Holy, Holy, Holy ;” 
“Lord God Almighty ;” “ shall fall down,” 
“ shall worship,” “ shall cast.” 

Diisterdieck notices a reading of the 
uncial manuscript. B, to which Ewald is 
favourable, —ovx joav: “Cum non erant, 
creata sunt,” i.e. “they were created out 
of nothing ;” and Ewald, in his edition of 
1861, further says of the reading which all 
good authorities support:—“ ist so wenig 
Hebriisch oder sonst in irgend einer Sprache 
klar dass man nothwendig mit einigen Urkup 
den ovx joay hinzusetzen muss.”—s. 163, 





560 


REVELATION, IV. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Chap. IV. 


NOTE A ON VER. 3—THE JASPER, THE 
SARD, THE EMERALD. 

The selection of these three stones as 
symbols of the Divine glory is in accordance 
with what early writers tell us of the estima- 
tion in which they were held by the ancients. 
Thus, Plato (Phedo, 110) speaks of the 
gems admired by the Greeks — the sard, 
the jasper, the emerald; and he describes 
the “‘true world” [Paradise] as a region in 
which all the rocks consist of that sub- 
stance whereof the precious stones of this 
lower earth are but fragments that have 
escaped the universal ruin of all things here 
below. To regard the emerald as merely 
denoting the principal colour (so Ewald, 
Stern, Hengst., &c.) ; or, with Zillig, to take 
green together with the colours of the two 
other stones as the tree fundamental colours 
of the common rainbow, does not suit the 
character of this description, in which the 
chief Figure glitters like “a jasper stone and 
@ sard,’—His Nimbus, or Aureole, being an 
emerald bow. Hence, no sensible represen- 
tation of Deity is given; and the glory in 
which God is veiled so dazzles the eye of 
the Seer, that the impression left by the 
most brilliant components of light alone 
remains (1 Tim. vi. 16). When Ewald speaks 
of this perfectly unique alternation of colours 
as typifying for St. John “a heavenly light 
never yet beheld,’—we hear the echo of 
Wordsworth’s famous line, “ ‘The light that 
never was on sea or land.” Ewald, in- 
deed, writes of this description with enthu- 
siasm;—the doctrine, so dear to St. John, of 
the mysterious Trinity suggests the choice 
of the three colours: “ Who shall here speak 
(he continues) of a human countenance, or 
of ‘a human form? Only an appearance as 
that of a rainbow, yet infinitely brighter than 
that of a rainbow, makes its nearness felt.” 
“As a sea was there,” notes I. Williams, 
“ but of glass, so a rainbow, but of emerald.” 

It is not necessary to dwell on the spiritual 
significations which have been discovered in 
this imagery: e.g., in ancient times (Vic- 
torinus, Primas., Beda), that, as the colour of 
water is green, and the sard is red, we have 
emblems of baptism and the deluge, and also 
of the judgment by fire ;—or, in modern times 
(Ebrard), that the combined glitter of the 
Jasper and the sard typifies the essential unity 
of God’s holiness and justice ;—or, as sug- 
gested by Burger, that the green of the 
emerald, “which is the most beneficent 
colour of the rainbow,” symbolizes Hope. 


Note B ON VER. 7—THE Four LIvIne 
BEINGS. 


The connexion of the Four Living Bemgs 


with the Cherubim of the ancient Tabernacle 
and Temple has been stated already:—it 
remains to point out the import of the symbol. 

The ‘Living Beings’—the (da of the 
Apocalypse—are manifestly borrowed from 
the nn (¢éa, LXX.) of Ezekiel (ch. i. and 
ch. x.), The Apocalypse here introduces (vv. 6 
-9), surrounding the Throne, a symbolical 
representation consisting of the same four 
elements which are described in Ezek. i. 10 
(cf. Rev. v. 6-14; vi. 1-7; Vil. 11; xiv. 33 
xv. 7; xix. 4). These “Living Beings” (for 
which the Authorized Version erroneously 
substitutes “ Beasts”) have nothingin common 
with the “deasts” of Rev. vi. 8, or the “quild 
beasts” of Mark i. 13; nor yet with the 
“Beast” of Rev. xi. 7; Xiil. 1-18; xiv. 9, 11; XV. 23 
XVi. 2, 10, 13; XVii. 3-17; XIX. 19, 203 XX. 4, IO 
—in all which places the word 6npiov is used. 

We read of the ceaseless movements of the 
‘Four Living Beings’ both in the present 
passage, and in Ezek. i. 14;—while, in a stil] 
higher reference, the continuous action of the 
Godhead is ascribed to the fact that the 
Father and the Son “have /ife in themselves,” 
John v. 17-26. Absolutely and pre- 
eminently, the Cherubim are called “ Living 
Beings.” The idea of /ife is essential to the 
symbol; and thus they naturally image forth 
those existences to which /# in its chief sense 
belongs. 

Further:—The four elements of which the 
symbol consists (ver. 7), are instances of 
animated creation: the ‘Living Being,’ there- 
fore, or Cherub, in its true conception and 
regarded as a whole, is a symbol which re- 
presents, car’ eLoynv, creaturely life ;—which 
exhibits the most perfect and the fullest degree 
of created being;—and which stands at its 
highest grade! The number four also, 
which is no arbitrary number in Jewish sym- 
bolism (see Introd. § 11, (a) ), is the recognized 
signature of Creation, especially so far as it is 
the witness and manifestation of God. The 
Cherub, accordingly, is such a being as, 
standing at the head of created life, and 


} Hengstenberg (Comm. on Ezek., Append., 
p- 507, Eng. tr.) considers that as soon as we 
recognize in the Cherub the ideal unity of the 
animal creation, the interpretation of the word 
follows of itself: it means ‘‘ as a multitude,”— 
viz. 3 (which does not belong to the root) and 
31 The Jewish expositors, he thinks, did not 
perceive this, because they imagined that the 
Cherubim were of angelic nature: the truth 
being that they represent the animated creation 
on earth, while Angels are the ‘‘creatures” of 
heaven. Hence Jehovah ‘‘sitteth upon the 
Cherubim,” Ps. xcix., and He is ‘*God of 
Hosts” (Sabaoth), Ps. Ixxx. 15; the phrases 
being co-ordinate (#., p. 503). Cf. 1 Sam. iv. ¢ 


REVELATION. IV. 


uniting in itself the most perfect examples of 
created existence, is the formal manifestation 
of Divinely imparted life. This is illustrated 
the nature of the four elements, as the 
Talmud (quoted by Spencer, De Legg. Heér., 
ili, 5, 4, 2) explains: “Quatuor sunt superbi 
in mundo—Leo inter feras; Bos inter jumenta; 
Aguila inter volucres; Homo, vero, super 
omnia: at Deus eminet super universa.” 

Of the significance of the Ox regarded as 
symbolic of excellence among tame animals, 
the worship of Apis among the Egyptians 
is a proof. There was also an imitation 
of this form of idolatry among the Hebrews 
(to which they had already yielded while in 
bondage, Josh. xxiv. 14; Ezek. xx. 6-8) ex- 
hibited in “the molten calf” of Ex. xxxii. 4. 
As expressly stated by Philo (De Special. 
Legg., ii. p. 320) this form of idolatry was 

ived from an Egyptian origin; and it was 
again exhibited in the “sin” of Jeroboam 
(1 Kings xii. 28; 2 Kings x. 29). Preemin- 
ence among wild animals is assigned to the 
Lion (as instanced in the lions beside Solo- 
mon’s throne, 1 Kings x. 19, 20) adopted 
as the natural symbol of sovereignty. The 
power of vision in the case of the Eagle (cf. 
also Ezek. x. 12; Rev. iv. 6, 8) is emblematic, 
in the Cherub, of the Divine omniscience; 
as his power of flight (cf. “a flying eagle,” 
Rey. iv. 7), so constantly referred to in 
Scripture (e. g. Deut. xxviii. 49; Job ix. 
26; Prov. xxiii. 5; Jer. iv. 13; Hab. i. 8), 
is emblematic of the Divine omnipresence. 
These characteristics, added to reason in 
Man, render the Cherub an ideal being, 
the type of Creation in its highest forms, 
and of Life in its most perfect energy: and 
so all the four NVD, (da, of Ezekiel i. 5— 
the “living creatures” of A. V.—are repre- 
sented by that Prophet, in ver. 20, as one 
iV, (on, Life As the entire Creation is a 
witness to the Divine power of life, so the 
Cherub, concentrating in its four elements 
the highest created energies, appears as one 
individualsymbol representative of all animated 
existences; testifying to the power, majesty, 
omniscience, omnipresence, and absolute 
wisdom of God, as manifested by the universe 
of created Life. This testimony, we here 
(Rev. iv. 8, 9; v. 11-14) learn, is unceasingly 
borne by “the Four Living Beings;” and the 
idea which their forms symbolize is expressed 
in the words of Ps. ciii. 22, “Bless the Lord, 
all His works, in all places of His dominion.” 
The Cherubim always appear in Scripture the 
Ministers of the Divine will, just as Creation 
is bound to obey it. Thus we find the 
Cherubim (1) at the Gate of Eden—Eden the 
state of Life—and placed there “to keep the 
way of the Tree of Life” (Gen. iii. 24;1 Ezek. 


' From this early reference to the Cherubim 
New Test.—Vou. IV. 


XXvill. 11-16); and (2) surrounding, as here, 
the mystic throne of God:—observe if God - 
sits upon His throne (1 Kings xxii. 19, Ps. 
ix. 4) He sits on the Cherubim (1 Sam. iv. 4; 
2 Sam. vi. 2; 2 Kings xix. 15; 1 Chron. xiti 
6; Ps. lxxx. 1; Isai. xxxvii. 16). 

In Rev. v. 8, 11, the “Living Beings” are 
specially distinguished from Angels, who utter 
a song of praise of their own. The later 
Jews, however, seem to have considered the 
Cherubim to be of Angelic order; for in place 
of the Four Living Beings of Ezekiel and St. 
John, the book of Enoch (ch. xl. 9) places 
around the Throne the four Archangels, 
Michael, Raphael, Gabriel, Phanuel:—and R. 
Eliezer (Pirke) says that the four Cherubim 
of Ezekiel are these four Archangels, as 
leaders and representatives of the four 
Angelic Orders, Elliott, too (Hor. Apoc. i. 
87-92), still insists that their nature is the 
“angelic, or is-angelic state of the glorified 
Church :”—in reply to which opinion ch. vii. 
Ir is conclusive, where the Four Living 
Beingsare distinguished from “all the Angels.” 

The following meanings have also been 
assigned :—The Four Living Beings represent 
(a) The four Evangelists, or Gospels (see on 
ver. 7). According to the earliest com- 
mentator Victorinus, the Maz is St. Matthew; 
the Lion is St. Mark; the Ca/f is St. Luke; 
the Eagle is St. John: and so St. Jerome, 
Proem. super Ev. Matt.;—with St. [renezus 
(iii. 11, 8), St. Mark and St. John here 
change places ;—with St. Augustine (De Cons. 
Ev. 1. 6), St. Matthew and St. Mark are 
interchanged ;—with St. Athanasius (Synops. 
Script., t. ii. p. 202), the order of St. Mark 
and St. Luke is inverted. And thus we see 
that this system of explanation is purely 
arbitrary, however generally it may have been 
adopted. Words. (see on ver. 4), I. Williams 
(who does not specify the particular Evange- 
lists), and others understand generally by the 
symbol “The four Gospels ;” and I. Williams 
(p. 70) thinks it probable that the origin of this 
symbol “is connected with Assyrian hiero- 
glyphic.”? (b) The four Patriarchal Churches: 
—The Manis Alexandria, the seat of learning; 


Hengstenberg (4 ¢., i. 501) would infer that 
this symbol belongs, in its origin, not to the pro- 
vince of revelation but to that of natural religion. 

? In the article Cherubim, in the Encyclopedia 
Britannica (oth ed., 1876), it is stated that 
‘fresh light” has been thrown upon this sub- 
ject from the cuneiform inscriptions. Com- 
bining Ps. xviii. 10; 2 Sam. xxii. 11; Deut. 
xxviii. 49, the writer infers that ‘‘the cherub 
was either an eagle or a quadruped with eagle’s 
wings. This result would seem to justify con- 
necting the word with the Assyrian Zurudu, a 
synonym of Lurukku, or karakku, the ‘ circling’ 
bird,—4, ¢., according to Friedrich Delitzsch, the. 
vulture.” On the other hand Ezekiel (xxviii. 
13-16) describes him ‘‘as the attendant and 


NN 


561 


562 


the Lion 1s Jerusalem, exhibiting constancy in 
the faith, Acts v. 29; the Ca/f is Antioch, 
“quia primo in ea vocati sunt discipuli 
Christiani;” the Eagle is Constantinople, the 
See of such men as Gregory Naz. (De Lyra). 
(c) The four great Apostles,—Peter, James 
the Lord’s brother, Matthew, and Paul as 
“the Eagle” (Grotius). (d) As the standards 
of Judah, Reuben, Ephraim, Dan (Num. ii.) 


guard rather than as the bearer of Deity.” 
*““Now, according to a talismanic inscription 
copied by Lenormant, 4irubu is a synonym for 
the steer-god, whose winged image filled the 
place of guardian at the entrance of the Assy- 
rian palaces :” in Ezek. i. 10, one of the four 
faces of a cherub was that of an ox; ‘‘we 
should, therefore, connect the word cherub 
primarily with the Assyrian irubu, but also, 
as proposed above, with 4urubu. The two 
forms seem to be co-ordinate and expressive of 
some quality common to the king of birds and 
the colossal steer. Their etymology is alto- 
gether uncertain.” Of parallels to the Cherubim 
to be found outside the Hebrew religion, the 
most complete ‘‘is that of the winged pues 
(griffins, a secondary form of kerubim), who not 


only watched over the treasures of the gods (cf. 


Herod. iv. 13, 116), but were also the bearers 
of Deity, if at least Plutarch and Eustathius 
may be followed in identifying the rerpackeAhs 
oiwvds of AXschylus (Prom. 395), with the 
griffin” (see Hermann, ad /oc.). 


CHAPTER V. 


1 The book sealed with seven seals: 9 which 
only the Lamb that was slain is worthy to 
open. 12 Therefore the elders praise him, 


[Ver. 4 om. éya—om. kal avayvavat. 


REVELATION, V 


jv. & 


represented the Church of the Old Test., so 
the Four Living Beings represent the Church 
of the New Test. (Mede). (e) The four 
Gospels and also the four cardinal Virtues 
(Andreas) ;—the four Virtues of the Apostles 
(Alcasar) ; — the four mysteries of the faith, the 
Incarnation, Passion, Resurrection, Ascension 
(Aretius);—the four faculties of the human 
soul, “Homo est vir rationalis; Leo irascibilis; 
Bos concupiscibilis; Aquila conscientia” (Corn. 
a Lap.). (f) The four Orders—“pastorum,” 
“diaconorum,” “doctorum,” ‘contemplan- 
tium” (Joachim); or, as Vitringa, all the 
doctors of the Church. (g) Finally, the four 
Beings in Ezekiel, notes Renan (L’ Antechrist, 
p. 381) symbolize the attributes of Divinity 
—wisdom, power, omniscience, creation. 

On the symbolism as explained in the text, 
see Bahr, /.c., i. Ss. 340-360, whose results 
are accepted by De Wette, Zillig, Hengst., 
Diisterd., Alf., &c. Ebrard only differs in 
regarding the Four Living Beings as symbolic 
not of Creation itself but of the creative 
power of God. Stern also asks “May 
we not refer the Cherubim of the New 
Covenant to the chief influences on the 
spiritual life of Divine Grace within the 
Church?” Yet in his explanation of ver. 9 
(s. 209) he takes them to represent “‘all the 
creaturely life of Nature” —“alles creatiir 
liche Leben der Natur,” as above. 


9 and confess that he redeemed them with his 
blood. 


ND I saw in the right hand of 
him that sat on the throne a 


Ver. 5 om. dv.—om. dKioa. Ver. 6[A reads kat 


28ovd, which 8, B, P, 1 omit],—om. ra before dmecran. [A reads drecradpevor]. Ver. 7 om. rd 
BiBriov. Ver. 8 xiGdpav. Ver. 9 [&, B, P read nuas, which A omits,—cf. ver. to]. Ver. 10 
avrovs [Erasmus, without the authority of any MS., altered the reading of his codex into 
hpas, after the nos of the Vulg.]—Sacurciav—Bacirevovow [N, P, 1 read Baowevoovow,—but 
Erasmus, followed by Luther and the A. V., altered this reading of his codex into BactAev= 
aoper, after the regnabimus of the Vulg.]. Ver. 11, kat 7. ¢, Kai. mpeoB., kat Hv 6 apiOpos 
aura@y pupiddes pupiddav Kal xiA. x. kT A. [The codex of Erasmus reads xal rav (devs 
kat xiAuddes xududdav éyovres. Here, Er. inserted merely cai mpecSurépwy (without the 
art.) after the Vulgate “et seniorum.” The Textus Receptus reads xai t. ¢. kal r. mpeoB. 
«ai xtX. x. Aeyovres. The Vulgate: “et erat numerus eorum amillia millium, dicentium™). 
Ver. 13, om. the 1st éor.v.—éni ths yns.—om. a[A reads éeoriv].—[S, B, P read Xéyovras,—A, 1 
read \éyorra].—[A, B read 76 Opdva,—-X, P, 1 read rod Opdvov]. Ver. 14 om. eixoovrécoapes. 
—om. (arti eis Tovs aidévas tév aidvwy [Both insertions were introduced into the reudae 
of his codex by Erasmus—followed by Luther, and the A. V.—after the Vulgate, “ Ee 
wiginti-quatuor seniores ceciderunt in facies suas: et adoraverunt viventem in sacula seculorum”) J 


now followed, as an introduction to the 
Visions which disclose the future of the 
Divine Kingdom, by a revelation of the mae 
jesty and glory of Jesus Christ in presence of 


CuHap. V. 


The manifestation of God described in 
the fourth chapter (see on ch. iv. 2), is 


v. 2.] 


book writte:. within and on the back- 
side, sealed with seven seals. 


REVELATION. V. 


2 And I saw a strong angel pro- 
claiming with a loud voice, Who is 





the Hosts of heaven, and of the representatives 
of assembled Creation. After the Vision of 
the ideal Church, comes the Vision which 
shows how the great mystery is to be ful- 
filled. Of that mystery the Book with the 
Seven Seals is the type. The Sea/ is the 
symbol of an event still hidden in mystery, 
but Divinely decreed ; and this image is bor- 
rowed from Isaiah xxix. 11, 12. 

Apart from this reference to Isaiah, and a 
few other references to the earlier prophets, 
the entire conception of this Vision is original 
and peculiar to St. John. 


THE SEALED BOOK (1-7). 


In ch. iii. 5; xiii. 8; xx. 12, 15; xxi. 27, we 
read of “ se Book of Life,’—that Book of 
God’s counsels of Mercy out of which the 
Redeemed are to be judged (cf. Ex. xxxii. 
32; Ps. lvi. 8; cxxxix. 16; Dan. xii. 1; Phil. 
iv. 3). Here we read of the secret counsels 
of God as to His Kingdom, of which the 
mystery—to be disclosed only by a special 
revelation—is symbolized by the sevenfold 
Sealing (cf. ch. x. 4; xxil. 10; Isai. xxix. 11; 
Dan. xii. 4, 9). Christ alone, the Revealer of 
God’s counsels, can unfold this mystery. See 
ver. 9, and compare ch, i. 1. 


1, And I saw] See on ch. iv. 1; as there 
stated, a particular feature of the Vision is now 
introduced. 

upon the right hand| Not “in the right 
hand” (Vulg., Vitr., Hengst.)—in favour of 
which ch. xvii. 8 and ch. xx. 1 are appealed to; 
nor, “ on the right side of Him that sitteth” 
(Ebrard)—which ver. 7 proves to be an 
error; but, according to the usage of the 
A pocalypse, “npon” the hand from which 
the Book is taken (eri, with an accus.:—see 
on ch. i. 20). It lay upon the open hand ws 
him to take who might be “worthy ”— 
ver. 7, and cf. ch. xx. 1. 

of him that sat on the throne] See on 
ch. iv. 2. 

a book written within and en the back, | 
See on ch.i. 11. Cf. “a roll of a book,” Jer. 
XxXxvi.2;—“i# was written within and with- 
out,” Ezek. ii. 9, 10. “The back,” or outside 
of a roll of parchment was written on when 
its inner side was full (smia8éypapoy, Lucian, 
Vit. Auction., 9;—“a tergo,” Juv., Sat. i 6 3— 
“in aversa charta,” Martial. viii. 22; ol “com- 
mentarios ofistographos,” Plin., Ep. iii. 5). 

Grotius renders: ‘ written ‘within ; sealed 
without” (“‘intus scriptum, extra signatum”). 

In this fulness of the Roll commentators 
see an emblem of the completeness of the 
contents—an idea which is also implied by 


the number Seven of the Seals. Origen’s com- 
mentary on St. John’s Gospel opens with a re= 
ference to this place: “The Book written 
within,” illustrates the spiritual; that written 
“ on the back,” the /iteral sense (Opp., vol. iv. 
p- 1). Compare the Tables of the Law, Ex. 
Xxxli. 15. Elliott needlessly understands by 
the writing “within and on the back,’ two 
divisions of written matter :—(1) The writing 
“‘ ayithin,’ he considers, described the three 
contemporaneous Visions which follow, the 
first part consisting of ch. vi. and ch. vii; 
the second part of ch. viii. 1—ch. ix. 19; the 
third part of ch. ix. zo—ch. xi. 19. (2) The 
supplementary part (ch. xii. r—ch. xiv. 8), or 
that which was written “on the back” of 
the Roll, contained the account of the rise 
and character of the Beast from the Abyss, or 
Papal Rome (/. c., vol. i. p. 114; vol. iil. p. 
4): see the remarks introductory to ch. xii. 
Compare also Mr. G. S. Faber’s division of 
the Apocalypse already quoted, Introd. § 12, 
(2), note’. See within on ch. x. 8, and ch, 
XV. I. 


close-sealed with seven seals.] Or sealed 
down,—the verb is found only here. The end 
of the parchment is fastened down by the 
Seals to its staff, so that the Roil cannot be 
opened: cf. Luke iv. 17, where our Lord 
unrolls the Book. A profound mystery is 
hereby denoted,—see Deut. xxxii. 34. All the 
Seals are visible to St. John: each involves its 
own mystery; and the opening of each is fol- 
lowed by a special Vision—e. g. ch. vi. 2; but 
“nought could be read in the Book till after 
the unsealing of all the Seven Seals” (C. a 
Lapide). Cassiodorus explains: “ Iste septem 
sigillis, id est Septiformi Spiritu, conspiciebatur 
esse signatus; quia mysteria Domini usque 
ad tempus prezfinitum habentur semper incog=- 
nita.”—Complex. in Apoc., p. 409. Diisterd. 
considers that, as each Seal is opened, the 
Vision which follows symbolizes a portion 
of the contents of the Roll; and that the Roll 
embraces all “the determinate counsel of 
God,” but is itself not read. Alford cone 
cludes that the successive openings of the 
Seals “ are but so many preparations for that 
final state of perfection in which the Lamb 
shall reveal to the Church the contents of 
the Book itself;” but that what the Book 
shall thus reveal is not stated by St. John. 
Schleiermacher observes that there is nu 
ground for regarding this as “the Book of 
Destiny,” for all that is said refers to the 
“ Seals,” not to the “Book” (Einl. ins N. Test., 
S. 459). 

‘We have no materials fer judging of the 
contents of the Sealed Book Even were the 


NN 2 


563 


564 


worthy to open the books and to loose 
the seals thereof? 

3 And no man in heaven, nor in 
earth, neither under the earth, was 


events prophesied in this Book disclosed in 
the Visions which follow the opening of the 
several Seals,—and thus the contents of the 
Book itself expressed figuratively,—all must 
still remain a mystery ; inasmuch as the disclo- 
sure is made through images and symbols, the 
full signification of which the final accom- 
plishment alone can reveal. Bishop Words- 
worth, on the other hand, writes :—* When 
one Seal is broken, a portion of the Roll is 
unwrapped and its contents are disclosed ; 
then a second Seal is broken; and so on, till 
the Seven Seals are opened. . . . This Roll 
reveals a brief view of the successive suffer- 
ings of the Church of Christ from St. John’s 
age to the end of the world.” ‘To the same 
effect Elliott and others ;—viz., that we have 
Seven distinct writings, each sealed with one 
Seal, and each manifesting its own revelation. 
As to what the Roll itself represents, Dr. 
J. H. Todd (Lectures on the Apoc., p. 91) 
reckons up sixteen different opinions; and 
he gives the enumeration as incomplete. 
Victorinus takes the Book to be the Old 
Testament ; and explains that none but Christ 
(ver. 5) could preach what had previously 
required the typical teaching of sacrifices 
and various oblations. The opinion of 
many ancient and modern writers (see above) 
that the Roll contained the sum of the Divine 
counsels (Acts ii. 23), however unsatisfactory, 
necessarily includes the majority of the less 
comprehensive interpretations:—e.g. that 
what was written within signified the New 
Testament, and what was written on the back 
the Old (Primas., Beda, &c.); or that the 
Roll gave an account of the rejection of 
the Jews (Grotius, Hammond, Wetstein). 
Hengst. (after Schottgen) regards “ the Seal- 
group,” ch. vi. 1-ch. vili. 1, as expressing the 
whole contents of the Roll, arguing that 
ch. iv. and ch. v. lead us to look for nothing 
but God’s judgments on His enemies (Alcasar 
similarly explains ch. vi. 1-ch. xi. 19). Others, 
however, understand that from the seventh 
Seal (ch. viii. 1) a further development pro- 
ceeds on to the very end, until which 
time the seventh Seal continues—the Visions 
which follow being “ evolved,” as it were, from 
this Seal, and “ the patience and the faith of the 
saints” who wait for the day of the Lord (ch. 
xili. 10; xiv. 12) being thusexercised. Accord- 
ing to Mede (/. c., p. 458), however, the Trum- 
pets alone are “evolved” from the seventh 
Seal, which is “the Seal of the Trumpets ;” 
and he understands this Sealed Book as con- 
taining the destiny of the Roman Empire, 


REVELATION. V. 


[v. 3—4. 


able to open the book, neither to look 
thereon. 

4 And I wept much, because no 
man was found worthy to open and 





and the “ Little Book” of ch. x. 2, 8 as cone 
taining the destiny of the Church. Burger zlso 
concludes that the contents of the “ Sealed 
Book” are made known as soon as the 
seventh Seal is broken (ch. viii. 1); and that 
these contents are represented in the Seven 
Trumpet Visions. 

As a “Futurist,” Todd (/.¢, p. 98) re- 
lying upon ch. x. 8, Ezek. ii. 9, together 
with Ps. xl. 7 and Heb. x. 7, considers that 
the Roll “denotes the office or commission 
with which our Lord shall be invested, and 
in virtue of which He shall come again in 
glory to judge the world;’—and to the 
same effect De Burgh (p. 130), who takes 
the Sealed Book, and the whole Apocalypse 
itself, to be solely occupied with the account 
of the last great Crisis. 

Mr. Maurice, as a “ Preterist,” takes the 
Sealed Book to be “the expression of God’s 
purpose and will;” adding: ‘“ The belief that 
there is such a Book in such a hand, has 
sustained the strongest, sternest minds among 
men; it has enabled them to endure the 
world’s despair and their own” (/. ¢., p. 84). 

The truth is that we do not read of any 
connexion between the opening of the Seals 
and the reading of the Book or Roll; nor, 
indeed, does the text state that the Roll was 
unfolded. 

2. a mighty ange/] As inch. x. 1; xvili. 
21: either as being of higher rank (De 
Wette, Stern, Ziillig:—De Lyra specifies the 
Angel Gabriel); or with reference to that 
“ great voice” which rings through Creation, 
—see ch. x. 3; xviii. 2. 


proclaiming with a great voice, Who [is| 
worthy] Morally entitled, as John i. 27; cf 
Matt. viii. 8. 

On the absence of the verb substantive 
here (x, A, P omit éoriw), see Introd. § 7, 
IV. (d). 

3. And no onein the 4eaven, or on the 
earth, or under the earth,| Grotius ex- 
plains “ under the earth” by the sea (cf. Ex. xx, 
4, broxdrw, LX X.) :—but the evident mean- 
ing is the whole realm of Creation, ef. ver. 13 ; 
Phil. ii. ro. Ebrard understands Hades, the 
place of departed souls (not of demons),— 
compare Isai. xiv. 9, &c. 

or to Jook thereon.] As illustrating the fact 
that no one “quas able to open the Book,’ 
Origen compares Rom. iii. 10-12. 


4. And The pronoun is not expressed 
—see vv. /],: commentators, however, who 






WW 5s—6.] 


to read the vook, neither to look 


thereon. 
5 And one of the elders saith unto 


Gee. 09 me, Weep not: behold, ¢the Lion 


of the tribe of Juda, the Root of 
David, hath prevailed to open the 





read the pronoun, explain that it is em- 
phatic, “I, on my part ”—under the circum- 
stances related in vv. 2, 3. 

was weeping much, because no one) I.e., 
because the promise of ch. iv. 1, seemed 
likely to fail:—‘ Without tears,” writes 
Bengel, “the Revelation was not written, 
neither without tears can it be understood.” 
Hengstenberg’s idea that there is here a 
weakness of faith on St. John’s part cannot 
for a moment be entertained. The Seer was 
waiting in the humility of faith until the 
Lamb had opened the Roll; cf. Matt. xxiv. 
36; Mark xiii. $2; Acts i. 7. 

“The Seer, when he wept,” notes Mr. 
Maurice (according to the “Preterist” 
theory), “might have hoped that the open 
Book would have told him the judgment onthe 
great Babel-empire of the world; that the 
seventh Trumpet might have announced the 
fall of Rome. No! when it sounds, Jeru- 
salem will fall” (p. 186). 

qworthy to open the book, or fo Jook there- 
on:} Omit the words, “and to read”—see 
vv. Il. 

The interpretation of ch. iii. 7 given by 
Irenzus is to be noted here,—see in Joc. 

5. and one of the elders] Representing, 
as Vitr. notes, the body of the Elders—the 
Church. Of course attempts have been made 
to determine which of the Elders is the 
speaker:—some fix upon St. Matthew, in 
whose Gospel (xxviii. 18) the omnipotence 
of Christ is declared ; De Lyra says St. Peter, 
who had already died as a martyr. Cf ch. 
vi. 1, where one of the Living Beings in like 
manner addresses the Seer. On the form of 
expression “one of the Elders” (cis éx rav) see 
John vi. 8 ; Matt. xxvi. 14; andcf. ch. xvii. 11. 

bebokd,] To which corresponds “ dnd I 
saw,” ver. 6. 

the Lion which is of the tribe of Judah, 
the Root of David,] (Omit d»—see vv. 
i). C£. Gen. xlix. 9; Isai. xi. 1, 10; Rom. xv. 
12; Heb. vii. 14:—this harmony of remote 
texts illustrates the fact that Scripture is 
“ one organized whole.” 

hath conquered, to open the book] Cf. 
ch. vi. 2. According to the usage of the 
Apocalypse, the verb “to conquer,” “to 
evercome,” is to be taken absolutely—as e. g 
in ch. ii. 7, 11, 17, and especially in the full 
aense of ch.iii. 21. It denotes here the past vic- 


REVELATION. V. 


book, and to loose the seven seals 
thereof. 

6 And I beheld, and, lo, in the 
midst of the throne and of the four 
beasts, and in the midst of the elders, 
stood a Lamb as it had been slain, 


tory of Christ (“Victor fuit in Resurrectione” 
—De Lyra). This, although not expressed, 
appears not only from the epithets applied, 
but also from the interpretation given in 
ver. 9,—‘ decause Christ is the Lamb Who 
was slain, He has gained the right, and is 
therefore worthy to open the Book.” This 
is a pregnant construction ; ‘ He conquered, 
[so as] to open, —“ the infin. epexegetic,” see 
‘Winer, § 44; cf. ch.i. 1. “The glory of opening 
the Book of God’s counsels . . . is one part 
of the ‘ Verefore God also hath highly exalted 
Him’ of Phil. ii. 9” (Vaughan, /. c., p. 143). 
Like Irenzus (see on ver. 4) Origen also 
refers here to ch. iii. 7. On the other 
hand, many (e. g. Vitr., Bengel, Ewald) 
take the words in the same sense as the 
A. V., viz. “bath prevailed to open” (“ob- 
tinuit id quod tu desperandum putabas,” 
Grot.), referring to the analogy of the 
Hebrew—e. g. Ps. li. 4 (1. 6, LXX., vxav). 
But ch. iii. 21 is sufficient, of itself, to 
decide that the former is the correct sense; 
and hence the fitness of “ome of the Elders” 
—one of those who know the fruit of the 
Redemption—being chosen to indicate that 
Christ, exalted to His Throne, is the ime 
parter of all Revelation. 


and the seven seals thereof.] The 
words “fo Joose” are to be omitted—see 
vv. i. The reading of the uncial MS. B 
(6 dvoiywv)—“ He that openeth the Book and 
the Seven Seals thereof hath overcome ”"— does 
not alter the sense here adopted, and adds 
another epithet to Christ. 


6. And I saw] What the Elder (ver. 5) 
had announced. A new feature of the vision 
is introduced—see on ch. iv. 1. Omit “and, 
lo”—see vv. /i. Or render (with A) And 
behold, én the midst, &c. 


in the midst of the throne and of the four 
living beings, and in the midst of the 
elders,| Not ‘on the throne’ (as Ebrard), 
viz. “ sitting in the midst, on the throne, at the 
centre of two concentric circles, the inner 
formed by the four Living Beings, the outer 
consisting of the twenty-four Elders,’—which 
is forbidden by the fact that the Lamb is 
seen “standing,” and by ver. 7; but, as 
Disterd., who refers to dvapécov, ch. vii. 
17, and to év peow in ch. xxii. 2 as here; 
and who relies upon the repetition of “ in the 
midst” as a Hebrew idiom (cf. L»v. xxvii. 12, 


565 


566 


having seven horns and seven eyes, 
which are the seven Spirits of God 
sent forth into all the earth. 


REVELATION. V. 


[v. 7. 


7 And he came and took the book 
out of the right hand of him that sat 
upon the throne. 





14, _LXX.),explains—‘In thespacein the centre 
which is the throne together with the four 
Living Beings (as in ch. iv. 6); and which is 
surrounded, as its outward limit, by the circle 
of the twenty-four Elders’ (ch. iv. 4). Or 
we may understand (as De Wette), before 
the throne on “the glassy sea;” or (as 
Bleek), within the semicircle of the throne, 
and therefore “in the midst of the Elders” 
also. 

aLamb] This epithet (dpviov) is applied 
to our Lord twenty-nine times in the Apoc., 
—the word occurring elsewhere in the N. T. 
only in John xxi. 15, where our Lord says, 
“ Feed my lambs.” The other form (duvis) 
of this epithet is found only in John i. 29, 36, 
and in Acts viii. 32, where it is borrowed 
from Isai. lili. 7 (LXX.):—see also 1 Pet. 
i. 19. Alford observes (Prolegg., p. 228) 
that this personal name, the Lamb, in what- 
ever form, is common only to the Apoc. and 
the Fourth Gospel. On the difficulty which 
has been raised respecting the authorship of 
the Apocalypse, owing to the application of 
this name under its different forms to Christ, 
see Introd., § 7, IV. (¢). 

The diminutive form (4rnion) which is 
employed here brings forward more sugges- 
tively, as De Wette points out, the idea 
of meekness and innocence :—Christ had just 
been spoken of as a “ Lion;” He now appears 
as “a Lamb.” Liicke (s. 678) contrasts this 
use of the diminutive, as well as the reference 
contained in the word “ s/ain,’ with the idea 
of power conveyed by the symbol of “the 
Seven Horns.” See Words., quoted on ch. xi. 7. 


standing,| J. e., in posture as if living. 
St. John now sees, what he had already heard, 
chi) 185 ch. Rome vie 9s thes icamb) 13 
beheld standing as in life, and yet— 


as though it had been slain,| For the verb 
cf. Ex. xii. 6; and see on ch. vi. 4. This 
verb (cdirrew), found eight times in this 
Book and “used, so to speak, as a vox solem- 
nis, with a special fulness of meaning,” 
occurs elsewhere in the New Test. only in 
1 John iii. 12, where it is “ designed to ex- 
hibit before the reader’s eyes the unmitigated 
fearfulness of the act of Cain :’—cf. Haupt on 
1 John iii. 12. See Introd., § 7, IV. (f). 

As though it had been slain, t.e., bearing in 
His body the marks of His sacrificial death 
—the print of the nails and the wound of 
the spear (see ch. i. 7, and John xx. 20, 27; 
Luke xxiv. 39), tokens which shall also fill 
His enemies with terror (ch. vi. 16). The 
words “as (though) it bad been” mark the 


contrast between “standing” and “slain” 
—the former setting forth the Lord’s risen 
life (cf. ch. i. 18); the latter the abiding 
power of His sacrificial death. Words- 
worth contrasts the words “ as though it had 
been slain” of ch. xiii. 3. 

The Lamb has a double emblem— 


seven horns,| The first emblem. This de- 
notes universal dominion ( Matt. xxviii. 18); the 
Horn—an idea borrowed from the strength of 
the ox—being the symbol of power (cf. 
Deut. xxxiii. 17; 1 Sam. ii. 1; 1 Kings xxii. 
11; Luke i. 69), and the number Seven 
the “signature” of perfection :—see Introd., 
§ 11. This symbol is applied (but with 
different accessories) to beings of very oppo= 
site qualities: to the Lamb as here ;—in ch. xii. 
3 to the Red Dragon and in ch. xiii. 1 to the 
Beast from the sea, who have each Ten Horns. 
As being well known from its frequent oc- 
currence in the Old Testament, this symbol 
is not explained by St. John, as are the 


and seven eyes] The second emblem of the 
Lamb:—the symbol of perfect knowledge. 
Cf. Zech, ili. 9 ; iv. ro. 

See the notes on Dan. viii. 5, 6, which refer 
to the symbol of strength and intelligence, 
still to be seen on the sculptures at Perse 
polis—the goat with “a@ notable Horn between 
his eyes.” 


which are the seven Spirits of God,| Le. 
the “ Seven Eyes” are the “Seven Spirits,” as 
we learn from ch. i. 4; iii. 1; iv. 5, compared 
with Zech. ili. 9; iv. 10. See 2 Chron. xvi. 9. 

Bengel and De Wette would include the 
“ Seven Horns” also in the explanation— 
which is not grammatically impossible (Alf). 

Besides omniscience, this emblem also de- 
notes the active operation of Godhead, 
whereby the Divine energy works on and in 
the world. Both symbols conjoined signify 
the plenitude of omnipotence and omniscience. 
And thus we learn “the position occupied by 
the Saviour in Heaven, as the Lamb that was 
slain ;’ and then “the presence in all the 
earth of that Divine Spirit, Who is the very 
eye of Christ.”—Vaughan, /. c., p. 156. The 
symbolism also expresses the relation of the 
Divine Spirit to the Lamb,—for “the Holy 
Ghost is of the Father and of the Son.” 

Henceforth “ the Seven Lamps of fire” (ch. 
iv. 5) are no more seen before the throne. 


sent forth] See vv. il. 
7. And he came, and he taketh [it]] 


Omit “the Book”—see vv. ll. The perfect 
(citAngev), as in ch. vii 14; Vill. 5, is used for 


v 8) 


8 And when he had taken the 
book, the four beasts and four and 
twenty elders fell down before the 


“thenarrative aorist,”—see Winer, 8 340, 
who compares 2 Cor. i.9; ii. 12, 13; Xi. 253 
Hebr. xi. 28. If the force of the perfect 
tense, occurring here among the aorists, be 
given—as appears to be more natural—viz. 
“and he hath taken it,” the description 
becomes highly dramatic; see ch. xi. 17. To 
ask (as Vitr.) how the Lamb could take? or 
to speak (as Stuart) of “sthetical difficul- 
ties,” is to overlook the principle that the 
symbols of Scripture are not capable of 
sensible representation,—see on ch. iv. 3, 7. 
Ebrard insists on the sense “received,” as 
suiting the relation ofthe Son to the Father. 

The Book is taken as it lay upon the open 
hand, see on ver. I. 


that sat on the throne.) See on ch. iv. 2. 
Christ knows that it is His office to take 
the Book, and that He has the power to open 
it. 


THE WorsHIP IN HEAVEN (8-14). 


8. And when he took the book,| In ver. 
7 this same verb is in the ferfect tense: here, 
the aorist has rather its own force than 
that of the pluperfect, “ he had taken,” as in the 
A. V. In support of the pluperfect Diisterd. 
refers to Matt. vii. 28; and to ch. vi. 1, 3, &c. 

It now became known that it was the Lamb 
who was worthy to unseal the Roll—see 
ver. 2. 


the four living beings and the four 
and twenty elders} They who in ch. iv. re- 
present animated Creation and redeemed Hu- 
manity, and who had adored God the Father, 
before the throne, in alternate hymns of 
i These now unite, with one voice, 
in adoring the Lamb, for He shares the 
homage paid to “Him that sitteth on the 
throne” (ver. 13), as He shares the throne 
itself (ch. iii. 21; xxii. 1). And thus the 
doctrine is here represented typically, which 
St. Paul had expressed in words—see Phil. 
ii. 8-11. To this united hymn of praise the 
host of Angels returns the response in ver. 12. 
For the interpretation of Reuss, who takes 
the Elders (“vieil/lards”) to represent the 
celestial priesthood, see on ch. iv. 4. 
ell down before the Lamb,| In that tone 
sarcasm which marks his commentary, 
Reuss notes that the image here is not allied 
to those which have preceded, “car les ani- 
maux portant le trone de Dieu ne sauraient 
se jeter aterre sans ébranler ce dernier.” Itis 
his own exegesis, however, which is at fault— 
see on ch. iv. 4, 8. 
having cach one a harp] (See vv. i). 


REVELATION. V. 


Lamb, having every one of them 
harps, and golden vi 


which are the prayers of saints. 





Writers here also raise “zsthetical difficule 
ties” as to assigning harps to the Four Living 
Beings described in ch. iv. 7 ;—needlessly, as 
noted above onver.7. Itismoretothe pointto 
urge that the E.ders alone seem to be intended 
here,—inasmuch as they, being representae 
tives of the Church, are er suited to offer 
up “the prayers of. the saints” than the 
symbolic representatives of Creation (cf. ch. 
xiv. 2, &c.; xv. 2): so Disterd. 

On the “ Harps” and “ Vials,” see note A 
at the end of this chapter. 

and golden vials| The “vial” or“ bowl” 
(Lat.. patera)—a word common in classical 
Greek—was a broad, flat, shallow cup. 
The LXX. use it to express the “dason” 
(Ex. xxvii. 3) or “ dow/” (Zech. ix. 15; xiv. 
20) of the Authorized Version, which was 
a vessel used for receiving the blood of the 
sacrifices, and casting it upon the Altar. The 
reference here is to the use, in the Temple 
worship, of incense-cups (A. V. “ spoons,” 
i.e.,small gold cups—see the note on Ex. xxv, 
29) to receive the frankincense (ch. xviii. 
13) which, lighted with coals from the 
Brazen Altar that stood in the court immedi- 
ately in front of the Tabernacle (see the notes 
on Ex. xxvii. 1-3), was offered on the Golden 
Altar before the Veil (Ex. xxx. 1-9):—see 
ch. viii. 3 ; cf. Ezek. viii. 11. The word “ vial” 
is employed in the classical sense of xparnp 
in ch. xv. 7 :—cf. ch. xiv. Io. 


full of incense,| Minute directions were 
given (see Ex. xxx. 34-36) for the composition 
of the symbolical incense; the use of which, 
like the prayer which it represented, be- 
longed to Jehovah alone (Ex. xxx. 37, 38). 
The High Priest was to renew and kindle it 
every morning and evening (Ex. xxx. 7, 8); 
and in the service of the second Temple all 
priests offered it by lot—see Lukei.9. In 
the typical worship of the Old Testament, the 
ascending smoke of the burnt offering—* the 
sweet savour unto Jehovah” (see the note 
on Ley. i. 9}—and especially of the incense 
was the symbol of prayer: Lev. xvi. 12, 133 
Ps. cxli. 2; Isai. vi. 4; Lukei.9, 10:—cf. Acts 
x. 4; Tobit xii. 15. See Note A at the end 
of this chapter, and Note C on ch. viii. 3. 


which are the prayers of the saints.| By 
the “ saints,” here as elsewhere, are to be un- 
derstood a]' -he members of the Church of 
God (ch. xi 18; xiii. 7; cf Eph. ii. 9). 

De Wette, Ebrard, Diisterd., Alf. take the 
word vials to be the antecedent to “which ;” 
—but ch. viii, 3 as well as the analogy of 
Hebrew symbolism fix the reference to 


567 


full of ‘odours, 1 Or, dos 


568 


9 And they sung a new song, 
saying, Thou art worthy to take the 
book, and to open the seals thereof: 
for thou wast slain, and hast re- 


deemed us to God by thy blood out 


Oupiduura, incense, the gender of the article 
(feminine) presenting no difficulty, e. g. ch. iv. 
5; Mark xv. 16; 1 Tim. iii. 15. See Winer, 
§ 24, 8. 150; and Introd. 9 SuTatk Ves GF De 


9, And they sing a new song,| “ New” 
(see on ch. ii. 17, and cf. ch. xiv. 3), because, 
previously to the redeeming work of Christ, 
the earlier Church, though it also is repre- 
sented by the Elders, could not have uttered 
this song. A mew point is now attained in 
the development of God's kingdom—namely, 
the accomplishment of that work of redemp- 
tion, as stated in what follows. The com- 
ment of Victorinus is that the New Tes- 
tament is now added to the Old. 

The present tense, “sing,” denotes the 
never-ceasing worship of heaven,—see on ch. 
iv. 2,8. Cf. Ps. xxxili. 3; xl 3; xcvi. 1; &c. 

Saying, Worthy art thou] See ver. 12; 
and ch. iv. 11. 


and didst redeem us unto God with 
thy blood] The authorities for retaining “us” 
perhaps predominate, see vv. //.:—if the 
pronoun be omitted, render: “didst redeem 
unto God with thy blood [men] of 
every” &c.: see ver. 10. The tenses point to 
the definite, past act of the Crucifixion—cf. 
ch.i.5. The sense literally is, Thou didst 
purohase us [or men] unto God in, or 
with,—the verb being rendered by the A. V. 

“redeem” only here, and in ch. xiv. 3, 4 
In the ordinary sense of “to buy” or “ pur- 
chase” it is found in ch. iii. 18; xiii, 17; 
xviii. rr; John iv. 8; vi. 5; xili. 29. The 
compound verb (eEayopdte) is used only 
by St. Paul—e.g. Gal. il. 13. Winer notes 
that the prep. iz is, after the Hebrew idiom 
(as int Chron. xxi. 24), the prep. of price: 
“ The value of what is bought is contained in 
the price (to whick the éx of price corre- 
sponds).”—s. 348. Cf. “to loose us by” 
(Avew €v 76 aipare), ch. i. 5. 

out of every tribe, doc.) Or render as 
above, [men] of every tribe. The fourfold 
enumeration here, as usual in this Book (e.g. 
ch. vii. 9; X. 113 Xi. 93 Xiii. 7; xiv. 63 xvil. 
15), is symbolically exhaustive—all the in- 
habitants of the earth: see Introd., § 11, (a). 
Burger notes that, since the date of “the 
confusion of tongues” (Gen. xi. 7-9), man- 
kind has been separated according to this 
four-fold division of which we had already 
met with an illustration in Gen. x. 5, 31. 
This separation has ceased in Christ. 


REVELATION. V. 


[v. 9—10.. 


of every kindred, and tongue, and 
people, and nation ; 5 


to “And hast made us unto oure; Pets, 


God kings and priests: and we shall 
reign on the earth. 


10. and didst make them [to be] unto 
our God a kingdom and priests;| Te., the 
redeemed :—on the words them, and a 
kingdom, see vv. //. Cf. also the note on 
ch. i, 6, and on ch. ii. ro. 

and they reign on the earth.| See vv. il. 
This last clause is an addition to ch.i.6. The 
redeemed are united into a kingdom; as 
citizens of this kingdom they are priests, for 
they are admitted to the closest, the most 
intimate relations with God (cf. ch. vii. 15); 
and as such they share in the kingly rule of 
their Prince,—they reign. 

The expression “to reign,’ notes Reuss 
(on ch. xx. 4), is borrowed from Jewish 
theology which promised to Israel, during 
the Messianic epoch, supremacy over all 
peoples. It occurs in the Apocal in a 
new signification :—Christ establishes His 
Kingdom, that is to say He causes truth, 
justice, holiness to triumph, and consequently 
inaugurates an era of happiness for those 
who are Hisown. These latter are mem- 
bers of the Kingdom,—they enjoy the blessings 
which depend on it. This is the meaning of 
the phrase “to reign” in the Christian sense. 

Christ’s “ kingdom ts not of this world” 
(John xviii. 36). 

The Church is here regarded not in its 
disembodied state, but as it is now upon 
earth,—with the Lamb in the midst of it, 
sending forth into all the world that sevenfold 
plenitude of His power and wisdom which 
the “ Horns” and “ Eyes” symbolize, in order 
to the perfecting of the saints unto the day of 
His Coming (see Christ’s Second Coming, by 
Dr. David Brown, 6th ed., p. 447). Good 
MSS. also read “they shall reign” (see 
vv. é.), and the tense does not really affect the 
meaning. The future tense, however, is 
taken by the advocates of the “ Pre-millennial 
Advent” and of the Millennium generally 
to denote the personal reign hereafter, 
with Christ, of those who “sing the new song” 
(ver. 9)—a literal reign on the earth during 
the literal “Thousand Years ”(ch. xx. 4). Bur- 
ger, who accepts the future tense, notes: 
“* They shall reign as kings,’—not in worldly 
power on the earth as it is now; but, when 
restored to that state originally designed for 
man (Gen. i. 26, 27), over ‘the new earth,’ 
ch. xxii. 5.” As to the whole question of the 
reign of the saints on earth, see the notes 
on ch, xx. 1-6, 

“In this difficult passage,’ notes Ewalu, 


v. 11— 13.] 


11 And I beheld, and I heard the 
voice of many angels round about 
the throne and the beasts and the 
elders : and the number of them was 
ten thousand times ten thousand, and 
thousands of thousands ; 

12 Saying with a loud voice, 
Worthy is the Lamb that was slain 


“(the Arabic) Hippolytus [see Note A on 
ch. xii. 3] reads didst redeem us [the 24 
Elders] and didst make them [viz. believers] 

. . and they shall reign. And he 
understands the reign on the earth to mean 
the period of the Thousand Years, after the 
first or partial resurrection of the just.” 


11, And I saw,] The Angelic host, as distin- 
guished from the Elders and the Living Beings. 

and I heard a voice of many angels| The 
host of Angels now take part in the hymn of 
praise which the Elders had sung. From 
the symbolic representatives of the Church 
they have now learned “the manifold wisdom 
of God,” Eph. iii. 10; 1 Pet. i. 12; therefore, 
they at once unite in the hymn of praise. 

Tischendorf (with &) reads as it were 
@ voice. 

round about the throne and the living 
beings and the elders;| The Angels—en- 
compassing the throne and the Living Beings 
and the Elders—surround the scene described 
in ch. iv.; see ch. vii. rz (cf. 1 Kings xxii. 19): 
“Thus the redeemed Creation stands nearer 
to the throne of God than even the Angels, 
see Heb. ii. 5, &c.” (Bisping). The strain of 
adoration begun in vv. 8, 9 is continued here: 
in ver. 13 it is echoed by universal Creation. 


and the number of them was ten thousand 
times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands ;| 
Gr. myriads of myriads, and thousands of 
thousands. Cf. Dan. vii. 10; Hebr. xii. 22; 
Jude 14. Various ranks and orders of An- 
gels, as well as their separate offices, are dis- 
tinguished in the Apocalypse:—the Archan- 
gel Michael, ch. xii. 7 (cf. Dan. xii. 1; 1 
Thess. iv. 16);—the “mighty” Angels, ver. 2; 

X. I ; Xviii. 21 ;—the Angels “ having great 
authority,’ ch. xviii. 1;—Angels entrusted 
with special commissions, ch. xiv. 6; xv. 7; 
xvii. 1, 7;—Angels which have a special 
function, ch. vii. 1, 2; viii. 3; xiv. 18; xvi.5; 
Xx. 1;—and there are other more minute 
distinctions. 

On the Greek text here see vv. //. :—the 
A. V. follows the Complutensian text; while 
Tyndale, Coverdale, the Great Bible, the 
Bishops’, the Geneva of 1557, follow, more 
or less closely, the Textus Receptus and the 
Vulgate :—see Scrivener’s Paragraph Bible, 
fatrod., App. E., p. cii. 


REVELATION. V. 


to receive power, and riches, and 
wisdom, and strength, and honour, 
and glory, and blessing. 

13 And every creature which is 
in heaven, and on the earth, and 
under the earth, and such as are 
in the sea, and all that are in 
them, heard I saying, Blessing, and 


12. saying with a great voice,| The 
word saying is not construed with myriads, 
but (the words “and the number,” &c., being 
taken as a parenthesis) with “angels” under- 
stood in the nom.—as if the sentence had 
commenced with ‘‘and the angels lifted 
up their voice, saying:’’—see Winer, 
§ lix. 11. 

Worthy is the Lamb that hath been 
slain] Cf. ch. xiii. 8. 

to receive] Asascribed to Him in ch. iv. 11. 

the power, and riches, and wisdom, and 
might, &c.] Cf. 1 Chron. xxix. 11,12. In 
this doxology—sevenfold as when again 
offered by the Angels in ch. vii. 12 —omne 
article is prefixed to the seven nouns * and is 
not affixed to each as in the classification 
which is given in the note on ch. i. 6: hence, 
Bengel (whom nearly all modern writers 
quote) observes that these seven words of 
praise are to be uttered as one single word. 
Bengel would also, unnecessarily, refer the 
number seven to the number of the Seals. 
Note that the word “riches”—not_merely 
spiritual “riches” (cf. John i. 16; Eph. iin 
8), but the fulness of every “gift” of God 
(cf. James i. 17; Acts xvii. 25)—is found 
only here in a doxology, and in connexion 
with “ power.” 

13. And every created thing] At length 
the various hymns of praise (ch. iv. 8, 11; 
v. 9, 12,) are all combined in one harmonious 
chorus. The manner in which Creation 
welcomes the redemption “ of the children of 
God” (see Rom. viii. 19-23) is here declared. 

which is in the heaven, and on the earth, 
and under the earth,| “Under the earth” 
refers, as in Phil. ii. 10, to those in Hades,— 
see on ver. 3; not the demons, “ qui invits 
parent Christo” (Vitr.). 

and on the sea,| See vv. il. “The sea” 
is first referred to (symbolically) in ch. iv. 6. 
On the frequent use of “the sea” in the 
Apocalypse, both literally, and as a symbol 
—the Apostle’s exile at Patmos rendering it an 
object familiar to him, see Introd., § 4. 

and all things that are in them,| The 
usual summary of collective Creation, as in 
Ex. xx. 11; Ps. cxlvi. 6; Phil. ii. ro. 

beard I, saying,| See vv. ii.; and for ‘he 
gender, cf. on ch. iv. 1. 


569 


57° 


honour, and glory, and power, be 
unto him that sitteth upon the 
throne, and unto the Lamb for ever 
and ever. 


REVELATION. V. 


[v. 14 


14 And the four beasts said, Amen. 
And the four and twenty elders fell 
down and worshipped him that liveth 
for ever and ever. 





All blessing, and honour, and glory, and 
dominion,| As in ch. i. 6, the article is pre- 
fixed to each noun. The Father’s praise is 
celebrated in ch. iv. 8-11; the Son’s in ch. v. 
9-12; here, both are glorified,—cf. Rom. xvi. 
27; 1 Pet. iv. 11. Bengel again refers the 
number four in this doxology to the four 
classes of Creation in the preceding clause; 
see ON ver. 12. 


[be] unto him that sitteth on the throne,]| 
See vv. //.:—the genitive, or, perhaps, the 
dative, is to be read here; cf. on ch. i. 20. 

In this triumph of Redemption, redeemed 
Creation (ver. 8) first takes part; then the 
Angels (ver. 11), as “ ministering spirits” who 
do service for the sake of them who have 
now inherited salvation (Heb. i. 14); and 
then, as here, every oreated thing. This 
symbolic scene represents the great thought 


of St. Paul, that Christ has reconciled all 
things on earth and in heaven, and has united 
them in Himself—Eph. i. 10; Col. i. 20. 

The connected Visions of ch. iv. and ch. v. 
are now brought to a close; and this con- 
clusion introduces ver. 14. 


14. And the four living beings said, 
Amen.| Asin ch. iv. 8 these representatives 
of Creation had commenced the series of 
hymns, so now they pronounce the “ Amen,” 
which forms the customary close of Divine 
worship,—see 1 Cor. xiv. 16. 

And the elders fell down and wor- 
shipped.] See vv. /j.:—the verse closes 
here. The Elders, the representatives of the 
Church Universal, in silent adoration add 
their assent ;—the last tones of the hymns 
die away, and the opening of the Seals 
begins. 





ADDITIONAL NOTE on Chap. V. 8. 


NoTE A ON VER. 8—THE HARP, THE 
VIAL, THE INCENSE. 


The Harp,—Heb. 1))5, LXX. (1 Sam. xvi. 
16, 23) ktvupa, in the Psalms always x.@dpa, 
as here. In 1 Sam. xvi, David played “with 
his hand;” Josephus (Antz. vii. 12, 3) says 
the Aarp (kxwipa) had ten strings (cf. Ps. 
Xxxlil. 2) and was played with a plectrum, 
whereas the zaéd/a, or psaltery, was played 
with the fingers. At all events the x.dapa 
here, was rather a guitar or lute, than a harp: 
—see Winer, Real-Worterb., art. Musik. 
Instrum.; and the note on 1 Sam. x. 5. It 
has been “usual to consider the Aramaic 
word (D7N'p) in Dan. iii. 5, a transcript of 
the Greek «i@apis:”—see Excursus on Dan. iii. 

The Vial:—The word ¢udXr is used in the 
LXX. as the equivalent of the Hebrew p71 
(e. g. Ex. xxvii. 3; Num. vii. 13, 843; Zech. ix. 
15), rendered in A. V. “dow/” or“ bason” of 
silver; while the incense-cup, Heb. 4 (A. 
V. “spoon” of gold, Ex. xxv. 29), is expressed 
by 6vicxn,—both Greek terms being found in 
1 Kings vii. 36; 2 Chron. iv. 21: see the 
engraving of the Shewbread Table with its 
incense-cups in the note on Ex. xxv. 23. 
Josephus connects them with the Table 
(dt0 diddat yxpioeae AtGavwrod wAnpecs, 
Anit. iii. 6, 6; 10, 7). Bishop Wordsworth 
notes: “The word diady (connected with 
iw, suf=fio, which may be compared with 
@iw and thus. ‘incense’) does not signify a 
wial, o: bottle, but a broad shallow vessel, as 


the Latin patera from pateo, whence also 
paten, like a saucer or bowl-like dish (see the 
authorities in Wetstein, p. 769).” In ch. xv. 
7 (cf. ch. xiv. 10) St. John uses the word 
gid\n, in a different sense, to signify the 
smaller cup by which wine was drawn out of 
the larger xparnp, or mixing vessel, in which 
the wine for a meal was mixed with water. 
So Plato (Crito, p. 120, a), xpucais diadais 
€k Tod KpnTHpos apuTTrowevor — See Alford’s 
note on Rev. xv. 7. 

Incense, Ovpiaua' (the plural only is used in 
the Apocalypse), was the symbol of prayer: 
“Tsai. vi. 3, 4 is almost equivalent to an express 
interpretation .... The same may be said of 
Luke i. 10, where the people are said to have 
prayed in the fore-court, whilst the priest was 
in the Holy Place burning the incense.”— 
Kurtz, Sacrificial Worship, Engl. tr. p. 295. 
A silver shovel—A. V. “ firepan,” Ex. xxvii. 
3 (ANnd)—was filled with live coals, and 
then emptied into a golden one smaller 
than the former, so that some of the coals 
were spilled (cf. Rev. viii. 5); and when 
the incense was brought in the incense= 
cup (*)3), the priest cast it on the fire 
(Mishna, Tamid, v. 4), profound silence being 
kept by the people praying without (cf. Rev. 
vill. 1):—see Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, art. 
Incense. 

1 Hebrew Xevoreth (NOP), Ex. xxx. 1. See 


also Isai. Ix. 6, Zebonah (13135); and Note C 
on ch. viii. 3. 


v. 1] REVELATION. VI. 571 
ND I saw when the Lamb 
opened one of the seals, and I 


heard, as it were the noise of thun- 


CHAPTER VI. 
3 The opening of the seals in order, and what 
followed thereupon, containing a prophecy to 
the end of the world. 





[Ver. 1 éxra cfp.—av7.—om. xai Bdére (added by Erasmus to the reading of his Codex after 
the et vide of the Vulgate; and so in vv. 3,5, 7). Ver.4 éx tas yjs [A omits éx]—opatovow. 
Ver. 6 as gavnv. Ver. 7 [B, C, P omit davay].—arAéyovros. Ver. 8 nxodovbet.—amoxreivar follows 
ts yns- Ver. 10 om. o before d\y@.—ékx ‘Tay xatoux. Ver. 11 €066y [1 merely reads xad 
€866n avrois iva avamatcovra, which Er, filled up after his manner].—airois éxaot@.—oToAW 
Aeven.—om. 0o3.—mAnpwobdcw. Ver. 12 om. idov.— ceAnyn OAn. Ver. 14.6 ovp. Ver. 15 of 
xeAlapxor Kat of mAovct01.—xal of icxupoi (Not read in 1; Er. supplied xai of duvaroi after the 
et fortes of the Vulgate).—om. nas re édev6. Ver. 17 avtav.] 





CHap. VI 


The Second chief Vision (ch. vi. 1-viii. 1) 
of the Revelation Proper opens here,—see 
Introd. p. 89. 


THE SEVEN SEALS. 


The Seven Seals are now opened, this 
chapter containing the first six. The Seven 
are divided into the groups of four (vv. 1-8) 
and three Seals (vv. 9,123 ch. viii. 1),—the 
former group being distinguished from the 
latter by the agency of the Four Living 
Beings, and by the word of invitation, “ Come,” 
in vv. 1, 3, 5, 7- Similarly the first four 
Trumpets (ch. viii. 7-12) are separated from 
the last #4ree at ch. vill. 13. As stated in 
the remarks introductory to ch. ii., in the 
case of the Seven Epistles and of the Seven 
Vials (ch. xvi.) there is a different division — 
namely into groups of three and four, at ch. ii. 
18, and ch. xvi. 8: but in each of the groups 
of Seals, Trumpets, and Vials, an intervening 
action parts the first six from the seventh, 
at ch. vii.; at ch. x. I—xi. 14 ; at ch. xvi. 13- 
16. Of the Seven Seals, six only announce 
Visions partaking of the common character of 
judgments; while the seventh (ch. viii. 1) forms 
the solemn and mysterious close. So in the 
case of the Trumpets, at the seventh (ch. xi. 
15-18) the hidden meaning is merely indi- 
cated; just as at the pouring out of the 
seyenth Vial (ch. xvi. 17) the Voice ftom the 
throne merely declares “ It is done.” 

The Vision which accompanies the opening 
of each Seal is either intended simply to 
prepare for the final revelation of “the mys- 
tery of God” (ch. x. 7; cf. ch. xi. 15); or, 
in a more definite sense, is a symbolical 
representation of the corresponding portion 
of the Sealed Book,—see on ch. v. 1. There 
is, accordingly, a mysterious silence on the 
epening of the seventh Seal—the Seal which 
extends to the end of all things. The 
Visions that follow represent to the Seer 
events which either partly precede and 
partly accompany the seventh Seal (on the 
principle of Recapitulation—see the remarks in- 


troductory to ch. viii.) ; or which give a general 
survey of the progress of the Church of 
God in the world until the Divine purpose 
is accomplished, although by no means a 
picture of events in chronological succession 
such as the “Continuous” system of interpre- 
tation requires. This system, when applied, 
breaks down in every case. The Lord’s dis- 
course on the Mount of Olives, Matt. xxiv., 
as the earliest commentators have observed, 
is the key to the Visions of the Seals. The 
first four are committed, as it were, to the 
Four Living Beings who are “ round about 
the throne” (ch. iv. 6),and who now summon 
the Seer to behold. The symbolism recalls 
the Four Horses of Zech. i. 8-10, ‘‘ whom 
the Lord hath sent to walk to and fro through 
the earth ;”—cf. Pusey on Zech. vi 1-8. 


THE First Four SEALS (1-8). 

1. And I saw] Not the opening of the 
Seal, as if the meaning were “I was a be- 
holder when ” (Hengst.); nor does “ I saw” 
include the 4earing also which followed, as 
part of the prophetic intuition (De Wette and 
Ebrard)—see.on ch. i. 2; v.11. The sense 
is, St. John “saqw,” when the Seal was 
opened, what he describes in ver. 2 where 
the words “ I saw” are repeated. 


when the Lamb opened one of the seven 
seals,| (See vv. //.). The frst Seal, although 
not stated: see the next note. 


and I heard one of the four living 
beings] Not necessarily although probably 
(cf. ch. v. 5; xv. 7) identical with te first, 
the Lion; according to the order in ch. iv. 7 
—in which order Vitr., Bengel, and others, 
place the Living Being who summons in each 
of the first our Seals. Thus, the Lion’s 
strength, in the frst Living Being, is the type 
of victory. -Applying the idea differently, 
Wordsworth (who adopts the explanation of 
the Living Beings given by St. Augustine) 
understands here the first Gospel, that of St. 
Matthew, inviting the Church to contemplate 
Christ, “tbe Lion. of the Tribe of Judab,” a8 
Conqueror and King—see note B, on ch. 


- 


/ 


2 


der, one of the ‘four beasts saying, 
Come and see. 





iv, 6: and Words. explains that in the next 
three Seals “‘ the Power introduced is opposed 
to Christ.” Bossuet also identifies the Four 
Living Beings with the Four Evangelists ; and 
thence infers that we are to understand 
in these four Seals the execution of the secret 
counsels of God according to the rules 
which are laid down by Christ in the Gospels: 
—but see on ch. iv. 8. 


saying, as with a voice of thunder,]| 
(See wv. /].). This voice (cf. ch. x. 3; xiv. 2) 
belongs to each of the Four Living Beings, 
although mentioned only in the case of the 
first that speaks. Hengst. would explain the 
mention here of the “ Voice,” by the pre-emi- 
nence of the first Rider. 


Come.|] The words, “ and see,” added here 
and in vv. 3, 5, 7, are to be omitted—see 
vv. ll. The insertion of these omitted words, 
in the form found in John i. 47 (kai ie), is 
supported by the Codex Sinaiticus and by 
some other MSS. 

This summons, by its very form, separates 
the first four Seals from the last three where 
it does not occur. Hofmann, Kliefoth, Alford, 
relying on ch. xxii. 17, 20, and on the dif- 
ferent form of expression in ch. x. 8, would 
explain this “cry”—this groaning and tra- 
vailing together of Creation for the manifesta- 
tion of the sons of God (Rom. viii. 19, 22)— 
as addressed to Christ, not to St. John. 
This cannot be the sense:—let the opening 
words only of ver. 2, “ I saw,” in accordance 
with this invitation, be considered; and also 
the appeal in ver. 10. Burger takes the four 
invitations (vv. 1, 3, 5, 7) to be addressed to 
the Riders respectively :—each is summoned 
in order that St. John may see him. 


2. a white horse,| For the imagery, see, 
as noted above, Zech. i. 8-11. Diisterd., in- 
deed, denies that the texts are parallel; but 
cf. the “ How Jong,” Zech. i. 12, 13, with 
ver. 10 below. On white as the colour of 
heaven see on ch. i. 14; ii. 17. With the 
Hebrews the horse was the emblem of war 
—Job xxxix. 25; Ps. lxxvi. 6; Prov. xxi. 31; 
Jer. viii. 6; Ezek. xxvi. 10. With the Ro- 
mans the white horse was the emblem of 
victory :—“‘ equos .... candore nivali,” x. 
iii. 537; ‘‘Victorie omen,” Servius, Schol. 
Cf. I/. x. 437; Herod. ix. 63; Plut., Camil- 
lus, 7. 

anda be that sat thereon] ‘The interpre- 
tations here are various:—(1) The words 
“behold a white borse, and be that sat 
thereon” are repeated exactly in ch. xix, 11 
and there is a pretty general agreement that 
here alsc the Rider is Christ—the Begin- 


REVELATION. VI. 


[v. 2. 


2 And I saw, and behold a white 
horse: and he that sat on him had a 


ning and the End, the First and the Last— 
from Whom, thus, all the Visions commence. 
(2) Inasense not absolutely different, some 
explain that as the Riders in the next 
three Seals are evidently personifications of 
bloodshed, scarcity, death, we have here, too, 
Christianity personified: so Stern—see Note 
A at the end of this chapter. Alford differs, 
regarding the Rider as “only a symbol of 
Christ’s victorious power.’ and Godet also 
(/. c., p. 298) sees here “the emblem of the 
Gospel, which, by being preached, is about to 
run victoriously through the earth.” (3) In 
a different sense of personification De Wette 
takes this symbol to personify war as a 
triumph,—the next three Seals personifying 
war as a catastrophe. According to him, if 
Christ is symbolized under the figure of the 
Rider, either here or in ch. xix. 11, it can be 
merely dy antithesis, for the victory of the 
Gospel is won only by the peaceful preaching of 
the word :—but see Matt. x. 34; xxiv. 7. (4) 
In Jer. xxi. 7 (cf. xxxii. 36) he who escapes 
war, famine, and pestilence is to fall into the 
hands of the king of Babylon; and hence 
Reuss understands the conqueror, who here 
precedes these three judgments, as personi- 
fying ambition and pride which bring with 
them destruction and ruin. Bengel, in like 
manner, understands conquest personified, 
the Emperor Trajan being the chief repre- 
sentative of the idea, and the first Rider; Bishop 
Newton understands Vespasian; Herder, 
Bisping, and others understand simply the 
personification of War. 

(5) Elliott (after Mede, Vitr., and others) 
considers that as the Empire of the Medes 
and Persians was figured to Daniel under 
the image of “a ram” (Dan. vili. 3), and 
Greece by ‘‘a goat” (Dan. viii. 5), so the 
destinies of the fourth—the last of Daniel’s 
kingdoms (Dan. vii. 23), the Roman Empire 
—are here foreshown by the emblem of a 
horse with a Rider. 

(6) Dr. J. H. Todd (Lect. om the Apot, 
P- 99) explains that “the revelations made on 
the opening of each Seal all portray the cire 
cumstances of our Lord’s Second Coming, 
representing that event under various as- 
pects.” See also on ch. v. 1. 

Some of the leading schools of interpree 
tation (see Introd. § 12) are here exemplified— 
the Symbolical; the Historical or Conti- 
nuous; the Futurist. For illustrations of 
another school, the Preterist, see note A at 
the end of this chapter. 

bad a bow;| Gr. having. On the word 
“ bow,” see on ch. iv. 3. We have here 
merely emblems of the Rider’s appearance 


Vv. 3-4] 


bow; 2nd . crown was given unto 
him: and he went forth conquering, 
and to conquer. 

3 And when he had opened the 
second seal, I heard the second beast 
say, Come and see. 


as a Conqueror: the Old Test. supplies the 
accompaniments of the picture—Ps. xlv. 4, 
5; Hab. ili. 8, 9; Zech. ix. 13, 14. It was 
not as a Conqueror that He first came— 
Zech. ix. 9. 


and there was given unto hima 
crown:| The context (cf. also ch. xiv. 14) 
imposes the sense, “ the conqueror’s crown :” 
—when Christ goes forth as King, He wears 
“ many diadems” (ch. xix.12). For the opposite 
interpretation, viz., that this also was a kingly 
crown, not the garland of victory, see on ch. 
ii. to. By this token the Lord_is distin- 
guished from the other Riders. In relation 
to the hostile world Christ appears as a 
warrior ;—in relation to the Father He ap- 
pears as a Lamb (Johni. 29). 


ana we came forth conquering, and to con- 
quer.| Gr. “and that he might conquer:” 
cf. ch. iii. 21; v. 5. He already proceeds as 
a conqueror, setting out to take possession 
of His kingdom:—but the end is not as 
yet attained. The earth is still to be sub- 
dued ; and to this purpose the other Visions 
are subordinate. The triumph is secured 
under the seventh Trumpet; and then the 
Elders return thanks for the consummation 
(ch. xi. 16, 17). When the Gospel was 
proclaimed men would naturally expect the 
future reign of peace and happiness over the 
earth; but such an expectation the Lord had 
from the first declared to be groundless: “I 
came not,” He said, “to send peace on earth, but 
asword” (Matt. x. 34). To unfoid this theme 
is the object of the first six Seals—as, indeed, 
of the greater part of the Apocalypse. Instead 
of peace, there appears throughout this Book 
a secret gathering of armies as for some great 
war or battle—from this single mysterious 
Rider in this first Seal, to the summoning the 
birds of heaven “unto the great supper of God” 
(ch. xix. 17): e.g. ch. xvi. 12-16. 


3. And when He opened the second seal,| 
The tense is the aorist in the case of each of 
the Seals. 

the second living being saying,] Weneed 
not understand literally “the Calf” of ch. iv. 7. 
According to the arbitrary symbolism, how- 
ever, which takes the Four Living Beings 
to be the four Gospels (see note B on ch. iv. 
6), Words. sees here the Gospel of St. Luke, 
of which he regards the “ Ca/f”—* the sacri- 
ficial animal ”—to be the emblem as display- 


REVELATION. VI. 


5 


4 And there went out another 
horse that was red: and power was 
given to him that sat thereon to take 
peace from the earth, and that they 
should kill one another: and there 
was given unto him a great sword. 


ing the sufferings of Christ, and here inviting 
the Seer to behold “the suffering inflicted 
on the martyrs.” 

Come.] On the form of this invitation, 
omitting the words “and see,” cf. on ver. I. 

The Vision which followed the opening of 
the first Seal has ended,—the form of the 
first Rider has disappeared. 


4. And another [horse] came forth,] 
As before, the symbol of war. Theexpression 
“ another,” used only in the case of this Seal, 
may denote the contrast between the first and 
the others (Hengst.). 

As a “Preterist” (see on ch. i. 7) Mr. F. 
D. Maurice writes: “I need not say how 
wildly that horse was plunging in the days 
after the death of Nero, and before the 
establishment of Vespasian ” (/.c., p. 104). 


a red horse:| The colour of the war- 
horse, Zech. i. 8; vi. 2, and of the Dragon, 
ch. xii. 3—‘fiery-red, or ‘blood-red’ (cf. 2 
Kings ili. 22, LXX.). The colour of each 
horse corresponds to the mission of its Rider 
(see ver. 8) :—here, it is to shed blood. 


and to him that sat thereon it was 
given] Gr.“and to him that sat upon 
him, unto him it was given,” cf. ch. ii. 26; 
ill, 8, 21. On the redundant pronoun, see 
Winer, § 22, 4, a. 


to take peace from the earth,| I.e., peace 
absolutely, the ancient expositors dwelling on 
the parallels, Matt. x. 34; xxiv. 7. If the 
prep. be omitted (see vv. //.), render—the 
peace of the earth. Elliott understands 
“the peace left by the former Seal.” “The 
earth” is used in a general sense: not, as 
Grotius understands, to signify Judza;—or, 
as others, the Roman world ;—or, as Renan 
(7. ¢., p. 385), the revolt of Judza and the 
insurrection of Vindex (A.D. 69). 


and that they should slay] For the con- 
str. cf. on ch. iii. 9 :—see vv. //. The verb 
(cgarrw) is found only in the Apocalypse 


and in 1 John iii. 12 (cf.ch. v. 6); and to it, 


as the sacrificial term, corresponds strictly 
the term here used for “ sword,” although 
this word (udyaipa, or sacrificial knife, cf 
Gen. xxii. 6, 10, LXX.) is also used promis- 
cuously —e.g. ch. xili. 10; John xviii. 10. 
See on ch. i. 16 


one another:| It is clearly meant that the 
inhabitants of the earth (see ch. iii. 10) shal: 


574 REVELATION. Vl. 


[v. 5—6. 

6 And I heard a voice in the!The.. a 
midst of the four beasts say, 
measure of wheat for a penny, and? msature 


5 And when he had opened the 
third seal, I heard the third beast 
say, Come and see. And I beheld, 
and lo a black horse; and he that 


sat on him had a pair of balances in 
his hand. 


slay one another; and hence, the exposition 
of De Lyra, Stern, and the ancient inter- 
preters is untenable, who see here only the 
persecutions of the Christians. ‘The same in- 
terpretation, however, is supported by Bishop 
Wordsworth; and he refers to the martyrs 
spoken of in ver. 9, that “had been slain by 
the sword of him who rides on the red 
horse :” in this sense the second Seal personi- 
fies persecution; and he quotes the lines :— 


. Lament, for Diocletian’s fiery sword 

Works busy as the lightning .... 

Against the followers of the Incarnate Lord 
It rages.”—Wordsworth, Zecles. Sonnets, vi. 


It is more in accordance, however, with the 
context, and also with the saying (Matt. x. 
34) “I came not to send peace, but a sword,” 
to take the symbol as referring to that 
“ beginning of sorrows” foretold by our Lord 
(Matt. xxiv. 8), and now represented under 
the personification of b/oodshed about to come 
on the whole earth. Applying this thought 
to but one period of history, Bishop Newton 
sees here the “horrid wars and slaughters ” 
in the reigns of Trajan and Hadrian. 


5. And when he opened the third seal, I 
beard the third living being saying, Come. | 
That “the rise of Aeresy,”—denying Christ’s 
bumanity—“ next in order to persecution,” is 

ortended by this Seal is inferred by Words. 
om the Auman face of the third Living 
Being, ch. iv. 7, who now invites to behold. 

And I saw, and behold, a black horse ;| 
Ihe colour of gloom (cf. ver. 12); implying 
the destruction caused by the Rider (cf. vv. 2, 
4, 8)—who personifies scarcity. According to 
Allegorists this colour is the emblem of the 
Church’s mourning at the corruption of the 
true faith, and the consequent loss of souls. 

and he that sat thereon had a balance 
in bis hand.| The meaning of the word 
“balance” ((vyds or (vyév, primarily a yoke, 
cf. Matt. xi. 29) is determined here by its 
use in Lev. wx. 35, 36; Prov. xvi. 11; Isai. 
xl. 12; and especially by Ezek. xlv. 10 

LXX.) where the expressions used here 
see yoiué, ver. 6) are found in juxtapo- 
sition. Woodhouse and others insist on the 
meaning “ yoke ”—understanding “the yoke of 
ceremonies.” What is meant, however, is 
that corn is weighed, not measured; and 
hence scarcity is symbolized (see Ley. xxvi. 
26; Ezek. iv. 16, 17), not absolute famine as 


three measures of barley for a penny; one 
wine, 


in the next Seal (ver. 8). Here again we see 
“ the beginning of sorrows ”— Matt. xxiv. 8. It 
is to allegorize, not to symbolize, when some 
writers (e.g. Vitr.) refer here to Amos viii. 
11: “J will send a famine in the land, not a 
famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of 
hearing the words of the Lord ”—a conclu- 
sion supported by Words. This, however, is 
to take that which is conveyed by the symboli- 
cal language of the verse, viz. /itera/ scarcity, 
to be itself in its turn the symbol of spiri 
scarcity: see note B at the end of this 
chapter. 

6. And I heard as it were a woice in the 
midst of the four living beings] Distinct 
from their voices:—the “as it were” (see 
vv. iI.) denotes that the speaker being left 
undetermined (see on ch. i. 10) remained uxn- 
known to the Seer. The voice issues from 
the Throne—from the midst of the repre- 
sentatives of Creation, the woes denounced 
against which it is the object of the voice to 
mitigate. ‘The mercy seat” was between 
the Cherubim, Ex. xxv. 22; Heb. ix 5. 

The prices which this voice goes on to 
announce imply severe dearth :— 

saying, A measure of wheat for a penny,] 
(The “gen. of price,” Winer,s. 185). Gr. “a 
chenix of wheat for a denarius;”—the 
“ chenix” being defined, “a man’s food for 
a day” (jueprjovos tpodn, Suidas) :—* About 
a quart measure, equal to two sextarti in 
liquid measure, and to two ‘bre or pounds 
in dry measure. The denarius was a day’s 
wages for a labourer (Matt. xx. 2), and the 
daily pay ofa soldier (Tac., dun. i. 17). The 
chenix was only the eighth part of a modius ; 
and a modius of wheat was usually sold for a 
denarius, and sometimes for half that sum 
—Cicero, Verr., iii. 81; De Divin. 10” 
(Words. inJoc.). The chenix, however, falls 
below the amount of a quart, and the de- 
narius approaches towards the value of a shil- 
ling,—see Lightfoot, On a Fresh Revision of 
Eng. New Test., p.167. Although there are no 
English equivalents, it is important to aim at 
precision here, “ because the extremity of the 
famine only appears when the proper relation 
between the measure and the price is pre- 
served.”—ib., p. 169. The Rider is to see 
that this shall be the price of food, and the 
limit of the dearth. 

and the oil and the wine hurt thou 
not.] The Rider's office as destroyer is here 


wine 
and see thou hurt not the oil and edercanle 
part of a 
quart. 


Vv. 7-81 


7 And when he had opened the 
fourth seal, { heard the voice of the 


fourth beast say, Cone and see. 
8 And I looked, and behold a pale 


to cease,—“ the oil and the wine” are to be 
produced as usual. For this use of the verb 
StOmaurt ch ch. i. TEs vile 2, 3, cc. : 
it does not mean “ to waste ” (Rinck) ;—or “to 
commit injustice in the matter of” (Elliott) ; 
and accordingly another limit to the severity of 
this judgment is prescribed: cf. Matt. xxiv. 
22. No particular scarcity is referred to, 
such as the dearth in the days of Claudius 
(Grotius, Wetstein, &c.);—or that under 
Nero, .1.D. 68, see Sueton., Nero, 45 (Re- 
nan). ‘1 he general class of judgments spoken 
cf by our Lord (Matt. xxiv. 7) is intended, 
wheat, barley, oil, and wine, forming the 
ordinary sources of nourishment—see Ps. 
Civ. 14, 15; cf. Joel i. 10. Bishop Newton 
again notes: “This third period commen- 
ceth with Septimius Severus” [A. D. 193]. 

Mr. Maurice thinks that this is not “a 
Vision of war at all... The images here 
are all of peace. ‘The sword is changed for 
the balances. Men are studious about bar- 
ter and exchange. They are tender about 
oil and wine” (p. 105). 


7. And when he opened the fourth seal, 
Iheard the voice of the fourth living being 
saying,| ‘The participle (T. R. reads \éyou- 
gay) agrees with “Living Being,” as in vv. 
I, 3, 5—see vv. //. Some MSS of weight omit 
“ the voice.” 


Come.| As before,in ver. 1. The invita- 
tion may proceed from the fourth Living 
Being, “‘ like a flying Eagle” (ch. iv. 7). Words. 
here understands the Gospel of St. John 
who, in Rev. xx. 14, declares the triumph 
of Christ over Death, Hades, and the Beasts: 
and he interprets that under the second 
Seal the Church endured persecution; under 
the third Seal, Heresy ; and that here, the evil 
is multiform. 


8. And I saw, and behoid, a pale horse :] 
The palish green of terror and of death 
(“pallida mors”). The word is used of 
grass in ch. viii. 7; ix. 4; Mark vi. 39. 


and he that sat upon 4im,| Not the same 
ptep. as in the three previous Seals—here 
erdve (not eri), “above,” as in John iii. 31. 
For the construction, cf. ch. iv. 1. 

his name was Death;] To this Rider 
alone is a name given:—he is Death personi- 
fied (see the note on Job xxvii. 15), and there- 
fore offers the broadest contrast to the Prince 
of Life who leads the procession. The 
preceding nom. is here taken up by the 
pronoun “ 47s ” in the dative; cf. ch. iii. 12, 21: 


REVELATION. VI. 


horse: and his name that sat on him 
was Death, and Hell followed with 
him. 
them over the fourth part of the” 





—-see Introd. § 7, IV., (f), the last note; and 
cf. John i. 6. 


and Hell followed with him.| Gr. Hades 
—the place of departed souls, which is also 
personified in Ps. xlix. 14; Isa. xiv. 9. It is 
combined with Death in ch. i. 18 (where seethe 
note) asever following in his train. Hengst. 
(so too Stern) understands the place of 
torment,—‘ for the word is used in the New 
Test. only in reference to dead sinners, 
Luke xvi. 23” (cf. also ch. xx. 14): but this 
assumes that the ungodly alone are to be 
subject to the trials here spoken of—see on 
ver. 17. Ewald understands “the Angel of 
Hell who is called in Hebrew Abaddon” (ch. 
ix. 11): the Angel of Hell /o//ows Death; as 
“the Destroyer” desires to draw all men 
down to his Abyss, by means of the four evil 
agencies which here follow. Eichhorn and 
Ebrard take it to mean, by metonymy, “the 
dwellers in Hades,” “the entire number of 
the dead :”—but this sense is opposed both to 
the whole tone of the passage, which implies 
personification, and also to the true reading 
“ was given unto them;” for here, as in ch. xx. 
13, “ Hell” is regarded as a person, the com- 
panion of “ Death.” See vv. Il. 


And there was givenuntothem] Viz. 
unto Death and Hell. The marginal read- 
ing of A. V. “to him” (Vulg., “data est 
ili”) is supported by B alone of the five 
uncial MSS. In his arbitrary criticism Reuss 
adopts the reading “to him,” viz. to Hades ; 
and he understands Death merely to signify 
“contagious maladies,” as in ch. xviii. 8 
—see below. 


authority over the fourth part of the earth,| 
“The fourth part” is peculiar to this place. 
Diisterd. explains, “a tolerably great part ;” a 
still greater part, viz. one-third—the fraction 
which continually recurs, e.g. ch. vili. 7-12 ; ix. 
15,18; xii. 4—being usually specified. Some- 
what similarly Volkmar explains that the 
famine of this Seal is not as yet to attain its 
utmost severity (Joel i. 10, &c.); it becomes 
more intense under the first Trumpet, when 
a greater part of the earth, one-third, is 
afflicted (ch. vili. 7);—Zillig, followed by 
Alford, considers that the fourth part contains 
an allusion to the four Seals of this group; 
the commission of each Rider extending to the 
fourth part of the earth ;—Elliott adopts the 
version of the Vulgate: “ super quatuor partes 
terre,” “over the four parts of the earth ;”’— 
Hengst. understands the partial and provie 
sional character of this judgment ;—I. Williams 


575 


And power was given ‘untol Or, fe 


576 


earth, to kill with sword, and with 
hunger, and with death, and with 
the beasts of the earth. 





ascribes to this Seal the universality which 
the number four denotes; and similarly 
Mede (p. 446), “Expono de potissima et 
multo maxima orbis Romane parte.” Ebrard 
confesses a “docta ignorantia.” The fact 
noted on ver. 6, that these judgments are but 
preliminary and have not as yet reached their 
utmost intensity, is a strong confirmation of 
the justice of Volkmar’s interpretation. See 
vv. Il. 

to kill with sword,| Not the “ saord” of 
ver. 4—see-on ch. i. 16 where the term 
here used occurs. As in ch. ii. 16, the prep. 
(év) prefixed to the first three nouns denotes 
the instrument or means. These words are 
very closely followed in the Sibylline verses, 
B. iii. 316, 317—see note E on ch. ii. 20. 
Cf. “ gladium, et famem, et mortem, et interi- 
tum,”—4 Esdras xv. 5. 


and with famine,| As the “ sqword” here 
differs from the “sqord” in ver. 4, so does 
this “ famine” differ from the scarcity of vv. 
5, 6 as being more intense ;—although even its 
severity is to become greater under the first 
Trumpet, ch. viii. 7. 
and with death,| “ Death” is to be taken 
merely in connexion with the sword and with 
JSamine (being accompanied by the same 
preposition ¢v) as one instrument of Divine 
punishment :—either zatural death as opposed 
to the other kinds of wio/ent death speci- 
fied in this verse; or, as many understand, 
pestilence (referred to in ch. xvi. 2). God’s 
“ four sore judgments upon Jerusalem” (Ezek. 
xiv. 21) are expressed in the LXX. by the 
game four words as in the text,—the Hebrew 
term for “pestilence” (deber) being rendered 
(as also in Jer. xiv. 12; xxi. 7) by the Greek 
term for “ death:” see on ch. ii. 23; xviii. 8. 
In popular living Greek ro @avarixéy is the 
ordinary term for the plague—see Moulton’s 
ed. of Winer, p. 30. (Note,—the word “ es- 
tilences” (Aouoi) of the Textus Receptus in 
Matt. xxiv. 7 is not genuine). 
and by the wild beasts of the earth.] (Cf. 
Mark i. 13; Lev. xxvi. 22; Deut. vii. 22; 
2 Kings xvii. 25). A different prep. (id) is 
now used :—“ wild beasts” are themselves 
agents, and this judgment is independent of 
the otherthree. Volkmar suggests the beasts 
in the Roman amphitheatre. Words. sees in 
this term used with the article (6npiov, “a 
wild beast,” occurs for the first time in this 
place) a reference by anticipation, asin ch. xi. 7, 
to the Beast from the Abyss—this Seal fore- 
shadowing the sufferings of the Church “ from 
he various workings of the Evil One.” In 


REVELATION. VI. 


{v. 9 


g And when he had opened the 
fifth seal, I saw under the altar the 
souls of them that were slain for 


Matt. xxiv. 7, instead of “beasts” we find 
“ earthquakes,’ which occur under the sixth 
Seal, in ver. 12. 

According to Bishop Newton, “ This period 
commenceth with Maximin” (A.D. 235). 

The first four Seals have now been opened. 
They announce, I Christianity—“ conquering, 
and to conquer;” and then, Il. War; III. 
Scarcity; IV. Death. We have here a ful- 
filment of the Lord’s words in Matt. x. 34; 
xxiv. 6, 7. The Rider upon each horse 
personifies what is announced on the opening 
of each Seal. This feature of the Vision is 
common to all the first four Seals, as well as 
the accompanying voice of one of the Four 
Living Beings who, taken together, sym- 
bolize living Creation; and through whom 
Creation, “groaning and travailing in pain 
together until now” (Rom. viii. 22), pre- 
pares for Christ’s coming. This prepara- 
tion extends throughout the whole course 
of the Church’s history. The Church is 
ever “militant on earth;” she must never 
cease labouring “that she may conquer” 
(iva viknon), ver. 2. If this be so, the fulfil- 
ment of these four Seal Visions is not to be 
looked for in any series of successive events, 
past, present, or future; although each of 
them may be applicable, at different periods 
of history, to particular events, and may 
admit of recurring fulfilments. On the 
whole, Ezek. xiv. the proclamation of God’s 
judgments on the Ancient Church should be 
studied here. 


TuE Last THREE SEALS (9—viii. 1). 
The Fifth Seal (g—11). 


9. And when he opened the fifth seal,| In 
this first of the second group of Visions all 
is changed. Weare here reminded of those 
who during the long conflict of the Church 
have suffered for Christ. The incidents re- 
vealed in the Visions of the first group pre= 
pare for the consummation, still remote, of all 
things. The opening of the fifth Seal, its 
Vision having for its object to restrain the too 
ardent hopes of believers, is not accompanied 
by any special incident ; although the martyrs’ 
cry for vengeance recalls the memory of the 
Lord’s prediction, Matt. xxiv. 9, to which 
this Seal corresponds. ‘This Vision, in short, 
is not a continuation of, nor does it resemble 
the preceding four:—it points onward to the 
great theme of the Apocalypse, the Lord’s 
Coming; it adds to the groans of Creation 
the sighs of the martyred Saints. 


I saw under the altar| The imagery 8 











v. 1o—I1.] 


the word of God, and for the testi- 
mony which they held : 

10 And they cried with a loud 
voice, saying, How long, O Lord, 





taken from the Temple-service. ‘The Bra- 
sen Altar ” (Ex. xxxix. 39)—called “the Altar 
of burnt-offering ” in Ex. xl. 29)—stood “at 
the door of the Tabernacle;” and “at 
the bottom” of this Altar “all the blood” of 
the victim was poured, Lev. iv. 7; viii. 15 (cf. 
the words “ :/ain” in this verse, and “ d/ood” 
in ver. 10). Tins was called by preeminence 
“tho Ajiar ’ (cf. Havernick on Ezek. xliii. 13, 
&c.). The souls of the martyrs correspond to 
the blood of the sacrifice poured out beneath 
the Altar, for “the blood thereof is the life 
thereof” (Gen. ix. 4; Lev. xvii. 14). Thesame 
image is used by St. Paul—cf. Phil. ii. 17; 
2 Tim. iv. 6 (see St. Ignat.adRom.,c.ii.). The 
Seer beholds the “ sou/s” of departed saints— 
of those whose bodies had been “ s/ain” on 
earth—see ch. xx.4; Matt. x. 28. Conscious 
of the past, praying for the Coming of Christ, 
they measure the lapse of time—“ Lord, How 
long?” Cf. also the patristic references given 
by Words. in /oc. (For imroxara see on ch. v. 3). 

De Wette and Bleek understand here the 
Golden Altar of incense in the Holy Place 
before the Veil (Ex. xxx. 6-9) ; and that what is 
now symbolized is the hearing of the martyrs’ 
prayer—see ch. v. 8; viii. 3. This is quite 
unsatisfactory. Alf. says vaguely,“ am altar 
of sacrifice.” 

According to Bossuet, the Altar is Christ 
—see Col. iti. 3, 4. 

It may be noted that mention of an “ Altar” 
is for the first time introduced here. As St. 
John is describing the Vision introduced in 
ch. iv., where he beheld the worship in 
Heaven, it is natural to fad among his sym- 
bolic images the adjunct of that worship’s 
earthly counterpart (Heb. viii. 5; xiii. 10). 

thesouls| “The souls” only,—for ‘the Resur- 
rection of the Dead’ has not yet come to 
pass: cf. ch. xx. 4. 


of them that had been slain for the word 
of God,| Or on account of, because of, 
by reason of (va with an accus.). Cf. ch. 
i. 9; John iv. 41. 

and for the testimony which they held:| 
Except in St. John’s writings—e.g. John v. 
36; 1 John v. 1o—this form of expression is 
found only in 1 Tim. iii. 7. The meaning is 
either “the testimony” of Jesus, borne by 
Him (see on ch. i. 2) and which they had re- 
ceived from Him who is “the faithful Wit- 
mess” (ch. i. 5),—the testimony which was 
committed to them to bear; or, objectively, 
“the testimony concerning” Jesus, as in Acts 
Xxli. 18, and in bearing which they had shed 


New Test.—Vou. IV 


REVELATION. VI. 


a and true, dost thou not judge 
and avenge our blood on them that 
dwell on the earth? 

11 And white robes were given 


their blood (so Ewald, De Wette, Alf.) :—see 
ver. 10. In fact, as in ch. i. 2, 9, we may 
understand the phrase either subjectively, or 
objectively—see on ch. xi. 3, and cf. ch. xii 
11,17; xix. 10; xx.4. The words, “which 
they held,’ do not mean “which they held 


fast” (“quam firmiter tuebantur,”—Ewald) ; 


but ‘which they had received from the faithe 
ful Witness, and which they continued to 
hold :’—cf. John xiv. 21. (B reads, “the 
testimony of the Lamb ”). 


10. and they cried with a great voice,] 
I.e., “the souls:” it is quite needless (with 
Hengst. and Diisterd.) to regard “ the slain” 
as the nom. agreeing with Aéyovres,—cf. ch, 
iv. 8. Ziillig observes that the thought ex- 
pressed in Gen. iv. 10 is here dramatized. 

saying, How long,| Cf. Zech. i. 12; and 
see on ver. 2. On ‘‘the delay of the Divine 
justice” see on ch. i. 3; cf. Ps. Ixxiv. 19; 
Ixxxiii. 1; Luke xviii. 7, 8. 

The answer is given by “the Angel of 
the waters,”—see ch. xvi. 5-7. 

O Lord,| Gr. “0 Master” (6 Aeordrns), 
—a title found only here in the Apocalypse ; 
the correlative of “servant,” see ver. 11: 
Luke ii. 29; 1 Tim.vi.1; 1 Pet. ii. 18. 


the holy and true,| See on ch. iii. 7: 
not “ subjective truthfulness” (Vitr., Bengel, 
Hengst., &c.) ;—cf. ch. xxi. 5; xxii. 6. 

dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on] 
Gr. “exact vengeance from.’ For the 
prep. (ex—see vv. //.) cf. ch. xviii. 20; xix. 2: 
see the different prep., azo, Luke xviii. 3. 

them that dwell on the earth?] I.e., “the 
world,” “all people,” in contrast to the ser- 
vants of God :—ch. iii. 10; viii. 13 ; xiii. 8, 14° 
cf. John xvii. 14; Matt. xxiv. 9. The prayer 
of the martyrs, accumulating from age to age, 
has for its sole object “the honour of holiness 
and the truth of their Lord” (Bengel); cf 
on ver. 16:—it but expresses by anticipation 
that longing of the whole Church which is at 
length uttered in ch. xxii. 17, 20. 

I. Williams would here understand the 
souls of the Old Testament Saints (Matt. 
xxiii. 35) who are waiting, as stated in Heb. 
xi. 39, 40, for “the promises: and this be- 
cause it is not said that these martyrs had 
died “for the testimony of Jesus,” as it is 
said in ch. xx. 4; because, too, this cry for 
vengeance is not in the spirit of the Gospel. 

Renan finds here and elsewhere “ the eche 
of the persecution of Nero,” from which, as he 
asserts, the Apocalypse has directly resulted 


OO 


574 


578 


unto every one of them; and it was 
said unto them, that they should 
rest yet for a little season, until their 
fellowservants also and their brethren, 


REVELATION. VI. 


[v. 12, 


that should be killed as they were, 
should be fulfilled. 

12 And I beheld when he had 
opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there 





(/. c., p. 167). He refers, however, to the 
cruelties of Domitian (p. 173) which might 
possibly suit these “allusions ;” but this would 
not square with his theory as to Antichrist. 


ll. And there was given them to 
each one a white robe;| (See vv. //.). As 
in ch. iii, 4, 5; vii. 14 —the symbol of the 
“ righteous acts of the saints,” ch. xix. 8 (cf. 
Zech. iii, 4). Even before the great consum- 
mation, the martyrs have a foretaste of heaven. 
According to Bossuet, the ‘“ white robe” is 
the glory of holy souls awaiting the Resur- 
rection. 

On the colour “ white,” see on ch. i. 14. 

that they should rest} In heavenly peace, 
as implied in ch. xiv. 13; cf. Dan. xii. 13. 

Bengel and De Wette explain—‘ cease from 
their cry, as uttered in ver. to.’ 


yet for a little time,] Cf. ch. ii. 21. This 
interval (ypdvos not karpds,—see on ch. i, 3) 
comes to an end at ch. x. 6. 

Bengel makes this “ Chronus” (or rrrr} 
years, see Introd. § 11, (b), IV.) to extend from 
the persecution of Christianity under Trajan 
to that of the Waldenses,—viz. from A.D. 98 
to A.D. 1209. I. Williams suggests that this 
period may extend till the end of the “ Thou- 
sand Years,”—ch. xx. 5. 

until] The answer to the “ How long?” 
in ver. 10. See wv. Ml. 


both their fellow-servants, and their 
brethren whioh should be killed even as they 
were,| Two classes are denoted, the “ fe//ow 
servants” of the martyrs—i. e., the company of 
the faithful; and also “their brethren” who 
should like them be put to death. The A. V. 
seems to imply but ove class,—the same body 
of the faithful who are “ fellow servants” in 
relation to the “ Master” (ver. 10); and “dre- 
thren” as belonging to the communion of 
believers: so De Wette, Hengst., Diisterd., 
Alf. The former sense seems to be more in 
accordance with the text,—see on ch. xx. 4. 

Bengel writes, “The first martyrs were 
chiefly from Israel; their ‘fellow servants’ 
were inafter times from the heathen ; and their 
‘brethren’ from Israel.” 

should be fulfilled] See vv. ll. Te, 
“completed in number”—cf. Luke xxi. 
24; Col. ii. 10; or, adopting the reading 
of x, .B, P, 1 (@Anpecaor), “shall have 
fulfilled [their course].” 

According to Bossuet, ch. vii. explains the 
cause of the delay here spoken of, and how 
the number of the elect is to be accomplished. 


“The era of ” under Diocletian 
[A.D. 303 ].—Bishop Newton. 


THE SIXTH SEAL (12-17). 


12. And I saw when he opened the 
sixth seal,]) Ch. xvi. 17-21 presents many 
features parallel to the following description. 
This Seal brings us to the very eve of the 
final catastrophe. As vv. 3-8 depict the signs 
which prepare for the Lord’s coming,—see 
Matt. xxiv. 6, &c.; and as the fifth Seal corre- 
sponds to Matt. xxiv. 9, so here the imagery 
of Matt. xxiv. 29 (with the “ earthquakes” 
in ver. 7), is taken up:—cf. vv. 16, 17, 
with Matt. xxiv. 30, &c.; Luke xxiii. 30. 
The most striking features of earlier pro- 
phecy are also combined here—Isai. ii. 19; 
xxxiv. 4; 1. 3; Ezek. xxxii. 7,8; Hos. x. 8; 
Joel ii. 30; Nah. i. 6: so the ancient, and 
many modern expositors. This, indeed, 
seems to be the obviously just interpretation ; 
and yet there is no prediction as to which 
commentators are less unanimous. (1) So 
early as the time of Andreas (/. c, p. 34) 
some, adopting the “ Preterist” system, inter- 
pret the sixth Seal of the siege of Jerusalem by 
Titus: thus Grotius and others. To the same 
effect, the rationalistic school interpret this 
Seal as proving that the different predic- 
tions do not refer to the fyture at all; but 
merely describe the events before, or during 
the lifetime of St. John. Every thing, they 
argue, represented by the first six Seals, is to 
be found in the historical records of the 
period extending from the appearance of 
Jesus Christ to the composition of the 
Apocalypse, i.e., on this system, down to 
A.D. 68, viz. Messiah coming forth to exercise 
spiritual rule over the nations;—then, war, 
pestilence, famine, as the annals of the Empire 
show ;—then, Nero’s persecution ;—then, the 
earthquakes and natural convulsions of the 
period: see Krenkel, Der Ap. Johannes, s. 67 
Mr. Maurice sees in this Seal “the shaking and 
downfall of heavenly powers ;” asking “ What 
can these powers be? Are they not the de- 
mons of the old mythology ?”—/. c., p. 113. 

(2) Several modern writers, on the “ His- 
torical” principle of interpretation, refer the 
sixth Seal to the triumph of the Church in 
Cent. iv., after the great persecutions. Thus 
Elliott—who sees here the fall of Pagan Rome 
dating from the Edict of Toleration (4.D. 
311)—writes : “ This Vision surely betokened 
some sudden and extraordinary revolution in 
the Roman Empire” (/. c., i. p. 223). 





v. 13—16.] 


was a great earthquake; and the sun 
became black as sackcloth of hair, 
and the moon became as blood ; 

13 And the stars of heaven fell 
unto the earth, even as a fig tree 


Beer casteth her ‘untimely figs, when she 


| Is. 4 4 


is shaken of a mighty wind. 
14 “And the heaven departed as 
a scroll when it is rolled together; 


(3) On the “Futurist” system, the sixth 
Seal is “one of the clearest and most magni- 
ficent descriptions of the Day of Judgment 
which is to be found in the Bible.”—J. H. 
Todd, /. c., p. 106, &c. 

It is to be borne in mind that, on any sys- 
tem, what is described in vv. 12-17—as in the 
case of the preceding five Seals—is all the 
subject of a Vision, and does not represent 
actual objective events. 


and there was a great earthquake;| (Omit 
“Jo,” see vv. il.). Iz. an earthquake took 
place—“‘came to pass:” cf. Isai. xiii. 13; 
Hagg. i. 6; Heb. xii. 26. The vengeance 
prayed for under the fifth Seal has come. 


as sackcloth of hair] CE. Isai. 1. 3. 


and the whole moon| (See vv. //.). Cf. 
Joelii. 31. Living Creation was the theme of 
the first four Seal-Visions ; the fifth introduces 
the prayers of the martyred saints until the 
Lord should come; the sixth now records 
the convulsions of material nature on the eve 
of His appearing. 

13. and the stars of the heaven fell unto 
the earth,| Compare Matt. xxiv. 29; Luke 
xxi. 25-27. “Stars” being the symbol of 
rulers (Num. xxiv. 17; Isai. xiv. 12), Hengst. 
sees the immediate fulfilment of this predic- 
tion in the overthrow of the possessor of the 
old Roman power, ‘the bright morning Star,’ 
when the Apoc. was written. “‘ The heaven,” 
he writes, “is the princes’ heaven, the entire 
order of kings and nobles. The stars are in- 
dividual princes and nobles.” . . . “ Julian’s 
exclamation, ‘Thou hast conquered, O Gali- 
lean,’ was a fulfilment of our Prophecy.” — 

as afig tree casteth ber unripe figs,| Cf. 
Nah. iil. 12. Either the winter fig which 
seldom ripens ; or the “ untimely” fig of spring 
—a sense which the parallel of Matt. xxiv. 
32 suggests. 

when she is shaken, of a great wind.| In 
vv. 12-14 Hengst. again notices the enum- 
eration by sevens. 

14. And the heaven was removed as a 
scroll when it is rolled up;] “ Scroll,” or 
“book” asin ch.i. 11. Isai. xxxiv. 4 supplies 
the imagery of this passage. The stars 


REVELATION. VI. 


and every mountain and island were 
moved out of their places. 

15 And the kings of the earth, and 
the great men, and the rich men, and 
the chief captains, and the mighty 
men, and every bondman, and every 
free man, hid themselves in the dens 
and in the rocks of the mountains ; 


16 2And said to the mountains and = = 


having fallen, the firmament (Gen. i. 14) 
“stretched out as a curtain” (Isai. xl. 22; 
Psalm civ. 2) disappears as “a scroll when 
it is rolled up.” See vv. ij. (1 reads 6 op). 
As “the sea,” observes Hengst., denotes 
the nations generally (cf. ch. xvii. 15), it is 
but an extension of this figure to describe 
kingdoms as islands and mountains: see ch. 
Xvi. 20. Or the words may simply signify that 
the foundations of the earth are subverted— 
that there is a perfect and complete cata- 
strophe in all the realm of inanimate Creation. 


15. And the kings of the earth,| As in ch. 
xix. 18, we have here not only a reference to 
the inhabitants of the earth generally(as at ver. 
to, and Matt. xxv. 32), but an enumeration 
also of social and other distinctions :—King and 
slave alike flee “‘ from the wrath of theLamb.” 

The “ Kings,” writes Bishop Newton, are 
the Emperors “ Maximian, Galerius, Maxi- 
min, Maxentius, Licinius [A.D. 304-324], 
&c.”:—that is (as Dr. S. R. Maitland com- 
ments on this class of interpretations in his 
Second Enquiry, p. 152), literal dings “on a 
symbolical earth, with figurative mountains 
and islands, under a symbolical heaven with 
a figurative sun, moon, and stars, and suffering 
from a figurative earthquake.” 

and the princes,| Diisterd. observes that 
this term (of peyordves, found in the 
N. T. only here, in ch. xviii. 23, and in 
Mark vi. 21, and which belongs to later 
Greek) is used to denote statesmen and 
courtiers, as distinguished from military com- 
manders. 

and the chief captains, and the rich, 
and the mighty,] (See vv. /L). “ Chief 
captains” or “ military tribunes” (y:Aiapxor). 
By “the mighty” are meant those possessed 
of physical strength,—cf. ch. x. 1; Ps. xxxiil. 
16 (LXX.). 

and every bondman and freeman,| >see 
vv. ll. 

in the caves] Ci. John xi. 38; and for 
the imagery, Isai. ii. 19. As in vv. 12-14, 
Hengst. calls attention to the sevenfold enue 
meration in this verse also. 

16. and they say to the mountains ama 
to the recks,] On this verse, cf. Hos. x. 8 


Q02 


579 


580 


rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the 
face of him that sitteth on the throne, 
and from the wrath of the Lamb: 


REVELATION. VI. 


{v. 17. 


17 For the great day of his wrath 
is come; and who shal. be able to 
stand? 





Fall upon us,| See Luke xxiii. 30. 


the wrath of the Lamb:] See on ch. xxi. 8. 
We find “ wrath” asa Divine attribute in ch. 
xi. 18; xiv. 10; xvi. 19; xix. 15 (here opyn: 
in ch. xiv. 10, 19; xv. 1,73; xvi. 1, the Divine 
“ indignation” is 6uyos); but it is “wrath” 
against the godless world, and therefore 
love, grace, and mercy, towards God’s ser- 
vants. Without its exercise His servants 
must feel doubtful of His favour, and must 
despair of His protection,—cf. vv. 9, 10; 
ch. xix. 2. 


17. for the great day of their wrath] (See 
vv. il.). Gr. “The Day, the great [Day],” 
—the two articles rendering the phrase em- 
phatic, and fixing the meaning, “the Day 
of Judgment,” cf. Isai. xlii. 4; Joel i. 15; 
ii. 2. “It is the expression of that presenti- 
ment of the end of the world, which in the 
great catastrophes of Nature seizes upon 
men ” (Godet). 


and who is able to stand?] See Nah. i. 6; 
Mal. iii. 2. This question the Seer next 
applies himself to answer. The natural 
judgments which accompany throughout all 
time the struggle of the Church with the un- 
believing world,—judgments from which the 
faithful are not exempt,—are the subject of 
the first four Seals, From the fifth Seal we 
derive lessons of fortitude and patience during 
the Church’s trials, while she awaits her 
Lord’s Coming, until the time predicted in 


Matt. xxiv. 31 shall arrive. The supernatural 
judgments by which that time is to be 
ushered in are the subject of the sixth Seal: 
but before these latter judgments fall, before 
earth and sea are subjected to them, the 
servants of God are sealed on their foreheads 
(ch. vii. 3), and thus rescued from the tribu- 
lation to come upon the earth. This inter- 
vening action (similar to that described in ch, 
x. t—xi. 14; ch. xvi. 13-16) is the theme of 
ch. vii.; and separates the sixth Seal, which 
closes here, from the seventh in ch. viii. 1. 

Vitringa sets aside this symmetrical ar- 
rangement, common to the Seals, Trumpets, 
and Vials, by making the Vision of the sixth 
Seal consist of three scenes, viz. ch. vi. 12-17 ; 
ch, vii. 1-8; ch. vii.g-17. Godet takes a// the 
first six Seals to represent, each of them, not a 
particular event, but “the categories of the 
principal judgments by which God supports, 
throughout all time, the preaching of the 
Gospel” (Matt. xxiv. 6, 7); “ disciplinary 
measures,” in short, which the fab/eau of the 
Seals exhibits——a tableau which is applicable 
to every period of the history of the Church, 
that can be called preparatory: “ The first 
Seal denotes a// the preachings of the Gospel; 
—the second, a// the wars;—the third, a// 
the famines ;—the fourth, a// the contagious 
maladies ;—the fifth, a the persecutions ;— 
the sixth, a// the earthquakes which the earth 
has seen, or will see, until the last scene for 
which the Trumpets must give the signal.”— 
2.0.) Pe 350. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Chap. VI. 


NOTE A—THE SEAL-VISIONS. 


It is not without importance to bear in 
mind, as the chief Visions of the Apocalypse 
come before us, the methods of exposition 
adopted by the early writers of the Church, 
either where they comment directly on the 
Book, or where they refer generally to its 
words. It will also be useful to add to the 
notes on the text some further illustration of 
the systems followed by modern expositors, 
No attempt, however, will be made to give 
an exhaustive history of Apocalyptic inter- 
pretation. 

St. IRENEUS (A.D. 180) seems to have been 
the earliest expositor of the Seal-Visions. 
He understands the “Sealed Book” (“pater- 
num librum”) to contain those things of 


which Christ said: “ All things are delivered 
unto me, of my Father” (Matt. xi. 27)— 
Adv. Her. iv. 20, p. 253. Irenzus inter- 
prets the first Seal to signify Christ Himself, 
of whom Jacob struggling and conquering 
(Gen. xxv. 22) was the type, and of whom 
“Joannes in Apocalypsi ait, ‘Exivit vincens. 
ut vinceret ’” (#4, c. 21, p. 258). 
TERTULLIAN (circ. A.D. 200), having 
casually alluded to the Red and Pale Horses 
(vv. 4, 8), limits his exposition to the fifth 
Seal, which is occupied, he thinks, with the 
period extending tothe universal Resurrection: 
“In Apocalypsi Joannis ordo temporum 
sternitur, quem martyrum quoque animz 
sub altari sustinere didicerunt” (De Resurr. 
c. 25);—“ Quomodo Joanniin Spiritu paradisi 
regio revelata, que subjicitur altari, nvllas, 


REVELATION, VI. 


alias animas apud se preter martyrum 
ostendit?” (De Anim., c. 55) ;— Martyrum 
anime placidum quiescunt. . . . Nam et 
rursus innumera multitudo albati et palmis 
victoriz insignes revelantur ; scilicet de Anti- 
christo triumphantes, sicut unus ex Presby- 
teris ‘Hi sunt, ait, ‘gui veniunt, d°c.,’” (ch. 
Vil. 14),—Scorpiace, Cc. 12.} 

ANONYMUS ad Novatianum (circ. A.D. 255, 
ap. Galland. t. iii. p. 375)—the first writer 
who notices the sixth Seal—commenting 
upon the “Little Horn” of Dan. vii. 8 
observes: “ Joannes autem manifestius et de 
die judicii et consummatione sexculi declarat, 
dicens, ‘Et cum aperuisset Sigillum sextum, 
oer, 

VICTORINUS (circ. A.D. 290), in expounding 
the Seal-Visions, adopts the primitive c/avis 
Apocalyptica: “ Ait enim Dominus in Evan- 
gelio.” The first six Seals present a pictorial 
illustration of the Lord’s prophetic words in 
Matt. xxiv. Victorinus (ap. Galland. t. ii, p. 
57) explains the opening of the Seals to be 
the opening of the Old Testament, and a 
prediction concerning those who are to 
preach in the latter times. In the first Seal 
the Rider on the White Horse, crowned and 
bearing a bow, is sent to preach the word— 
his sayings being like arrows, and his crown 
that which is promised to preachers by the 
Holy Spirit. The next three Seals are the 
wars, famines and pestilences (‘“‘bella, fames, 
pestis,”) foretold in Matt. xxiv.—the third 
Seal extending to the times of Antichrist, 
“quando magna fames est ventura, quandoque 
omnes ledentur.” In the fifth Seal, the souls 
are seen under the Altar; and as the Golden 
Altar signifies heaven, so the Brazen Altar 
here signifies the earth, “sub qua est infernus, 
remota a pcenis et ignibus regio, et requies 
sanctorum” (é).? 

ANDREAS explains the Seals thus :—(i) The 
Apostolic age, and the triumph over Satan in 


1 Mr. C. Maitland (2 ¢., p. 164) observes that 
‘‘this passage contains the earliest identifica- 
tion of the fifth-Seal-martyrs with those who 
suffer under Antichrist.” Mr. Elliott, on the 
other hand, considers that the two classes are 
here expressly distinguished. 

2 Up to this point, observes Dr. Todd (Lee?. 
on the Afpoc. p. 276), ‘‘the interpretation given 
by our author of the first five Seals is evidently 
a remnant of the ancient literal exposition. And 
it is remarkable that where the figurative inter- 
pretation begins the corruption of the text of 
this commentary becomes manifest. At the 
sixth Seal the figurative interpretation begins :” 
the ‘‘ great earthquake ”’ is the last persecution, 
—the moon becoming blood denotes the pouring 
forth by the Church of her blood for Christ, 
&c. &c. Dr. Todd, however, is not correct 
in placing the beginning of the “figurative” 
interpretation at the sixth Seal. Not to speak 
of what Victorinus says on the first Seal, he 


581 


the conversion of the G:zntilies ;-—(ii) The age~ 
next after the Apostolic, noted for the 
martyrdom of the Saints, Matt. x. 34 ;—(iii) 
The mourning over those who fall away, and 
who are to be tried in the balance of Divine 
justice; the oil and wine denoting the healing 
of such by Christ, Luke x. 34;—(iv) The 
results of the persecution under Maximin 
(Euseb., H. E. ix. 8);—(v) The Martyrs’ cry 
for vengeance ;—(vi) A transition to the days 
of Antichrist; or (observes Andreas), as some 
hold, the seige of Jerusalem under Vespasian; 
—(wvii) The seventh Seal (Rev. viii. 1) con- 
tains the Trumpets; and the opening of that 
Seal signifies the dissolution of all earthly 
rule, which the Seven Trumpet-Angels 
effect by plagues of chastisement and punish- 
ment. 

The commentaries of TICHONIUS! (circ. 
A.D. 380), and PRIMASIUS (circ. A.D. 553) 
are in many respects founded on the same 
principles. Both writers see in the first Seal, 
Christ and His Church proceeding to victory ; 
and both, after Victorinus, regard the 2nd, 
3rd, and 4th as signifying della, fames, pestis. 
The fifth Seal denotes martyrdom generally, 
The sixth they refer to the last persecution. 


writes on the third: ‘‘ Vinum et oleum ne 
Zeseris, id est, hominem spiritualem ne plagis 
percusseris ”’ (2d.). 

' The commentary of Tichonius is quoted 
both in the usual commentaries on the Apoca- 
lypse, and in the critical editions of the text— 
to give an instance taken at random, see Tisch- 
endorf’s notes on Rey. xxi. in his 8th ed, 

The African grammarian Tichonius was a 
Donatist (Neander, Azrchengesch., i. 527; Ros 
bertson, ist. of the Church, i. p. 416, 3rd 
ed.); and among his writings Cave reckons 
his ‘* Comment. in Apocalysin Fohannis, cui 
plurima, inquit Cassiodorus, venenosi sui dogs 
matis feeculenta permiscuit.” It is nearly cers 
tain that this commentary is no longer extant, 
The opinion of Erasmus in his ed. of St. Augus- 
tine’s works (t. ix., Paris, 1541), respecting the 
commentary which is there ascribed to Ticho- 
nius, was that short notes had been collected 
‘a studioso quopiam,’ and afterwards formed 
into Homilies. This commentary is also to be 
found in the ed. of the divines of Louvain 
(Opp. St. August. t. ix., App., p. 352, Antv. 
1576), who repeat the opinion that the exposi- 
tion had been compiled ‘a quopiam studioso.’ 
In this same opinion the Benedictines also 
concur (see Of. St. August. t. iii., Antw. 
1700). Cave says that this supposed com- 
mentary consists of fragments taken from the 
expositions of Victorinus, Tichonius, Prima- 
sius, Beda, and others (Ast. Zit, i. p. 294; 
cf. C. Oudin, i. p. 890).” Nic. Zegerus seems 
to have been the first who attributed this com- 
mentary to Tichonius. 

The ‘‘Septem Regule” of Tichonius are 
authentic, and distinct from his commentary on 
the Apocalypse :—see Introd. § 11, (b), I. 


582 


BEDA (circ. A.D. 730) understands the Seals 
as disclosing the future fortunes and trials of 
the Church, generally giving two senses—one 
allegorical and one literal. St. John observes 
the regular order down to the number six, 
and then, omitting the seventh, “recapitulates” 
. Nunc vero recapitulat ab origine eadem aliter 

icturus,”—/.c., Introd. ad cap. viii.). The first 
Seal discloses the glory of the primitive 
Church;—the three following the world’s 
war against her ;—the fifth the glory of those 
triumphed over in the world’s war ;—the 
sixth, the times of Antichrist. Then comes a 
“ Recapitulation”;—and then “in septimo 
cernit initium quietis eterne.” 

“Down to the year 1120,” writes Mr. Ch. 
Maitland (/.c., p. 315), “every writer that had 
handled the Seals had agreed in the meaning 
of the first, sixth, and seventh. The first had 
been taken to mean the Gospel triumph; the 
sixth the precursors of the last judgment ; 
the seventh the ‘beginning of the eternal rest.’” 
About A.D. 1111, or 1120, Ambrosiaster (or 
Berengaudus) and Rupertus Tuitiensis inter- 
preted the sixth Seal of the destruction of 
Jerusalem [but see, above, the account of An- 
dreas], thus giving an historical application 
to a part of those prophecies which hitherto 
had been applied exclusively to the end.” 

ANSELM of Havelsberg (circ. A.D. 1149) 
extended the allegorico-historical application. 
The Seals represent “ the seven states ” of the 
Church: At first she is white with purity ;— 
then red with martyrdom, down to the age of 
Diocletian ;—she is blackened by heresy from 
Arius to Nestorius and the Manichzans ;— 
and pale with hypocrisy during the remainder 
of the dispensation ;—she is expectant till the 
martyrs’ reward is conferred ;—she is con- 
vulsed under Antichrist :—and at rest in the 
silence of heaven: “ Recte ergo media et non 
integra hora dicitur” [Rev. viii. 1].—Dialog., 
lib. i., ap. d’Achery, Spicileg. t. i. p. 166. 


MODERN EXPOSITORS. 
I. Historical. 


MEDE (0). 1638) considers that the two 
chief prophecies of the Apoc. begin after ch. 
iv. The First embraces the Seals, and the 
Trumpets included in the seventh Seal; the 
Second, which is that of the “Little Book” 
(ch. x. 8), extends to the end of the Reve- 
lation. Both proceed from the same start- 
ing-point—the former giving the history of 
the Empire; the latter of the Church: and 
both coalesce in the Church triumphant. 
The Seven Seals accordingly are a syllabus 
of Roman History. We there see (1) the 
Empire in peace after the Jewish war under 
Vespasian ;—(2) The Empire under Trajan 
and Aurelian;—(3) The balance of justice 


REVELATION. VI. 


under Septimius and Alexander Severus ;— 
(4) The evils under Decius, Gallus, and 
Valerian ;—(5) The persecution under Dio- 
cletian;—(6) The overthrow of paganism 
and the changes under Constantine ;—(7)The 
last Seal, as explained by the Seven Trumpets 
(ch. viii. 6) which unfold its complex import, 
reveals the inroad of the Barbarians, and the 
fall of the Empire. According to this scheme 
the sixth Seal was fulfilled under Constantine; 
and the same result is adopted by Bishop 
Newton, Daubuz, Lowman, Doddridge, 
Hales, and others. 

VITRINGA (0d. 1722) discerns in the Seals 
(1) The Church in peace from Nerva to 
Decius for 150 years;—(2) Persecutions 
after A.D. 250;—(3) The heresies and cala- 
mities from Constantine to Cent. ix.;—(4) 
The Saracenic and Turkish inroads ;—(5) The 
sufferings of the Albigenses and Waldenses, 
and others down to the age of the Reforma- 
tion ;—(6) The fall of the Jewish nation ;—or 
the changes under Constantine ;—or the com- 
motions in Europe in the Reformation period ; 
—or The destruction of Antichrist ;—(7) The 
“half-hour’s silence ” (ch. viii. 1): #. ¢., he 
takes the seventh Seal to mean the prolonged 
peace of the Church after the fall of Anti- 
christ ; the Trumpets, relating to the Roman 
Empire, being entirely separated from this 
Seal, which predicts the internal history of 
Christianity. 

BENGEL (0d. 175z):—The first four Seals 
denote the bloom of Imperial power, (1) 
in the East under Trajan; (2) in the West; 
(3) in the South; (4) in the North, accord- 
ing to the position of the Four Living Beings 
(ch. iv. 6): they relate to what was visible, 
and to time past. The last three Seals relate 
to things invisible :—(5) the righteous dead; 
(6) the unrighteous dead; (7) the Angels. 

G. S. FABER:—The first four Seals are 
identical with Daniel’s Four Monarchies, the 
Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Grecian, Roman. 
The fifth Seal represents the persecutions of 
the Church under the Roman Emperors ;—the 
sixth, the Establishment of Christianity under 
Constantine ;—the seventh is left unexplained 

CUNNINGHAME :—(1) The progress of the 
Gospel from the beginning ;—(2) the con 
flicts of the Church with Arians and Dona- 
tists;—(3) the dark ages of the Papacy ;— 
(4) the Inquisition, and the persecution of 
the Albigenses and Waldenses;—(5) the 
dawn of the Reformation ;—(6) the French 
Revolution, including events still future ;— 


(6) The last great catastrophe ;—(7) . . . 
ELLIoTT:—(1) The “golden age” from 
Nerva, A.D. 96, to the second Antonine ;— 





REVELATION, VI, 


a) The military despotism, commencing with 
ommodus, A.D. 185 ;—(3) Taxation under 
Caracalla’s edict, A.D. 212 ;—(4) God’s “ four 
sore judgments” which preceded the fall of 
the Empire, dating from A.D. 248 ;—(5) The 
rsecution under Diocletian, A.D. 303;— 
(6) The fall of Pagan Rome dating from the 
edict of toleration, A.D. 311 (Paganism having 
been swept away, ch. vii. represents the 
Church established in its place) ;—(7) With 
ch. viii. 1, begins the short interval between 
the death of Theodosius the Great, A.D. 395, 
and the rising of the barbarian hordes. 
WoORDsworRTH. The Seals give a pro- 
phetic view of the successive sufferings of the 
Church from the First Advent of Christ, 
until the End:—(1) Christ comes with the 
Gospel ;—(2) Satan causes Ten persecutions ; 
First, under Nero; Second, under Domitian ; 
Third, under Trajan; Fourth, under Marcus 
Aurelius Antoninus ; Fifth, under Septimius 
Severus; Sixth, under Maximinus ; Seventh, 
under Decius ; Eighth, under Valerian ; Ninth, 
under durelian; Tenth, under Diocletian ; 


583 


tnaking a period of about 240 years, 1.¢., 
from A.D. 64 to A.D. 304. This is the 
enumeration of St. Augustine, De Civ. Dei, 
xviii. 52;—(3) The third Seal represents 
not only a season of spiritual scarcity, a 
famine of the Word of God (Amos vii. 11), 
but also Satan “riding forth on the black 
horse of Heresy ;’—(4) The evil is multi- 
form—the Barbarian invasions, A.D. 410- 
455; Mohammedanism, A.D. 622; spiritual 
Dearth, and Death consequent on heresies 
and schisms; the rise of the Papacy, 
Cent. ix. and x.;—(5) St. John sees the 
souls of the martyrs in their rest, ch. xiv. 
13;—(6) “The Jast age of the Church 
and the world;”—(7) In “the half hour’s 
silence” (ch. viii. 1) St. John has a glimpse 
of the future peace of Eternity (ch. xxi.; 
XxXii.). 

Mr. Tyso! gives in a tabular form, as fol- 
lows, the results attained by several of the 
“ Historical” commentators on the Apoca- 
lypse as to the dates of the opening of the 
several Seals :— 

















> . G.S. Cunning- . 
Seals.| De Lyra. Mede. | R. Fleming.| Daubuz. | Frere. Faber, | Lhos- Scott.) “ame. Keith. 
a Began A.D.; A.D. A.D. A.D. A.D. B.C. A.D. A.D. A.D. 
Christianity 33 7° 33 34 312 657 34 33 |96(Christianity). 
2 Nero. . - 117 66 66 383 538 100 319 22 (Mohame 
\ med), 
3 | Titus. . «| 22% 138 202 400 331 138 500 606 (Popery). 
A.D. 
4 | Domitian. .| 237 190 235 533 30 1 1200 1789 (Infidelity) 
5 | Diocletian 270 250 303 628 311 ae 1552 Persecution. 
6 | Diocletian 364 306 312 1789 313 324 1792 The last Catase 
7. | Liberius. . ah aA 325 Ac 50 388 an trophe. 














II. (a) Ordinary “‘ Preterssts” :— 


Grotivs understands by “ the earth,” in 
the second Seal, the land of Judea;—the 
dearth, under the #bird Seal, he takes to 
be the famine which prevailed in the reign 
of Claudius;—the sixth Seal relates to the 
events during the siege of Jerusalem by Titus. 

BossueET (0b. 1704) takes the Rider in 
the first Seal to be Christ, in Whose train 
follow the three agents of the wrath of God 
(2 Sam. xxiv. 13) ;—in the second Seal to be 
War ;—in the third to be Famine ;—in the 
fourth to be Pestilence. In the fifth Seal, 
the Altar is Christ (Col. iii. 34). The sixth 
Seal signifies the Divine vengeance—which is 
to fall first on the Jews, and then on the per- 
secuting Empire, but which is deferred until 
the number of the elect from among the 
eee people is accomplished. Bossuet 

ds the great Catastrophe of the Apocalypse 
in the conquest of Pagan Rome by Alaric. 

WETSTEIN, who places the date of the 
Apocalypse before the destruction of Jeru- 
salem, assumes that the jst part of the 
Book has respect to Judza and the Jews; 
and the second to the Roman Empire. The 


“Sealed Book” is the book of divorcement 
sent to the Jewish nation from God ; and the 
Seven Seals are to be interpreted thus: (1) 
The victorious Horseman is Artabanus king 
of the Parthians who slaughtered the Jews in 
Babylon ;—(2) The red horse means the 
assassins and robbers of Judza in the days of 
Felix and Festus ;—(3) Famine comes under 
Claudius ;—(4) The pestilence which fol- 
lows famine and pillage;—(5) The Chris- 
tians, persecuted in Judza, are about to be 
avenged ;—(6) Commotions in Judza, pre- 
paratory to rebellion;—(7) A brief respite 
— the Silence” (ch. viii. 1)—conceded to the 
entreaties of King Agrippa. 

STUART considers that the “Sealed Book, 
comprising chapters ,vi.—xi., symbolizes the 
humiliation of the Jewish persecuting power 
and the triumph of Christianity; and that 
this is the import of the series of symbols 
throughout ch. vi.—xii—chapters which de- 
scribe what he calls “the First Catastropne’ 
(see on ch. x. 2). 


1 « 4n Exposition of the Books of Daniel and 
the Revelation,” London, 1838. By Jos. Tyso. 


584 


IsAAc WILLIAMS—wno may here be 
classed as a “ Preterist "—takes “ with Vic- 
torinus the discourse on the Mount of Olives 
for the key” to the first six Seals. The 
Visios. of ch. v. represents the power given to 
Christ at the Resurrection ; and we have‘here 
in order an emblematic history of His vic- 
tory on earth from that period. As to the 
writing “ on the back,” the first six Seals, em- 
bracing a period of forty years “in which the 
Spirit pleaded with Jerusalem before its 
destruction,” describe the Lord’s coming in 
judgment on the Holy City, each having, at 
the same time, a hidden sense—the writing 
“ within.” “The seventh Seal contains the 
Seven Trumpets within it... the judgments 
and sufferings of the Church.”—Joel i. 15 
(LXX),. 


(4) Rationalistic “ Preterists.” 

The exposition of modern Rationalists may 
be represented by Volkmar and Renan :— 

VoLKMAR :—(1) The Book of Judgment 
when its first Seal is opened exhibits the all- 
pervading victory of Messiah, followed by 
“the sorrows” (Matt. xxiv. 8) which in- 
troduce His Kingdom;—(2) The Parthian and 
Arabian wars, with the Jewish war after the 
year 66;—(3) Repeated famine, A.D. 445;— 
(4) Pestilence, A.D. 66;—(5) The martyrs 
at Rome, A.D. 64, are compared to victims 
slain on the Divine Altar (cf. Phil. ii. 17; 
2 Tim. iv. 6; Ignat. ad Rom. ii. 4), their 
blood flowing beneath it (cf. Lev. iv. 7) ;—(6) 
The world-convulsions which, according to 
all prophecy (e. g. Isai. xiii. 10), precede the 
Day of Judgment, and which the Seer now 
clearly beholds under the reign of Galba, 
A.D. 68;—(7) The seventh Seal is opened 
amid the notes of the Seven Trumpets which 
announce the Judgment. 

RENAN thus prefaces his conclusion :—The 
rage of the Christians against the Roman 
Empire had led to the belief that the Anti- 
christ Nero was to be judged by Messiah in 
presence of the universe (p. 351), a belief 
which was “the parent of the Apocalypse.” 
According, therefore, to a truly just historical 
conception, the Author of the Apocalypse 
fixes the origin of the Messianic agitation at 
the moment (A.D. 69) when Rome extended 
its Empire to Judza. Accordingly the Seals 

nt (1) The Roman Empire to which, in 
St. John’s days, all resistance is vain ;—(2) 
War, the revolt of Judza and the insurrection 
of Vindex;—(3) The scarcity of the year 
68 ;—(4) Death ;—(5) Thecry ofthe souls of 


REVELATION. VI. 


the martyrs ofthe year 64;—(6) The conrute 
sion of the Universe at the Last Judgment 
”) The “ Silence” (ch. viii. 1) indicates that 

e first act of the mystery is ended, and that 
another is about to begin (pp. 384-391). 

Ill. “ Futurists” :— 

J. H. Topp :—The Lord’s Second Comin 
is represented in the Seal Visions under dif 
ferent aspects:— Wars and famine, pesti- 
lence and death, are to be the signs; a great 
and fearful persecution of the Church shall 
fulfil the number of the martyrs; and then 
shall the end be” (p. 104). 

De BurRGH :—“ The Seals have not yet 
been opened. What we have now to expect 
from the opening of the Seals, is the unfold- 
ing, according as they are opened, of the acts 
of Christ when ‘ He takes to Himself His great 
power to reign’—ch. xi. 17” (1. ¢., p. 150). 


IV. Symbolical. 


STERN:—The Seals denote (1) Chris 
tianity personified ;—(2) The personification 
of every World-power thirsting for Christian 
blood, and chiefly the Roman Empire ;—(3 
The personification of false doctrine ; 3 
The personification of unbelief and utter 
apostasy ;—(5) The prayers uttered by the 
souls of the martyrs;—(6) Commotions in 
Church and State. The falling of the stars 
denotes the falling away of Church rulers 
from the faith ; and the removal of islands and 
mountains symbolizes the overthrow of all 
ecclesiastical and civil order;—(7) The 
Trumpets are introduced by the seventh Seal. 


Note B ON VER. 6—ALLEGORICAL INTER= 
PRETATIONS. 


The third Seal has been the subject of ex- 
cessive allegorizing. 

Beda writes: —“ Equus niger falsorumcaterva 
est fratrum, qui stateram recte professionis 
habent, sed socios ledunt per opera tene= 
brarum ;”—Vitringa explains the dearth to 
mean spiritual fasine (see on ver. 5), “ caritas 
annone spiritalis,” viz. from Constantine to 
Cent. ix.;—C. a Lapide: The Horse denotes 
heretics like Arius; the Rider the Devil, on 
Heresiarchs; the balance and measure signify 
Scripture; the penny is the merit of faith and 
holiness ; wheat is the emblem of the Gospel ; 
barley of the harshness of the Old Law; oil - 
and wine are the medicine of our Samaritan, 
Christ ;—N. de Lyra: The black Horse is 
the Roman army under the Rider Titus; 
wheat and barley denote the Jews; oil and 
wine the Christians. 





v. 3.] 


CHAPTER VII. 


3 An angel sealeth the servants of God in their 

Sorcheads. 4 The number of them that were 
sealed : of the tribes of Israel a certain num- 
ber. 9 Of all other nations an innumerable 
multitude, which stand before the throne, clad 
in white robes, and palms in their hands. 


REVELATION. VIL 


14 Their robes were washed in the blood of 
the Lamb. 


ND after these things I saw 
four angels standing on the 

four corners of the earth, holding the 
four winds of the earth, that the 





[EVer. 1 om, xai.—rovro. 


Ver. 2 dvaBaivoyra, Ver. 3 om. ov.—odhpayicaper. 
‘oppayicpevor is to be read only in the jst and /ast place. 


Verses 5-8 
Ver. 9 mepiBeBAnuevous. 


Ver. 10 Kpdfovot.—ro bed par Tr Kad. eri td Opdvm. Ver. 11 eiornkercav.—ra npdcona. 
Ver. 14 Kupué pov.—ehedk. abras ev, Ver. 17 (ais—ex trav 6h6.—[The words kai eEaheiwes 
x. T. X., not found in 1, Er. (after the Vulg.) supplied in his 2nd ed. from ch. xxi. 4].] 


Cuap. VII. THE Two EPISODES (1-17). 


This chapter, by its two episodes commen- 
cing “After this” (ver. 1) and “After 
these things” (ver. 9), separates the first six 
Seals from the seventh (ch. viii. 1); just as 
in the case of the Trumpets there is the 
double interlude in ch. x. 1—xi. 14; and in 
the case of the Vials the episode of ch. xvi. 13- 
16. 

Commentators differ as to the connexion 
here :—Vitringa, as we have seen (on ch. vi. 
17), includes ch. vii. under the sixth Seal. 
Ewald connects ch. vii. 9-17 with ch, vi. rr. 
Many (Stern, Hengst., Words., &c.) refer 
more or less to the judgments of all the six 
Seals—especially of the sixth—on the prin- 
ciple of Recapitulation (see the remarks in- 
troductory to ch. viii.). 

Bossuet connects this chapter on the one 
hand with the fifth Seal,— the short time” 
spoken of in ch. vi. 11 being accounted for 
by the Sealing of the elect from among the 
tsp and on the other hand with ch. viii. 

y comparing ver. 3 (“the earth,” “the sea,” 
“the trees”) with the first two Trumpet 
Visions, ch. vill. 7-9. 

As already observed on ch. vi. (see on vv. 
8, 17), the language of the Seer does not 
imply that the elect are to be exempt from 
the judgments and trials there specified. The 
Seven Epistles (ch. ii.; ili.) promise no such 
immunity during the period of the Church’s 
warfare. The contrary is predicted by our 
Lord in Matt. xxiv. 20-29; and the same 
follows from ver. 14 below. Assuming, on 
the other hand, that the Sealing of the 
elect does signify preservation from tem- 
poral calamities and physical suffering, many 
others (Mede, Bengel, De Wette, Ebrard, 
Zullig, Diisterd., Alf.) connect this chapter 
with the seventh Seal, under which the 
final judgment is to be looked for. Ac- 
fepting any of these results, the seventh 
chapter, by its two episodes—the Sealing the 
servants of God who are of Israel (ver. 4), 
and the assembling of the great multitude 


who are of all nations (ver. 9)—gives the an- 
swer to the question of ch. vi. 17: “* And who 
is able to stand?” The time set forth in 
Matt. xxiv. 30 has arrived; but the Angels 
must first gather together “the elect from the 
four winds” of heaven (ver. 31). To the 
faithful of all times, oppressed by the thought 
of the coming judgment, the consolation is 
held out—(1) In vv. 1-8 that God’s protecs 
tion will be over those who shall be exposed 
to the approaching Trial, whether we un- 
derstand by it the ¢ria/s which the Church 
has had from the beginning to encounter 
under the first six Seals, or those still future 
under the seventh Seal; and (2) In wv, 9-17 
that the celestial glory is reserved as their 
reward. 

The result then seems clearly to be that 
by the Sealing of the servants of God no one 
definite act, to be performed at some one 
definite point of time, is intended ; but that this 
entire Vision represents a continual process 
of preservation under the trials and afflictions 
ofall times, down to the end. 

As the Vision of God’s throne (ch. iv.) 
precedes the Seals, so here the Vision of the 
Blessed precedes the Trumpets (ch. viii. 7, 
&c.) with their warnings of judgment and 
of woe. 

Compare the parallels supplied by Ex. xii. 
7,13; Ezek. ix. 4-6. 


THE SEALING OF ISRAEL (1-8). 


1. After this] (Omit dnd—see vv. /L) 
Te., after the Vision of the sixth Seal. The 
Vision of the Sealed, according to Mede, is 
given twice,—here, in order to denote those 
who are to be preserved under the calamities 
denounced by the Trumpets; and again, in ch. 
xiv., to encourage those who retain their faith 
after the Beast has appeared, and when the rest 
of mankind have worshipped him, Hengst. 
and others, as stated above, place the events 
described in this Vision Jefore or during the 
Seal-Visions, or, at least, before the close of 
the sixth Seal. 


585 


586 


wind should not blow on the earth, 
nor a the sea, nor on any tree. 
2 And I saw another angel ascend- 


REVELATION. VII. 


[v. 2. 


ing from the east, having the seal of 
the living God: and he cried with a 
loud voice to the four angels, to 





I saw four angels| Perhaps ‘ Angels of the 
winds ’"—see Dan. vii. 2; Zech. vi. 5; or, 
generally, four “ ministering spirits ” to whom 
the office here described is given, cf. ver. 2; 
ch, viii. 2; xv. 1. So Disterd., who notes: 
“Neither ‘evil angels’ (4ret., Zeger, Laun., 
Calov., Beng., Rinck, and others); nor ‘the 
Angels of the winds’ after the analogy of the 
* Angels of the waters’ in ch. xvi. 5, cf. ch. xiv. 
18 (Alcas., C. a Lap., Stern, Heinr., Ziill., De 
Wette).” 


standing upon the four corners of the earth, | 
Te., the points from which the four winds 
proceed—cf. Jer. xlix. 36; Matt. xxiv. 31. 
Four is also the signature of the earth—see 
Introd., § 11, (a). The phrase includes the 
whole region that lies within them, :.e., the 
whole earth even to its “four corners” — 
see Isa. xi. 12: cf. ch. xx. 8. 


holding the four winds of the earth,| The 
interpretation of ch. vii. being symbolical, the 
meaning of this verse is that the Divine 
judgments of the first six Seals—of which “ the 
four winds” are now the emblem—are, from 
age to age of the Church’s history, to be so 
regulated that God's elect shall be safely car- 
ried through their spiritual trials, although 
exposed like mankind in general to the cala- 
mities which are to come upon the earth. 
According to the sense given to the “ qwinds,” 
whether literal or symbolical, we must also 
understand, argues Diisterd., “ the earth,” 
“ the sea,’ “the trees ;” and he takes the sense 
to be /iteral storm-winds which shall desolate 
the entire earth,—an outburst, after the signs 
of the sixth Seal, of still greater calamities held 
back until after the Sealing of the servants of 
God, but which are immediately to precede 
the actual entrance of the final catastrophe. 
Mede takes the “ winds” ina figurative sense, 
as denoting wars and calamities which, like 
tempests, may come from any quarter of the 
earth. Hengst. notes that “the four winds of 
the earth” are in Scripture the symbol of 
the Divine judgments (here, those announced 
in ch. vi.):—he takes “the sea” to be the 
symbol of’ the nations and peoples, and “ the 
trees™ 3: signify the kings and great men, 
ch. vi. 15. Thus Words. also: The Angels are 
to restrai the winds, or blasts of destruction, 
from blowing on the earth, i.e., on earthly 
ans opposed to those of beaven ;—from 
lowing on the sea, the emblem of nations in 
agitation ;—from hurting the trees, the great 
and powerful ones of the world: God’s de- 
sign in this world is the preservation and 
beatification of His servants; and the punish- 


ment of the opposing powers of this world, 
here represented by the earth, sea, and trees, is 
subordinate;—not directly designed by Him, 
but consequent on their sins, cf. Matt. xxiv. 40. 
According to Bengel, “the earth” is Asia; 
“the sea,” Europe; “the trees” Africa. Gro- 
tius takes “the earth” to be Judza;—“ the 
winds” any en ;—“ the sea” a great 
people, such as that of Jerusalem ;—“ the trees” 
imply what is formed from trees, such as 
cities, or the Temple ;—and on the whole, the 
peaceful rule under King Agrippa is meant. 


that no wind should blow on the earth, or 
on the sea, or upon any tree.| (®, P, 1 read 
mav, as in ch. ix. 4; xxi. 27; B, C read 7; 
A reads “on a tree”—emi devdpov). Land 
and sea include the surface of the earth ; the 
trees are the objects most exposed to storms. 


2. another angel] Also indefinite: one 
contrasted with the other four (ver. 1), and 
on whom they minister,— cf. ch. viii. 3; x. 1; 
xiv. 6, 8,17. Not necessarily “an Archangel” 
(Stern); nor can it be Christ (Hengst.), or 
the Holy Ghost (Vitr.)—see the words, “of 
our God,” ver.3. Referring to the epithet “the 
day-spring ” (dvaroA7), in Luke i. 78, Words. 
understands by this “ Angel,” if not “Christ 
himself,” “‘a special messenger from Christ.” 
Victorinus takes this Angel to be the prophet 
Elijah, who is to anticipate the times of the 
Antichrist, and restore and give peace to the 
Church. 

ascend from the sun-rising,] Cf.ch.xu. 
12. The Angel who brings protection comes 
from that one of the four regions (ver. 1) 
whence rises the source of light and blessing 
for the earth:—“In view of Patmos,” notes 
Stern, “and the lands where the Gospel first 
shone.” 


the seal of the living God:] Cf. ch. ix. 4, 
Strictly “a seal,”—although the possessive gen, 
which follows renders the noun detinite. 
Diisterdieck suggests that there may be “ dif- 
ferent seals for different objects,”—the object 
here being to impress this Seal upon the fore- 
heads of the servants of God. By this token 
their faithful continuance in God’s service, 
notwithstanding the coming woes, is insured. 
This “Seal” is of an entirely different nature 
from the “mark of the Beast” (yapayyza) in 
ch. xiii. 16; xiv. 9, 11; Xvi. 2; xix. 20; Xx. 4, 
which denoted servitude to a master. The 
title “the living God,’ means that God as the 
Living One (Jer. x. 10) now gives life. (Note 
that here only we have not the full title, “ thas 
liveth for ever and ever,”—cf. ch. iv. 9, 10; 
x. 6; xv. 7). 


v. 3—4.] 


whom it was given to hurt the earth 
and the sea, 

3 Saying, Hurt not the earth, 
neither the sea, nor the trees, till we 


and be cried with a great vore| As m 
ch. i. 10; v. 2; vi. 10; &c. 

to whom it was given to burt] Gr. “to 
whom it was given unto them” (which does 
not suit the English idiom—see on ch. iii. 8, 
and cf. ch. vi. 4). That is to those whose 
function it was to set free the four winds, 
and thus cause the ruin. 

Some writers hold that the restraining 
the winds is the cause which “ 4urts,’— 
Rinck inferring this from the fact that in what 
follows no command is given to set them 
loose ;—Bengel, because the winds, if set free, 
must “cool” the scorching heat of the ap- 
proaching plagues, ch. vili. 7, &c.: but cf. 
ver. 3. 

the earth and the sea,| ‘The trees specified 
in vv. 1, 3,are here omitted, because they are 
to be understood as belonging to “ the earth ;” 
and hence, from this omission, Diisterd. infers 
that neither the earth, nor the sea or the 
trees are to be understood symbolically. 
Auberlen understands “the earth and the 
sea” to signify the worldly element, as 
opposed to the kingdom of God (p. 245) :— 
gee on ch. xii. 9, 12. 


8. Saying, Hurt not] By loosing the four 
winds. The act of protection now com- 
manded shields the Church during her war- 
fare with the world; and the final withdrawal 
of this—when the sealing is complete where- 
by the servants of God from age to age are 
marked out (cf. ch. ix. 4), and when the elect 
are at length gathered tegether—is to be 
followed by the peace of heaven (vv. 16, 17). 

the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees,| Cf. 
the judgments of the first two Trumpets— 
see ch. vili. 7-9. 

till we shall have sealed] (See vv. Il). 
“We,” not “I”—i.e., this other Angel, and 
the four who minister to him, see on ver. 2 
The symbolical act of “ Sealing ” signifies that 
God will protect and preserve: see below, 
and on ch. ix. 4. 

the servants of our God] AA title, notes 
Bengel, specially belonging to holy men in 
Israel—Gen. 1. 17; Deut. xxxii. 36; Isai. Ixi. 
6. Cf. ch. xix. 10; xxii. 9. 

Grotius and “ Preterists” generally un- 
derstand the Jewish Christians who fled 
from Jerusalem to Pella, escaping, through 
having been “sealed,” the results of the siege 
and destruction of Jerusalem. 

on ther foreheads.| Cf. Ex. xxviii. 36-38. 
The unholy imitation of this Divine Sealing, 


REVELATION. VIL. 


have sealed the servants of cur God 
in their foreheads. 

4 And I heard the number of 
them which were sealed: and there 


the slave-brand of common life, was on the 
hand, or on the forehead, as the most conspi- 
cuous place—see ch. xili. 16; xiv. 9; xx. 4. 
We here recall the vision in Ezek. ix. 4-6 
(see the note zz /oc.) where “the mark ”—as 
the Hebrew text shows—was the letter Taz 
(iN) the last of the Hebrew alphabet, and 
of which the old form was that of a cross. 
We are thus reminded of the sign of the 
Cross in holy baptism which has taken the 
place of circumcision, Rom. iv. 11. (Com- 
pare also the reference to baptism as “the 
Seal of the Lord ” [ryv cppayida rod Kupiov]} 
in the affecting narrative of the interview be- 
tween St. John and the youthful convert who 
had become a robber, as told by Clemens AL, 
Quis dives salv., c. 42; Euseb. H. E. iii. 23, 
together with the note of Valesius). The 
“Seal” moreover in this place, although the 
text does not say so, may have contained the 
names of God and of Christ—see ch. iii. 12, 
and also ch. xiv. 1 where the “ Sealed” again 
appear. Renan (/.¢., p. 389) observes that 
“the Seal has for its legend, as all the seals 
of kings, the name of Him to whom it be- 
longs, mm°9, Isai. xliv. 5.” The effect we 
learn at ch. ix. 4; the sealing however does 
not denote protection from tribulation (see ver. 
14), but preservation from apostasy under 
tribulation :—cf. the “if it were possible” of 
Matt. xxiv. 24. This “ Sealing” may denote 
who “the Elect” are, to whom our Lord 
refers, Matt. xxiv. 22. 

Ebrard, who considers (s. 311) that “ the 
time from the conversion of Israel until the 
Second Advent of Christ (ch. xii. to-14) is 
stated to be only 33 days,” regards the 
Sealing as another form of the figure of the 
flight to the wilderness in ch. xii. 14:—see 
on ch. viii. 6. 


THE 144 THOUSAND (4-8). 


4. AndIiheard| ‘The sealing is assumed to 
have taken place between vv. 3 and 4. 

the number of them which were sealed,| 
Probably as announced by the Angel—the 
ether Angel of vv. 2,3. The act of Seal- 
ing is not described in the Vision; just as it 
is omitted in Ezek. ix. where, after the com- 
mand had been given at ver. 4, it is stated at 
ver. 11: “I have done as thou hast come 
manded me.” 

an hundred and forty and four thousand,} 
(Omit and there were). This number gives 
the square of twelve, multiplied by the cube 
of ten. The number 12 (=3 x4) combines 


587 


588 


were sealed an hundred and forty and 
four thousand of all the tribes of the 
children of Israel. 


“the signature” of God and “the signa- 
ture” of the world. The division into Twelve 
Tribes fixes the relation of Israel, God’s 
ancient Church, to the number Twelve. 
Christ too by the number of His Apostles 
has fixed the same relation for the Christian 
Church (“Ye also shall sit upon twelve 
thrones, judging the Twelve Tribes of Israel,” 
Matt. xix. 28): and thus, by the use of this 
number He has declared His Church tobe the 
Covenant people with whom God shall ever 
dwell. Again: the number 1000 (= 10°) is the 
symbol of universality—see Introd. § 11, (a). 
For 12 x 1000, see ch. xxi. 16; and for 12 x 12, 
see ch. xxi. 17. It is evident that the literal 
number 144,000 cannot be intended here: a 
vast number—less than a number indefinitely 
great, but greater than a large number de- 
signedly finite, e.g. “a thousand” (ch. xx. 2) 
—is what we are to understand; see on ch. 
vili. 1. 

The number 144,000 involves the idea of 
election (De Wette). See ch. xiv. 1. 


sealed out of every tribe of the children 
of Israel.| I.e., out of all the Tribes :—for 
this cumulative sense of “every ” (was) joined 
to a substantive without the article, see Winer, 
§ 18. 4,s. 101. That “Israel,” and more spe- 
cially the Jews are taken in this Book in the 
highest and best sense, is clear from ch. ii.9 ; iii. 
9; and thus the language here indicates “the 
blessed company of all faithful people ”—“ the 
Israel of God,” Gal. vi. 15, 16; cf Rom. ix. 
6-8. It was by this metaphor the Apostle 
of the Gentiles signified that the Church 
of the latter Covenant is continuous with 
the Church of the former Covenant: and now, 
St. John, foreshadowing how the Church of 
the Redeemed is to be gathered in from 
amid the sin and confusion of the world, an- 
nounces, in the figurative language of St. 
Paul, that it is “the Israel of God” alone 
which can supply citizens for “the New Jeru- 
salem.” In this sense the Epistle for All 
Saints’ Day is taken from this chapter. The 
reference to the Twelve Tribes of Israel, ch. 
xxi. 12, and to “the New Jerusalem,” ch. 
iii. 12 ; Xxi. 2, 10, seems to fix upon the words 
this spiritual meaning ; while the fact that the 
same number is chosen out of every Tribe indi- 
cates that both names and numbers are here 
symbolical (cf. the equal division of the Holy 
Land among the Twelve Tribes, Ezek. xlvii. 
13, 14). in fact, the definite number 144,000 
—representing “the Sealed ” on earth through- 
out all time—is again represented indefinitely 
in ver. 9, by the “great multitude which no 


REVELATION. VIL 


(v. 5 


5 Of the tribe of Juda were sealed 
twelve thousand. Of the tribe of 
Reuben were sealed twelve thousand, 


man could number ;” in other words, by the 
Church of the Redeemed in heaven (cf. ch. 
v. 9 with ch. xiv. 1, 3) :—to this effect Origen, 
Mede, Vitr., Ewald, De Wette, Dollinger, 
Hengst., Words., Alf., &c.; see on ch. ix. 4. 

There are many, however, who refuse to 
identify those who are here sealed, with the 
palm-bearing multitude in ver. 9. They consi- 
der “the Sealed ” to represent Jewish believers, 
chosen out of the literal Israel. These as 
belonging to the Twelve Tribes which are here 
distinctly specified, form a definite number 
(cf. Isai. liv.-lxvi. ; Rom. xi.); and thus vv. 1-8 
relate to believers from Israel, but vv. 9-17 
to believers whether Jews or Gentiles (see the 
remark of Vitringa, quoted in note A on ch 
xi. 1) :—so Grotius, Bullinger, Bengel, Stuart, 
I. Williams, J. H. Todd, De Burgh, Ebrard, 
Ziillig, Diisterd..— Auberlen (and so Burger) 
further noting that these “ form the nucleus of 
glorified humanity, to which the Gentiles are 
joined” (p. 355). That Israel should first 
be mentioned, and then (ver. 9) ail true 
servants of God, Diisterdieck explains by 
the ¢wo judgments under the seventh Seal 
—viz. that on Jerusalem (cf. ch. xi. 8), 
and that on Babylon, i.c.,Rome. He regards 
ch. viii. 1-ch. xi. 14 as the object of the 
passage here—vv. 1-8 representing what 
the seventh Seal will bring upon unbelieving 
Israel, while vv. 9-17 relate to the redem 
tion of believers in general, as well as to the 
tribulation of Babylon. Godet also (/. ¢., p. 
350) takes the 144,000 Sealed to denote the 
elect of Israel; but he understands Jews re- 
served by God—until Antichrist comes—to 
maintain in the bosom of their nation (which, 
as a whole, a/most apostatizes to paganism) 
true belief in Jehovah and His law, like the 
7000 in the days of Elijah (1 Kings xix. 18), 
These Elect are not even yet members of the 
Church : they do not form part of the army 
of the Lamb until ch. xiv. 1-5. And thus, 
until the very end of all things, there will be 
in the literal Israel an elect few, faithful to 
God and to the Law of their fathers; and 
also in the pagan world (see on ch. xvii. 1) a 
multitude of souls prepared to reign with 
the Lamb (see on ch. xi, 13). 

It seems a conclusive answer to this last 
theory to point out that both the 144,000 
Jews and the innumerable multitude of ver. 9 
are, according to it, alike included in the one 
number 144,000 of ch. xiv. 1 who are exp 
said in ch. xiv. 3, 4 to have been “redeem 
from the earth,” and “ from among men.” 

This Vision, writes Mr. Maurice (p. 128), 
“endorses the hopes which earnest men, 


v. 6—7.] 


Of the tribe of Gad were sealed 
twelve thousand. 

6 Of the tribe of Aser were sealed 
twelve thousand. Of the tribe of 


REVELATION, VII. 


Nepthalim were sealed twelve thou- 
sand, Of the tribe of Manasses were 
sealed twelve thousand. z 

7 Of the tribe of Simeon were 





either Jews or Christians, have entertained of 
the ultimate restoration of Israelites to more 
than all the privileges their fathers enjoyed.” 

Interpreting differently, Stern takes the 
144,000 to represent the Elect on earth in the 
days of Antichrist; and the “great multi- 
tude” of ver. 9 to be the Redeemed in heaven 
of every period of the Church, and therefore to 
include the 144,000. Neander—understanding 
the 144,000 to mean only believers of Jewish 
descent, and as “a round number” to repre= 
sent the converts of Acts xxi. 20—asserts 
that this verse contradicts ch. xiv. 1 which 
enumerates the whole number of the elect 
from all the world (Pfanzung, Engl. tr., 
i. p. 398). To the same effect, Bleek (s. 230). 
Such an argument, however, sets aside the 
spiritual and symbolical use of numbers in 
the Apocalypse. 

By the “ Historical” school of commenta- 
tors this prophecy has been variously referred 
to the Jewish and Gentile converts in the 
age of Constantine ;—to the Albigenses and 
Waldenses ;—to the Reformation ;—&c., &c. 


5. Of the tribe of Judah [were] sealed 
twelve thousand:| The words “ were sealed” 
are to be read only here and in the case of 
Benjamin, ver. 8. 

Note, that of the Twelve sons of Jacob, 
six were sons of the first wife, Leah; two of 
the second wife, Rachel; ¢qwo of the first 
concubine, Bilhah; two of the second con- 
cubine, Zilpah. 

Of the tribe of Reuben twelve 
thousand:] (And so until the end of ver. 
8—see wv. //.). As to this catalogue of the 
Twelve Tribes it is to be noted that in no 
two places throughout the Bible are the 
names and the order the same. In the O.T. 
there are several such catalogues giving 
e.g. (1) the order of birth, Gen. xxix., xxx. 
XXxV. 18; (2) the order of Jacob’s bless- 
ing, Gen. xlix.; (3) the order of Moses’ 
blessing, Deut. xxxiii. (where Simeon is 
omitted); (4) the order of blessing and 
cursing, Deut. xxvii. 12, 13; (5) the order 
of “the princes,” Num. i.; (6) the order of 
the encampment, Num. ii.; (7) the order 
of the inheritance, Josh. xiii—xix.; (8) the 
census before the invasion of Canaan, Num. 
xxvi.; (9) the order by the wives and con- 
cubines, 1 Chron. ii. 1, 2 (Dan, as in Gen. 
xlix., coming after the sons of Leah, for which 
a reason may perhaps be found in Gen. xxx. 
3-6); Oe the order of the gates of “the 
City” (“the New Jerusalem”), Ezek. xlviii. 


31-34. This last catalogue presents the 
closest resemblance to that of St. John, if we 
arrange Ezekiel’s catalogue in the order of 
north, west, south, east, placing the name of 
Judah first (as St. John places it with manifest 
reference to ch. v. 5; cf. Hebr. vii. 14)—viz. 
north, JUDAH, Reuben, (Levi); west, Gad, 
Asher, Naphtali; south, Simeon, Issachar, 
Zebulun ; east, Joseph, Benjamin, (Dan). In 
this catalogue of Ezekiel Levi is included; 
and also Joseph, in whose stead Manasseh 
and Ephraim (see Josh. xiv. 3, 4) are free 
quently placed,—e.g. Num. ii. 18-20. Ace 
cordingly St. John, closely following the order 
of Ezekiel, omits Dan (in whose room Mane 
asseh appears—placed however after Naphe 
tali, Dan’s brother by Bilhah, and in connexion 
with Gad and Asher the sons of the other 
concubine Zilpah); and places Levi next 
after his elder brother Simeon: see Zuillig, 
in loc. This arrangement is doubtless implied 
in the symbolism of ch. xxi. 12. And thus in 
the case of the sons of Leah and Rachel 
(with the exception of the case of Judah, who 
is placed first) the order of age is followed, 
—the last-born, Benjamin, being placed last. 
Grotius, on the other hand, writes: “ Nul- 
lus servatur ordo quia omnes in Christo 
pares ;” and he rejects all meanings which 
assign a motive for the arrangement here: 
and so Alford. Reuss ascribes the order to 
“pure chance” (p. 74). 


6. Of the tribe of Manasseh twelve 
thousand:] As observed on ver. 5, the 
name of Dan, given in the catalogue of 
Ezekiel, is omitted by St. John, and the 
name of Manasseh is introduced in its stead. 

Bossuet thinks that the name of Dan is 
omitted here merely in order to preserve the 
number Twelve, Joseph appearing twice— 
once in his own person, ver. 8, and once in 
the person of Manasseh. 

The Fathers, generally—referring to Gen. 
xlix. 17, “ Dan shall be a serpent by the way, 
an adder in the path,” and also to the imagery 
of ch. xii. 9; xx. 2, where the serpent syme 
bolizes the power of evil—explainthe omission 
of Dan by the belief that Antichrist was to 
rise from this Tribe. Thus, St. Hippolytus (De 
Antichr., c. 14) observes that as Christ has 
been born from the tribe of Judah, so, ac- 
cording to Jacob’s words (Gen. xlix. 17), will 
Antichrist be born from the tribe of Dan :— 
for other authorities, see the note on Gen. 
xlix. 17. Thustoo Beda, Andreas, C.a Lap.,. 
Stern (who recapitulates the evidence of the 


589 


9° 


sealed twelve thousand. Of the 
tribe of Levi were sealed twelve thou- 
sand. Of the tribe of Issachar were 
* sealed twelve thousand. 
8 Of the tribe of Zabulon were 
sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe 


REVELATION. VIL 


[v. 8—9. 


of Joseph were sealed twelve thou- 
sand. Of the tribe of Benjamin 
were sealed twelve thousand. 

g After this I beheld, and, lo, a 
great multitude, which no man could 
number, of all nations, and kindreds, 





Greek and Latin Fathers, ss. 235-244). ‘‘ The 
reason,” notes Hengst. on ch. xi. 13, ‘for the 
excluding of Dan is, that the only narrative 
of the O. T. in which Dan played a part is 
that respecting the worship of idols in Judges 
xviii. 1-31; so that the declaration in Rev. 
xxii. 15, ‘ without are idolaters, is here sym- 
bolically represented by the omission of Dan.” 
“ Here, therefore,” adds Words., “ is a pro- 
test against idolatry, as wholly disqualifying 
for admission into the mur of God’s 
saints :”—cf. ch. ix. 20; xxi. 8. The Jewish 
writers represent the name of Dan as a by- 
word for idolatry—Targum of Jonathan, on 
Ex. xvi. 8 (Wetst. p. 776). Grotius, Diis- 
terd., &c., support the opinion that as the 
Tribe of Dan did not return from the Cap- 
tivity (see 1 Chron. iv.-vii.) the Tribe must 
have been long extinct. It is maintained, 
however, by Bertheau, that the author of the 
Book of Chronicles has virtually included 
Dan in his place among the tribes, by his 
mention of “Hushim” (1 Chron. vii. 12) 
who are styled in Gen. xlvi. 23 “the sons of 
Dan.” Be this as it may, the name as applied 
to the Tribe disappears after 1 Chron. xxvii. 
22, and is kept alive only in the name of 
the northern city (Laish) ;—see Josh. xix. 47 ; 
Judges xviii. 7, 29; 2 Chron. xvi. 4; Jer. iv. 
15, &c.: cf. the note on Jer. viii. 16, and also 
note A at the end of this chapter. 

This omission of the Tribe of Dan from 
the later history, when we consider its war- 
like prowess and the fame of Samson (Judges 
xiii.), is no doubt very remarkable. 

As to the omission of Ephraim, while his 
brother Manasseh is introduced by St. John, 
t may be observed that Ephraim as well as 
Dan was addicted to idolatry (Judg. xvii.; 
xviii. ; 1 Kings xii. 25, 29), Ephraim being also 
foremost in the defection from the house of 
David (2 Sam. ii. 9 ; Isa. vii. 9,17). Ephraim 
is the “ confederate ” of the enemies of Judah 
(Isa. vii. 2, 5; cf. Hos. v. 3, and passim). 


7. Of the tribe of Levi twelve 
thousand:| Levi had no inheritance in the 
earthly Canaan (Josh. xiv. 3, 4); but he is not 
excluded from the heavenly. In this substi- 
tution of one name for another (see on ver. 5), 
we are reminded of the awful mystery of the 
blotting a name from out of the Book of 
Life :—see on ch. iii. 5. We may compare, 
too, the rejection of Judas (John vi. 70) and 
the substitution of another in his stead. 


8. Of the tribe of Benjamin (were) sealed 
twelve thousand.| ‘The actual order of time 
is here followed in the placing of Benjamin 
Jast, as, in the order of Christian conceptions, 
Judah is placed frst. And thus the 144,000 
symbolize the Church of the Redeemed 
throughout all time:—from the day when 
“the Lion of the tribe of Judah” went forth 
“conquering and to conquer” during the suc- 
cessive ages represented to the Seer in the 
Visions of the first six Seals, down to the 
final Judgment, and to the day which shall 
behold engrafted into the Church the last 
born of the Israel of God. 


THE PALM-BEARING MULTITUDE (9-17). 


9. After these things] These words 
introduce a new Vision—see on ch. iv. 1. The 
day predicted by Christ has now come. His 
Church, consisting of “the Sealed” in every 
age, has received its last member; and the 
Lord has sent forth ‘‘ His angels with a great 
sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather 
together His elect from the four winds, from 
one end of heaven to the other” (Matt. xxiv. 
31). 

I saw, and behold, a great multitude,| 
See on ver. 4. In one view St. John now be- 
holds iz heaven the entire company of the Re= 
deemed. These had been symbolically repre- 
sented in the previous Vision, while on earth, 
by the 144,000 who had been successively 
“ Sealed” from among the Twelve Tribes ; and 
they are now assembled before the throne. 
See on ch. xiv. 1. 


which no man could number,| For the cone 
struction—“the redundant onan "see 
on ch, iii. 8. 

Ebrard (and so also ‘Todd pe Godet—see 
on ver. 4) refuses to identify this com 
with the 144,000, because (1) this multi- 
tude cannot be numbered; (2) it is gathered 
from among all nations; (3) those who com- 
pose it have not been Sealed so as to 
the judgments, but have actually come “ out 
of the great tribulation” (ver. 14). To the 
same effect Auberlen: “ During the Millen- 
nium an innumerable multitude of all nations 
are added to the 144,000 sealed ones from 
the Twelve Tribes of Israel in heaven; 
and upon earth the world of nations is added 
to the kingdom of Israel” (p. 355). 

As a “Preterist” Grotius understands 


¥. 10.] 


and people, and tongues, stood before 
the throne, and before the Lamb, 
clothed with white robes, and palms 
in their hands ; 


those Christians who escaped the calamities 
of the Jewish war; especially the numerous 
Christians to be found in Syria. 

On the other hand, not to repeat what has 
been already said, we notice the repetition of 
this same number, 144,000, at ch. xiv. 1, 3, 
where the whole body of the Redeemed is to 
be understood; and this company is here 
said to be innumerable, because (as De Wette 
well observes) the fact of az election, which 
necessarily involves the idea of @ rejection, is 
not now the theme, but merely the bliss of the 
Church in glory. In short the number 144,000 
stands for a vast multitude—the definite for 
the indefinite—according to the laws of sym- 
bolism already stated. It 1s to be observed 
also that in neither ch. v. 9, nor ch. xiv. 3, is 
there drawn any distinction between Jewish 
and Gentile believers—a distinction which is 
so often urged: both receive here (see ver. 
3) the title “servants of God.” Compare, 
too, our Lord’s words, Matt. xix. 28. 

Volkmar (see on ch. il. 2) asserts that in 
this chapter St. John divides Christians into 
two classes—one class consisting of Hebrew 
Christians from the Twelve Tribes (wv. 3-8) ; 
the other of believers from all peoples 
(wv. 9-17). This assertion Renan repudiates 
altogether: “The distinction,” he writes 
(Pp. 397), “between heathen converts and the 
Jewish Christians does not exist for the 
author of the Apocalypse” . . . “ Israél est 
ici certainement le vrai Israél spirituel, le 
‘Israél de Dieu,’ comme dit Saint Paul” 
(Gal. vi. 16). 

out of every nation, and of [all] 
tribes and peoples and tongues,| See ch. 
v. 9, where the same fourfold classification 
occurs. On the bearing of these words as 
indicating the harmony of Johannean doc- 
trine with that of the Apostle of the Gentiles, 
see note A on ch. ili. 19. 

standing before the throne] The Seer 
reverts to the scene described in ch. iv. 

arrayed in whife robes,| Seeonch. vi. 11. 
Winer (§ 59, 11) suggests that in the zomina- 
tive, “ multitude,” St. John had in mind “ be- 
nold,” as in ch. iv. 1 ; and in the participle in 
the accus. (see vv. //.) the verb “I saw.” Cf. 
the note on ch. xix. 8. 

and palms| The Greek noun (goin, cf. 
Ps. xcii. 13, LX X.) occurs, in the N. T., only 
here and in John xii. 13. 

On ch. ii, 10, as we have seen, Archbishop 
Trench considers that in this Book there is 
go “ image drawn from the range of heathen 


REVELATION. VII 


10 And cried with a loud voice, 
saying, Salvation to our God which 
sitteth upon the throne, and unto the 
Lamb. 


antiquity: "—“The palms in the hands of 
the redeemed who stand before the throne 
(ch. vii. 9) may seem an exception.... 
but really are far from being so. It is 
quite true that the palm was for Greek and 
Roman a token of victory, but this ‘ palmi- 
ferous company, to use Henry More’s words, 
these happy palmers, do not stand before the 
throne as conquerors, but as those who keep 
the true Feast of Tabernacles—the Feast of 
Rest,” cf. Neh. vil. 15; 2 Macc. x. 6, 7; 
Joseph. Anft. xil. 13, 5. See also Hengst. on 
the present verse. 

The Feast of «Tabernacles, the third of the 
three great Festivals (Lev. xxili.), commemo- 
rated the passage of Israel through the wil- 
derness ; it also commemorated the joy after 
harvest, when labour ceased, and the period 
of rest began (Deut. xvi. 13-15). Hengst. 
and Words. refer, in confirmation of St 
John’s reference to this Feast, to ver. 15 
where it is said that “ God shall spread his 
tabernacle over them ;” cf. Johni.14. Alford, 
who will not exclude the heathen custom, 
having noted that the palm-branch was a mark 
of festal joy observes that “this practice ex- 
tended beyond the Jews;” and he quotes 
Virgil’s phrase, “‘ palmz, pretium victoribus ” 
(4n, v. 111). Ewald also quotes Pausanias 
(4rcad. 48) in proof that the conquerors at 
the Olympic games bore palm-branches, and 
garlands of palm leaves. Tertullian notes 
on this place, “Scilicet de Antichristo tri- 
umphales,”—Scorp. 12 (see above on ch. ii. 
Io). According to Bossuet the palms signify 
that “the great multitude are martyrs ”—viz. 
those described in ch. xx. 4. 

The “Palm-bearing multitude” syn- 
chronizes, according to Mede, with the 
seventh Trumpet ;—this is the seventh of his 
second class of synchronisms (p. 430): for 
a brief summary ‘of this system, see, Introd. 
§ 12 (2). Cf the imitation of this passage 
in 2 (4) Esdras ii. 42-47. 


10. and they cry with a great voice, 
saying,| See vv.i/.:—the tense expresses their 
unceasing occupation. 


Salvation unto our God] See vv. lh.— 
“The salvation [which we have attained, be 
ascribed] unto our God.” They utter the 
“ Hosanna” (see John xii. 13—the “Save now” 
of Ps. cxvili. 25) shouted by the people during 
the Feast of Tabernacles; cf. 2 Macc. x. 6, 
7. “Indeed, the Pain branches were called 
Hosaznas,”—W ords. ; see also Smith’s Dse#. 
of the Bible, art. Hosanna. 


oa 


592 


11 And all the angels stood round 
about the throne, and about the elders 
and the four beasts, and fell before 
the throne on their faces, and wor- 
shipped God, 

12 Saying, Amen: Blessing, and 
glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, 
and honour, and power, and might, 
be unto our God for ever and ever. 
Amen, 


REVELATION. VII. 


[v. 11—14 


13 And one of the elders answered, 
saying unto me, What are these which 
are arrayed in white robes? and 
whence came they ? 

14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou 
knowest. And he said to me, 
These are they which came out of 
great tribulation, and have washed 
their robes, and made them white in 
the blood of the Lamb. 





which sitteth on the throne, and unto the 
Lamb. The same adoration is here, as else- 
where (cf. ch. v. 13; xii. 10), offered to God 
and to the Lamb. 


ll. And all the angels stood) Ie., “had 
placed themselves” during the scene de- 
scribed in vv. 9, 1o—see vv. //.: so Disterd. 
Alf. renders, “were standing,” and ex- 
plains that the pluperf. “ is in sense imper- 
fect, just as the perfect, ‘I have placed myself’ 
= ‘I stand, is in sense present:”—cf. ch. 
viii. 2. 

round about the throne, and [about] the 
elders and the four living beings;] Le. 
as in ch. v. 11, the Angels encompassed the 
throne and the Elders and the Living Beings. 
On the participation of Angels in the work of 
Redemption, see Luke ii. 9-14; Matt. iv. 11; 
xxvill. 2; John xx. 12; Actsi. 10; &c. 

and they fell before the throne upon their 
faces,| The Elders fall prostrate in ch. v. 14; 
xi. 16; here, the Angels also, continuing the 
song of praise. See vv. //. 


12. Amen:] See ch. v. 14. The Angels 
confirm by an Amen! the song of praise 
uttered, in ver. 10, by men redeemed ; and then 
take up themselves the strain. In this seven- 
fold ascription, the article is prefixed to each 
of the nouns, as to Sa/vation in ver. 10. 


All blessing, and glory, dc.) Gr. “The 
blessing, and te glory, and the &c.:” see on 
ch. i. 6; iv. 11. Bengel arbitrarily refers this 
sevenfold ascription to the Seven Trumpets, 
ch. vili. 2, the first Angel sounding “ The d/ess- 
ing,” the second, “‘ The glory,” and so on (see 
on ch. vill. 12). Hengst. connects this song 
of praise with that in ch. v. 12, because this 
begins, and ¢4at ends with the two words 
“ blessing” and “ glory.” 

[4e] unto our God] As in ch. i. 6. 


13. And one of the elders} When events 
ire to happen through the agency of Creation, 
me of the Four Living Beings speaks, as in ch. 
vi: an Angel introduces Visions which are 
not expounded, as in wv. 2, 3; ch. xiv., &c: 
here, as in ch. v. 5, where Visions relating tothe 
Church are explained, “one of the Elders” by 


whom the Church is symbolized (see on ch. 
iv. 4) is the speaker. 


These which are arrayed in the white 
robes, who are they, and whence came 
they?} The Elder, notes Beda, “ questions 
in order that he may teach,”—“ interrogat 
ut doceat:” cf. Isai. lxiii. 1; Jer. i. 11; Zech 
iv. 2,&c. Commentators here give as illustra- 
tions of these questions, Jonah, i. 8; Virgil, 
“Qui genus? Unde domo ?”—x. vili. 114. 

14. And 1 say unto him,]| The verb is in the 
perfect—“I have said:” see on ch. v. 7 


My Lord,] See vv. /i. For this form of 
address, which expresses reverence for the 
being who asked the question, cf. Gen. xxiii. 
6, 11; Zech. i. 9; iv. 4, 5, 13—see also the 
notes on ch. xix. 10; xxi. 8, 9. In John 
xii. 21, the same form without the pronoun 
is used. 

thou knowest.| I.e, “1 know not, but 
would hear from thee,”—cf. Ezek. xxxvii. 3. 

These are they which come] The present 
tense (see on ch. xv. 2) is to be preserved 
here, as the tenor of the whole Vision re= 
quires. Ewald and Ebrard render, as ren- 
dered in the A. V., “qwhich came.” A simple 
designation of persons is intended—all, 
whether Gentiles or of Israel, all who come 
(oi épxduevor) unstained out of the trial, and 
whom the Seer now beholds in glory as they 
stand before the throne. 

out of the great tribulation,| “The tribu- 
lation, the great one’—the twofold article 
being specially emphatic: see ch. ili. 10; vi. 17; 
and compare our Lord’s words, Matt. xxiv. 
21, 29. Not merely all earthly trouble, Gen. 
iii. 16; v. 29, as Bengel holds; or “the 
whole sum of the trials of the saints of God 
viewed by the Elder as now complete” (Alf.): 
the reference assuredly is to the last great 
Trial to be expected under the seventh Seal, 
as well as to the preparatory tokens of that 
Trial under the sixth Seal, ch. vi. 12-17. 

Renan would restrict the application to the 
persecution under Nero, A.D. 64, for which 
“the great tribulation” was, he argues 
from Heb. x. 33, the ordinary description,— - 
lc, p. 217. 


; 


REVELATION. VII. 


 1g—17.] 593 





15 Therefore are they before the 
throne of God, and serve him day 
and night in his temple: and he that 


Sm 3- sitteth on the throne shall ¢ dwell 


among them. 


and they washed their robes,| In the life 
now past and gone,—see ch. iii. 4. Alf thus 
gives the substance of Diisterdieck’s note: 
“the aorist is that so often used of the course 
of this life when looked back upon from its 
yonder side.” 


in the blood of the jot Cf. ch. i531 
John i. 7. “It is a delicate feature of genuine 
ethics,” notes Diisterd., “that they who, in 
this earthly life, have washed their robes 
white in the blood of the Lamb, appear in 
that other life arrayed in white garments (cf. 
ch, iii. 4; xix. 8).” The earlier commen- 
tators (Arethas, Beda, N. de Lyra) were 
wont to apply this passage to the purifying 
effect of martyrdom—De Lyra understanding 
by “the blood of the Lamb” the blood of the 
martyrs, “quia est sanguis membrorum 
ipsius ”: so, too, Ewald owing to his identi- 
fying this place with ch. vi. 10. Hengst. in- 
terprets the washing, of the forgiveness of 
sins; the making white, of sanctification. 


15. Therefore} “On this account”— 
because the condition expressed in Eph. v. 27 
is now attained. 

are they before the throne of God;| Ie., as 
now seen in the Vision. To be there is itself 
bliss,—cf. John xvii. 24; 1 John iii. 2. 

and they serve him] Cf. ch. iv. 8, &c.; 
v. 8, &c.; xxii. 3. The verb (Aarpevo) is 
used as in Matt. iv. 1o—“ Him only shalt thou 
serve.” 


in bis temple: “Sanctuary,” Naos, as in 
ch. xi. 1 :—cf. on ch. ui. 12; xxi. 22. The 
earthly life of the faithful is already repre- 
sented as the being made priests unto God 
—ch. i. 6; v. 10. 


shall spread his tabernacle over 
them.] Ebrard renders, “ist ein Zelt iiber 
sie”—“is a tent over them.” The verb 
(cxnvow) which, in composition, often occurs 
elsewhere in the New Test., is found only in 
St. John’s writings,—viz. in John i. 14; Rev. 
xii. 12; xiii. 6 (with the prep. év); ch. xxi. 
3 (with wera); and here (with éxi), where 
it is difficult to express in English the re- 
ference to the Divine glory or Shekinah, 
overshadowing the mercy seat :—see Ex. xxv. 
8; Lev. xxvi. 11; Isai. iv. 5,6; Ezek. xxxvii. 
27; and the note on Ex. xxvi. 1. The 
distinction between the Tent as the outer 
shelter, and the Tabernacle as the “ Dwelling 
place of Jehovah ” (a distinction marked in the 


New Test—Vot. TV 


16 “They shall hunger no more, 71490 


neither thirst any more; neither 
shall the sun light on them, nor any 
heat. 

17 For the Lamb which is in the 


Hebrew by the definite article prefixed, 
hammishkan), is very clear in Ex. xl. 34-38: 
“The glory appeared as a light within, and 
as a cloud on the outside,”—note in /oc.; cf 
Ex. xvi. 10; Num. xiv 10; xvi. 19, 42; I 
Kings viii. 10,11. “The rich store of allu- 
sions contained in the word (cxynvacer) ought 
to be carefully treasured up in the mind 
the reader, as showing that the prophecies 
and types of the Old Test., especially in the 
pilgrimage through the wilderness, and the 
festive ceremonial of the Hebrew ritual, will 
have their full accomplishment in the heavenly 
glory of Christ and His saints (see Ex. xxix, 
43; Ps. lxviii. 18; 1 Cor. x. 11)”— Words, 

Note the tenses in vv. 14, 15: the “great 
multitude” is assembling before the eyes of 
the Seer in front of the throne;—“ They 
washed their robes ;’—“ They are before the 
throne,” “they serve ;’—and lastly, in the 
future, “ He that sitteth on the throne shail 
spread His Tabernacle over them,” for the Re- 
deemed whom St. John beholds have not ag 
yet actually accomplished their warfare. 


16. neither shall the sun strike upon 
them,] Gr. neither in any wise:—come 
pare the negative in ch. ii. 11. 


nor any beat:| For the contrast, see ch. 
xvi. 8, 9. This passage is borrowed from 
Isai. xlix. ro. 

17. in the midst of | Cf. the position in ch, 
v. 6, with which this position agrees although 
the phrase is different. For the phrase here 
(dvapécov) cf. Matt. xiii. 25; Mark vii. 31; 
1 Cor. vi. 5:—literally, “versus medium 
throni.” The Lamb is placed towards the 
middle of the throne ; between Him who'sits 
upon it, and the Four Living Beings with the 
twenty-four Elders, who stand around. The 
form of a “Lamb,” as well as this position, 
designates Christ as the reconciling Mediator 
(Disterd.) 


shall be their shepherd,] This image 
is that already used in the Fourth Gospel, 
John x.; xxi. 16. For the signification “to 
rule”? see on ch. ii. 27; cf. ch. xii. 5; xix. 15. 


and shall guide them unto fountains of 
waters of life:] See vv. //.; and cf. John 
vii. 37-39; xvi. 13: the verb in this latter 
place (the same as here) is used of “the Spirit 
of Truth ;” to Whom St. John expressly ape 
plies the former passage. Cf. ch. xxi. 6° 
<xi_ 5: 

PP 


594 


midst of the throne shall feed them, tains of waters: ‘and God shall wipe (+s 


REVELATION. VII. 


[v. 17. 


and shall lead them unto living foun- away all tears from their eyes. 





wipe away every tear from ther eyes.] See 
ch. xxi. 4; Isai. xxv. 8. (Note, the verb daxpto 
is found in the N. T. only in John xi. 35). 
Not without many tears have they come “ out 
of the great tribulation,” ver. 14: but “ they 
that sow in tears shall reap in joy,” Ps. 


CXxvi. 5. 
Godet (/.c., p. 270) takes the present 
ge, vv. 15-17, as an instance in which 
we find reunited several of the characteristic 
features of the Fourth Gospel :—ver. 15 to 
dwell (under a tent), John i. 14 ;—ver. 16 to 
hunger, to thirst, John vi. 35 ;—ver. 17 the 
Lamb, John i. 29 ;—ib. to tend, John xxi. 16 
(cf. the image of the shepherd, John x. 1-16); 
—ib. to guide, John xvi. 13 - On the other hand 


—_—_———— 


this verse supplies an illustration of the efforts 
to prove that the Apocalypse was not writren 
by the author of the Fourth Gospel. Licke 
indeed admits (s. 683) that the imagery here 
corresponds better than in any other instance 
to that of John x. 3: the verb moreover 
rendered “to guide” (é8nyew) both cor- 
responds to the image of ‘ tending as a shep- 
herd,’ and is also a Johannean word (e. g. 
John xvi. 13); but, nevertheless, he argues, in 
John x. 3 the verb which develops the pas- 
toral image is different! - 

Ch. xxi. ; andch. xxii. might now seem to be 
the fitting sequel of this Vision; but other 
trials are still in store for the Church. All is 
now ready for the opening of the seventh Seal. 


ADDITIONAL NOTE on Chap. VII. 6. 


Note A ON VER. 6—THE OMISSION OF 
THE TRIBE OF DAN. 


Hartwig (Apol. der Apok. ii. 227 ff.) and 
Ewald (Jahrb. d. bibl. Wiss., 1856, vili. s. 98 
ff.) argue that AAN was originally written in 
the copies in place of MAN. which they as- 
sert to be the abbreviation of Mavaco7 (ver. 
6); and that through an error the tran- 
scribers have substituted May. (and thence 
Mavago7n) for the true reading Adv. They 
appeal in support of' this alleged abbreviation 
to the unimportant cursive MSS. 9, 13; 
which however distinctly read Aay in place of 
Ta8 in ver. 5. On the other hand Irenzus, 
referring to Jer. viii. 16 (Adv. Her., v. 30, 2), 
Origen, An and Arethas (in Joc.) read 
Mayvaco7 in full, and state expressly that Dan 
was omitted. Bengel and Eichhorn, urging 
the signification ofthe name Manasseh (Gen. 
*gli. 51—i.2., ‘causing to forget, MW, oblitus est), 
consider that the name itself intimates that 
another name, viz. Dan, was forgotten, or 
— sacane m ious grea 
: su In support is opinion 
that the tribe of Dan had been long extinct 
Grotius quotes 2 Jewish tradition: “ Jam olim 


ea tribus ad una familiam Hussim reciderat, 
ut aiunt Hebrzi, que ipsa familia bellis ine 
terlisse videtur ante Esdretempora “ -but this 
notion seems to have arisen from a reminisce 
ence of Gen. xlvi. 23. On the enigmatical 
words of 1 Chron. vii. 12, “‘ Hushim, the sons 
of Aher,” Bertheau refers to Gen. xivi. 23, 
where Hushim are “ sons of Dan” (note the 
substitution of the name “Shuham,” Num. 
xxvi. 42); and considers that “ Aher” (>Mg) 
is not a proper name, but simply means “the 
other”—viz. the other son of Bilhah (Naph- 
tali being named in ver. 13) whose name the 
writer wished to pass over in silence, for the 
name of Dan was in disrepute as having set 
up a worship of its own—see Judges xviii. 
The words, accordingly, "nx 132 own (“ Hue 
shim, sons of the other”) stand for 195) 
wn wt, “and the sons of Dan, Hushim.” 
eil objects to this explanation, arguing from 
the repeated mention of Dan by the Chronicler 
(1 Chron. ii. 2; xii. 35; xxvii. 22)—the 
omission from one Hebrew text (1 Chron. vi. 
46, E. V. ver. 61) of the words “ Ephrai 
eee ink fee 
xxi. 5—being 'an error COpylm. 
Keil, Comm. in loc. Engl. tr. p. 135. 


v. 1.) 


CHAPTER VIII. 


a At the opening of the seventh seal, 2 seven 
angels had seven trumpets given them. 6 
Four of them sound their trumpets, and 
great plagues follow. 3 Another angel put- 


REVELATION. VIII. 


teth incense to the prayers of the saints on the 
golden altar. 
ND when he haa openea the 
seventh seal, there was silence 
in heaven about the space of half an 
hour. 





[Ver. 1 érav. 


Spovrai cai davai cai dorp. Ver. 6 of Exovres.—adrovs. 
-~ ”~ , - i. 

add kai To tpitov Tis yas Karexdn. Ver. 9 diePOapnoay. Ver. 10 trav iddror. 

—eyéveto TO tpiroy rav vddrwv.—rav avOp. Ver. 12 yn pavy (or gay7). 


Ver. 3 rod Guc.acrnpiov [A, P, 1 read ro Gvovacrypioy].—dacer. 


Ver. § 
Ver. 7 om. dyyedos.—ev aipatt.— 
Ver. 11 6 "AW. 
Ver. 13 derov 


weroucvov.—{N, B read rovs xarovkovvtas,—A, P, I read rois xarovxovowy].] 


Cuap. VIII.—THE SEVENTH SEAL. 


No single Vision follows the opening of the 
seventh Seal, as in the case of each of the first 
six. A solemn Silence ensues; and a new 
series of Seven Visions is exhibited, the last of 
which (ch. xi. 15) is followed in like manner 
by another series of Seven (ch. xv.; xvi.), 
and has no direct sequel casting light upon 
its meaning. 

There is no reason for imagining (with 
Heinrichs) that “the Sealed Book” itself (ch. 
v. 1) becomes now for the first time visible, 
after its seven wrappers (“‘involucra”) have 
been taken away. As the Seal is the emblem 
of an event decreed by God—mysterious, 
and still unrevealed ; so the Trumpet when 
sounded is more than the simple revelation of 
an event to come—it is a “manifestation of 
will, which calls for its speedy accomplish- 
ment ” (Godet, p. 296). After the analogy of 
the Seals, the Trumpets also are divided into 
groups of four and three (see ver. 13). Two 
distinct episodes, moreover, intervene between 
the sixth and seventh Trumpets (ch. x.— 
ch. xi. 14), as in the case of the Seals (ch. 
vii.) :—see the remarks introductory to ch. vi. 

Two opposite principles of interpretation 
have been commonly employed in order to 
explain the connexion between the Visions of 
the Seals and the Trumpets :— 

(1) The principle of ‘“ Recapitulution.” 
This principle is supported by the authority 
of St. Augustine (“ recapitulando dicit tanquam 
ad id rediens, quod przterierat, potiusve distu- 
lerat.”— De Giv. Dei, xx. 14). In modern times 
it has been adopted by Vitringa, Bossuet, 
Hengst., Words., Alf., Elliott, and others. It is 
to beunderstood, however, that “recapitulare” 
is not identical with “ repetere:” —“to recapi- 
tulate” is not “to go over the same ground 
again ” (“‘ Licet repetat per Phialas, non tamen 
quasi bis factum dicitur . . . Quod in Tubis 
minus dixit, heic in Phialis est.”—Victorinus). 
In “ Recapitulation” there is a parallel, not an 
identical series of events. “ Repetition,” how- 
ever, in the sense of scripture, is but a token 


of the certainty of the event—cf. Gen. x\li. 
32; Ps. lxii. 11. To this class belong the 
“Synchronisms” of Mede. (2) The principle 
of which Andreas, C. a Lapide, Bengel, 
De Wette, Stern, Bleek, Ewald, Reuss, and 
others, are the advocates— viz. that the 
series of the Trumpet-Visions is developed 
in order out of the seventh Seal; which Seal, 
as Diisterdieck expresses it (s. 15), ‘‘ by means 
of the seventh Trumpet proceeding from it, 
extends to ch. xxii. 5.” 

Vitringa, however, considers the Trumpets 
to constitute a zew Vision: he understands 
them as foreshowing the history of the Roman 
Empire, or external condition of the Church; 
as the Seal-Visions had foreshewn the Church’s 
internal condition. 


1. And when] See vv. /l.:—in place of 
dre (see ch. vi. 1, &c.) the MSS. A, C read 
éray, which is used with the aor. indic. by the 
Byzantine writers. Of this use, writes Pro- 
fessor Moulton, there are, in the N. T., “two 
well-attested examples, Mark xi. 19; Rev. 
viii. 1”’—see Winer, § 42, 5, s. 2273; and cf. 
ch. iv. 9. Alf. notes: “It occurs in the open- 
ing of this Seal only, giving it an indefiniteness 
which does not belong to any of the rest.” 


he opened the seventh seal,| See on ch, 
vi. 3. As before, it is the Lamb Who opens 
this Seal. According to Alf. this “lets loose 
the roll.” Burger also concludes that, on this 
opening of the seventh Seal, the contents of 
the Sealed Book are made known, and that 
the Seven Trumpet-Visions represent its con- 
tents :—but see on ch. v. 1. 


there followed a silence in heaven] Gr. 
“oame to pass ”—see onch.i.9. This image 
seems to have been borrowed from the silence 
kept by the people while the priest offered 
the incense. ‘The Silence here is preparatory 
to the sacerdotal act of the Angel in ver. 3 :— 
cf. Luke i. 10; 2 Chron. xxix. 25-29. 

The opening of the seventh Seal, writes 
Mr. Maurice as a strict “ Preterist,” introduces 
“the greatest catastrophe that has yet be- 
fallen the Universe ”—the destruction of Jerue 


PEP 


595 


596 


2 And I saw the seven angels 
which stood before God; and to 
them were given seven trumpets. 


REVELATION. VIII. 


‘* 


|v. =—g. 


3 And another angel came and 
stood at the altar, having a golden 
censer; and there was given unto 





salem. ‘“ There is silence in heaven in the 
contemplation of it” (p. 136). The Seven 
Trumpets are to sound around Jerusalem as 
they had sounded round Jericho. 

Here only, notes Bengel, is there “‘a silence 
in heaven.” Elsewhere we read of continual 
voices—e.g. ch. iv. 8; v. 9, 12; xi. 15. 


about the space of half an hour.| In the word 
“about” we have a form of expression usual 
with St. John, see John i. 39; vi. 19; xi. 18. 

The Vision of the seventh Seal is closed, 
and no further revelation is granted to the Seer 
in connexion with it as in the case of the pre- 
ceding Seals—not even such as that granted 
in ch. x. 4 which he was commanded not to 
write. The “ Silence in heaven” (see on ch. 
xi. 15) symbolizes this absence of a revela- 
tion; and the “ Si/ence” lasting for but “ 4alf 
an hour” denotes that the consummation of 
all things, to which the seventh Seal directly 
leads up, is to follow the opening of that Seal 
after a period absolutely short. (For a period 
absolutely /ong, see on the “ Thousand Years,” 
ch. xx. 2.) The relative shortness of dura- 
tion—relative, that is, to the divine apprehen- 
sion—is elsewhere usually expressed by such 
phrases as “The time is at hand,” “I come 
quickly :” see on ch. i. 1, 3; and also Note A 
at the end of this chapter. 

The preparation for a new series of Visions 
now begins at ver. 2. This series which 
covers the same period of time as the Visions 
of the Seals is a “ Recapitulation,” as the 
ancient expositors express it. It is commonly 
assumed tliat the opening of the seventh Seal 
follows, in the order of time, the events re- 
ferred to in ch. vii. Thus Alf. notes: “The 
coming of the Lord has passed, and the 
elect are gathered in. Accordingly the last 
Seal is now opened,”—but for such a conclu- 
sion there is no proof. The seventh Seal 
follows the sixth, just as the sixth follows the 
fifth, and the fifth the fourth—the episodes of 
ch. vii. relating to the entire course of the 
Seals from the beginning, and not revealing 
events subsequent in time to the sixth Seal: 
see the remarks introd. to ch. vii. It may 
well be, no doubt, that the “ Silence” has a 
further spiritual meaning; it may be that, as 
Words. after Victorinus notes, “ St. John has 
now a brief view of the ‘eternal peace’ 
of heaven” (“ cernit initium quietis eterne ”’). 
Beda also connects in this manner ch. vii. 
with ch. viii. (“In sexto sigillo maximas 
ecclesie pressuras; in septimo uiem 
cernit. . . . Nunc vero recapitulat ab origine, 
eadem aliter dicturus ”). 


The “ Silence” is broken by the Trumpet 
notes which announce the wrath of the Lamb. 

The Third chief Vision (viii. 2—xi. 19) 
of the Revelation Proper now opens :—see 
Introd. § 12. 


THE 'TRUMPET-ANGELS. 


2. And I saw] According to Disterdieck, 
the introductory Vision, vv. 2-6, is seen dur- 
ing the symbolic “Silence.” According to 
Ebrard, the brief “ Si/ence ” merely introduces 
the events which now follow; and it is in- 
cluded under the seventh Seal. On this point, 
however, nothing is told us, and on it nothing 
depends. The “ Silence” is itself symbolic as 
stated on ver. 1 ; and, quite irrespectively of it, 
another series of Visions begins as it were 
de novo. This series of Visions Disterd., 
on the other hand, with the majority of com- 
mentators, regards as “ evolved” out of, and as 
continuing the Seal-Visions. His reason is 
that on the principle of “ Recapitulation” 
“the organic connexion of the Visions as a 
whole would be torn asunder” (s. 296). 
Renan offers the following criticism: The 
“‘ Silence” denotes that the first act of the 
mystery is terminated, and that another is 
about to commence. The same thing occurs 
in the Song of Songs. Hebrew literature 
ignores the law of unity.—l. c., p. 391. 


the seven angels which stand before God ;| 
(For the verb stand see on ch. vii. 11). Cf. 
ch. xv. 1; we may also compare the words 
of Gabriel in Lukei. 19. The definite article 
manifestly denotes a special reference; and 
commentators (as early as Clemens Alex. 
Strom. vi., Pp. 493) quote here the words of 
the book of Tobit (xii. 15): “I am Raphael, 
one of the Seven Holy Angels (ray énra dyiov 
dyyédwv) which present the prayers of the 
saints, and which go in and out before the 
glory of the Holy One:’—Victorinus to the 
same effect quotes Mark xiii. 27. Alford 
considers that what is here referred to “‘ was 
part of that revelation with regard to the 
. ... Angels which seems to have taken 
place during the captivity.” The Seven are 
“ Archangels,” 1 Thess. iv. 16; Jude 9; cf. 
Dan. x. 15 (Stern, De Wette) ;—“ The Seven 
Spirits of God,” ch. i. 4; iv. 5; v. 6 (Aret.. 
Bossuet, Ewald);— ‘Seven Angels chosen 
merely on account of the Seven Trumpets” 
(Hengst., Ebrard,—the latter considering that 
the art. is used in order to contrast the s-ven 
here, with the four Angels of ch. vii 1). 
Luther and Vitringa take tne article t be 
“a Hebrew superfluity.” 








v. 3+] 


and there were given unto them seven 
trumpets. | In order to proclaim the judgments 
described in vv. 7, 8, &c. Ewald refers to 
the use of trumpets on days of rejoicing 
(Num. x. 10), observing: “The Last Judg- 
ment is the greatest Festival in history,”—cf. 
Josh. vi.; Hos. viii. 1; Joel ii. 1. Mede re- 
gards the Trumpets as included in the Seals, 
the seventh Seal being “the Seal of the 
Trumpets”; and these two Visions, extending 
from ch. iv. 1 to ch. x. 8, form, according to 
Mede, the first chief division of the Apocalypse 
(Works, p. 424). Words. regards the -final 
triumph of the righteous as the moral of the 
Seals; the punishment of the wicked as the 
moral of the Trumpets—the Vials (ch. xvi.) 
executing upon the empire of the Beast the 
judgments of the Trumpets. Max Krenkel 
(Der Ap. Johannes, s. 68) connects the 
‘Trumpets and Vials differently :—On the un- 
converted world (contrasted with “‘ the ser- 
wants of God,” ch. vii. 3 ; 1x. 4) St. John sees 
impending a double series of judgments; of 
these the first Seven are the Trumpets, and 
the second Seven are the Vials, ch. xvi. 

On the word “Trumpet” see Note B at the 
end of this chapter. 


THE INTRODUCTORY RITE (3-5). 


3. And another angel| According to St. 
John’s usage (See on ch. vii. 2), and contrasted 
with the Seven specified in ver. 2,—“ another 
Angel” who offers upon the Altar, as was 
done in ch. v. 8, the incense which typifies 
prayer. A spirit of prayer is now poured 
forth, in order that the servants of God may 

repare themselves thereby to meet the coming 
judgments. 

Many commentators, both ancient and 
modern (Beda, Vitr., Elliott, &c.) take this 
Angel to be Christ—a sense which confuses 
the entire meaning of what follows. The text 
leaves the reference indefinite, and does not 
support the special interpretation of Grotius, 
“the Angel of the Church’s prayers” (cf. ch. 
Xiv. 18, xvi. 5);—or of Ziillig, that the same 
Angel reappears in ch. xiv. 18, and, as having 
“ qutbority over the fire,’ now takes his place 
at the Altar of burnt offering. 


came and stood over the altar,| Or “at,” 
see vv. //.; compare Amos ix. 1 (LXX.), 
and Dr. Pusey’s note: the Angel seems to 
have placed himself so that his form appeared 
“over the Altar.” The whole description 
implies that “‘t4e Altar” here (note the force 
of the article) is that already described (see 
on ch. vi. 9),—viz. “the Brasen Altar” of burnt 
effering which stood in the court immediately 


REVELATION. VIII. 


10r,ed@ him much incense, that he should upon the golden altar which was 
‘hem ‘offer it with the prayers of all saints before the throne. 


i 





in front of the Tabernacle (Ex. xxxviii. 1-7), 
as distinguished from “the Go/den Altar,” or 
Altar of incense which was “before the Veil 
that is by the Ark of the Testimony ” (Ex. 
Xxx. I-6):—see Ex. xxxix. 38, 393; xl. 5, 6. 
Both Altars are mentioned in this verse. In 
the earthly Temple the priest took “a censer 
full of burning coals of fire from off the Altar ” 
—the Altar of burnt-offering (Lev. xvi. 12)— 
and went with it to the Altar of incense 
within the Sanctuary. Having there received 
the incense from the proper minister, he placed 
“the incense upon the fire before the Lord” 
(Lev. xvi. 13). According to this ritual, the 
Angel here brings from the Altar of burnt 
offering coals of fire on the “golden censer” 
which was part of the furniture of the Altar of 
incense, or “ Golden Altar,” Num. iv. 11, 14 
(see also Num. xvi. 6, 7). The “fire-pan” 
(Ex. xxvii. 3), or “censer” conveyed the fire; 
the vessel which held the incense to be offered 
is called a “vial” in ch. v. 8 (where see the 
comment, and Note A; cf. Num. vil. 13, 84). 
The Angel next receives the incense from 
another who bore “ t4e vial” ; and then offers 
it “‘ upon the Golden Altar which was before 
the throne:’—so Vitr., Beng., Zillig, Stern, 
Hofmann, Ebrard, &c. Were one Altar only 
intended here, why should it be described at 
first without, and then, as in ch. ix. 13, with 
the epithet “ Go/den”—by which epithet we 
know that the Altar of incense (Ex. xxxvii. 26) 
was expressly distinguished from the Altar of 
burnt offering (Ex. xxxvili. 2)? Diisterdieck 
however argues (and Alford, as usual, follows 
him) that we are not justified in supposing 
that we have in these Visions of heaven begin- 
ning with ch. iv. 1 any counterpart of the 
Jewish Tabernacle ;—the singular reason being 
added that to assume this would be inconsis- 
tent with ch. xi. 19 where the Temple of God 
in heaven is first opened. The fact is that 
each new Vision affords a deeper insight into 
the heavenly scenes,and adds some new 
feature to what had been revealed before. In 
ch. iv. 1 the Seer beholds “a door opened in 
heaven” ;—here he witnesses the ritual wor- 
ship of the heavenly Temple ;—in ch. xi. 19 the 
Temple is thrown open, and the Ark of the 
Covenant disclosed;—in ch. xv. 5° “the 
Temple of the Tabernacle af the Testimony” is 
opened. Diisterd., nevertheless, concludes tf at 
there is but one Altar—that spoken of 
in ch. vi. 9, which resembles in some ie- 
spects both the Altar of burnt offering and 
that of incense. De Wette, Hengst., Bleek, 
Words., &c., see only the Altar of incense 
here; and this, observes the writer of the 
article A/tar in Smith’s ‘ Dict. of the Bible,’ 


597 


598 


4 And the smoke of the incense, 
which came with the prayers of the 
saints, ascended up before God out 
of the angel’s hand. 





“is the only Altar which appears in the 
heavenly Temple.” 

The Altar, notes Bossuet (cf. onch. vi. 9), is 
Christ ; and it is to this the Angel brings, as if 
they were incense, the prayers which Christ 
alone can receive. 
Bossuet derives a proof of the intercession of 
Angels. 


having a golden censer;| The material is of 
gold (see Ex. xxvii. 3) as in the descriptions 
of heaven throughout the Apocalypse—cf. ch. 
iv. 4; v. 8; xv. 6, 7,&c. Onthe word rendered 
“censer,” see note C at the end of this chap- 
ter: its use in ver. 5 fixes its meaning here; 
it bore the fire, and upon the fire was placed 
the incense—see Num. xvi. 6, 7. 


and there was given unto him| I.e., as 
just explained, given to him by the ministering 
Angel who corresponded to the priest at 
the Altar of incense. This Angel held the 
golden cup or vial containing frankincense, 
and poured it upon the fire in the censer— 
as obviously required by the parallel of the 
Temple service. Elliott is clearly wrong 
in stating that it was given to Christ, as ‘the 
One Mediator” and High Priest, by the saints, 
“the 144,000, the sealed ones,” who offered 
the prayers ;—for the incense is distinctly 
marked as being different from the prayers of 
which it is the symbol. 


much incense,| See Note A on ch. v. 8. 


that he should add it to the prayers of 
all the saints] (Asinmargin. Gr. “give” 
—see vv. //.; compare ch. iii. 9). J.e., that he 
should incense the prayers of the saints —see 
ver. 4. Incense is not here, as in ch. v. 8, the 
type of prayer; but typically bears up the 
prayers to “ Him that sitteth on the throne.” 
“ The dative here,” notes Words., “ is a dativus 
commodi ; the incense was given fo the prayers, 
and made them fleasing to God. Cf. Winer, 
§ 31,5. 193:’—see Num. xvi. 46, 47. Simi- 
larly Calov., Vitr., Ewald, De Wette, Ebrard, 
Diisterd., Alf., Burger. From this follows 
the statement of ver. 4. Grotius ventures to 
change the dative into an accus., and renders: 
“ Accepit multos suffitus, ut eos suffitus, qui 
sunt omnium sanctorum preces, injiceret in 
altare.” 


upon the golden altar which was before the 
throne.| I.e., the Altar of incense, as already 
stated, which is not to be confounded with the 
Altar of burnt offering at the beginning of 
the verse. The Altar of incense stood before 
the Veil which separated the Holy place from 


REVELATION. VIII. 


From this interpretation’ 


[v. #5 


5 And the angel took the cen- 
ser, and filled it with fire of the 


-altar, and cast it into the earth: 


and there were voices, and thunder- 


the Holy of Holies; and now, in place of the 
Ark of the Covenant, we contemplate the 
throne of God. Cf. Heb. ix. 3, 4. 


4. And the smoke of the incense, with the 
prayers of the saints,| (Omit “ which came”). 
Or for the prayers, The Angel offers up 
the incense which had been given to him, so 
that it may mingle with the prayers (see ver. 3) 
addressed to God—e.g. ch. vi. ro. Ebrard. 
and Hengst. explain, “the smoke of the in- 
cense added to, or given to, or belonging to 
the prayers of the saints went up” &c.—the 
dative, like the Hebrew ? (Gen. ix. 5; Deut. 
i. 3; 2 Sam. iii. 2; LXX.), being equivalent 
to a genitive. Disterd. renders,“the smoke 
of the incense went up to the prayers” 
—cf. Winer (§ 31. 6). Reuss thus interprets 
the image: “Cette fumée est en quelque 
sorte le véhicule pour les priéres.” 

went up before God out of the angel's 
hand.| Cf. Ps. cxli. 2; Acts x. 4. The 
thought in vv. 3-5 is that God will hear the 
prayers of His afflicted Church. Hengst. 
infers from this that the exposition is erron- 
eous which sees in the Trumpet-Visions 
either the persecutions of the Church, or 
heresies ; those events only being intended 
which are “salutary to the Church, destruc- 
tive to the world.” 


5. And the angel taketh the censer;| Hav~ 
ing used it as described in ver. 3, and having 
poured out its contents on the Altar, the 
Angel again takes the censer, while the smoke 
is ascending. 

Note the perfect among the aorists, either 
in the sense of “the narrative aorist ;” or, 
retaining its force, “hath taken ”—see on 
ch. v. 7. 

and he filled it} Note the aorist. 


with the fire of the altar,| I.e., the Altar 
of burnt-offering, to which he now returns 
—not the Go/den Altar of incense: see on ver. 
3. Diisterd. and Words., as before, undere 
stand, in a general sense, the “fire of the 
Altar which had consumed the incense.” 

and cast it into the earth:| Or upon—the 
prep.iseis. “It”—i.e., the fire thus taken from 
the Altar of burnt offering, the Altar of ch. vi. 9. 

This symbolical act typifies the answer 
to the prayers which had ascended with the 
incense. Cf. the similar action, preceding 
judgments, in Ezek. x. 2, a well as our 
Lord’s words: “I came to cast fire on the 
earth ”—Luke xil. 49. As regards the prep. 
(eis) here and in ver. 7, see on ch. xvi. 1, 2 





v. 6—7.] 
ings, and lightnings, and an earth- 
quake. 

6 And the seven angels which 


REVELATION. VIII. 


had the seven trumpets prepared 
themselves to sound. 
7 The first angel- sounded, and 





and there followed thunders, and 
voices, and lightnings, and an earthquake.| 
Gr. there came to pass. See vv. /l. 

The outbreak of Divine judgments is always 
thus introduced —see ch. iv. 5; xi. 19; 
xvi. 18, in which passages the order is “ light= 
nings and voices and thunders.” Such judg- 
ments are here represented as consequent 
on the prayers “of all the saints” (ver. 3): 
see on ch. vi. to. When the priest had 
offered the incense in the Temple service, 
and had come out and blessed the people, 
the Levites burst forth into song accom- 
panied by the full swell of the Temple 
music, the sound of which say the Rabbins 
could be heard as far as Jericho (Mishna, 
Tamid, iii. 8):asee Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, 
art. Incense, where a reference is suggested 
to this verse. 

Mr. Maurice notes that ver. 2 recalls the 
ministry of the Priests before Jericho; and 
that vv. 3-5 recall the ministry of the Priests 
in the Tabernacle: “‘ And now the Holy City 
is to be judged ” (p. 140). 


THE SEVEN TRUMPETS (6—xi. 19). 


6. This verse resumes, and corresponds to 
ver. 2. In the Trumpet-judgments, as subse- 
quently in the Vials (ch. xvi.), we are re- 
minded of the plagues of Egypt. The first 
Trumpet reminds us of the seventh plague, of 
hail, Ex. ix. 24 ;—the second, of the frst plague, 
“the waters turned to blood,” Ex. vii. 19, 20 ; 
—the fourth, ofthe inth plague, of darkness, 
Ex. x. 21 ;—and the fifth, of the eighth plague, 
of locusts, Ex. xy. 12. This similarity was 
pointed out by St. Ireneus (Adv. Her. iv. 30, 
4, P. 268), who notices how the departure of 
Israel from Egypt was the type of the coming 
forth of the Church from among the Gentiles. 
This idea is the foundation of the imagery 
here—so far as it exhibits the judgments 
to come on the oppressors, in all times, of the 
people of God. What the prophet had said 
of the literal Israel, the Evangelist applied to 
Christ—what Hosea (xi.), had spoken of the 
Body, St. Matthew (ii. 15) refers to the Head : 
and now St. John employs the judgments on 
the Egyptian oppressor to symbolize the 
judgments denounced on the enemies of 
Christ’s Body—the Church— during the whole 
period of her future conflict with the world. 
That the application is purely figurative is 
indicated by tl.e indefiniteness of the selec- 
tion, neither the number nor the order of the 
plagues of Egypt being observed. “ When 
the Apocalypse was written,’ notes Bishop 





Wordsworth, “the Church of Christ was 
persecuted by the power of this world—the 
power of heathen Rome. ... . The Church 
of Christ was then in Egypt; the Czsars 
were her Pharaohs.” We are also to ob- 
serve that the Trumpet-judgments—them- 
selves more intense than the Seals (cf 
“the fourth part,” ch. vi. 8)—return with in- 
creased intensity inthe Vials. Here, only “the 
third part” of men (ch. ix. 18), of the earth, 
of the sea, of the luminaries of heaven, is 
subject to the plagues;—in the Vials, the 
whole Creation. There is no mention now 
of the guilt or the innocence of the sufferers 
(except, perhaps, in ch. ix. 20); in the Vials, 
the plagues are judgments on the ungodly : 
see ch. xvi. 2, 5-7, 9-II, 21. 

So much as to the Vision which follows. 
On its relation to the Vision which precedes, 
Todd (/.c., p. 127) writes: “ A great number, 
perhaps a majority of commentators, ancient 
and modern, admit the principle that the 
Trumpets are a recapitulation of the Seals ;” 
and he describes the Seals and the Trumpets 
as “the two great parallel Visions of the 
Apocalypse” (z5.p.225). Ebrard considers that, 
like the first four Seals, the first four Trum- 
pets relate to a series of judgments inflicted 
generally on the ungodly, but that single 
events are represented by the last three; and, 
assuming (s. 311) that a relation subsists 
between “ the five months ” of ch. ix. 5, and 
the 32 “‘ times” or “ days” of ch, xii. 14 (see 


on ch. vii. 3), he places all the six Trumpets _ 


before the time of the sealing of converted 
Israel. 

Diisterdieck, who makes the Trumpets 
to follow the opening of the seventh Seal, 
observes: “The half-hour’s silence in heaven 
is now at an end; after the fire—the import 
of which is manifested by the threatening 
signs that immediately follow (ver. 5)—has 
been cast upon the earth, the Trumpets 
sound ” (s. 304). 


And the seven angels which had the seven 
trumpets| See ver. 2. Vitr. and Hengst. 
compare Josh. vi. 4, and the fall of Jericho. 
“The Jast trump” (1 Cor. xv. 52) suggests the 
idea of successive Trumpets. For the imagery 
here, cf. Joel ii. 1, 15 :—the Trumpet had 
been wont to sound in Zion only for religious 
uses (Num. x.; xxxi. 6; 1 Chron. xv. 24), 
but Joel announces that in Zion itself, the 
“holy mountain of God,” the trumpet was 
to be used for sounds of alarm and fear—cf. 
Jer.iv. 5; Ezek. xxxiii. 1-6; see note A atthe 
end of this chapter. “ The judgments pre- 


599 


600 


there followed hail and fire mingled 
with blood, and they were cast upon 
the earth: and the third part of trees 





dicted by Joel represent all judgments unto 
the end.”—Pusey, in Joc. 


prepared themselves to sound.| The signal 
had been given by the presenting of the incense 
on the Altar, and the casting of the fire to the 
earth. In a similar manner at ch. ix. 14 the 
loosing of the Angels follows the voice from 
the Altar. 

The Trumpet-Visions are divided into the 
two distinct groups of the first four (ch. vili.), 
and of the last three or ‘“ Woe-Trumpets ” 
(ch. ix. 12; ch. xi. 14). Under the first four 
inanimate nature suffers; in the last three the 
judgments fall on men. See Note A on 
ch. ix. 14. 


THE First TRUMPET (7). 


7. And the first sounded,| (The A.V. 
omits the first And). In the case of this 
Trumpet alone is the word “ Angel” omitted— 
see vv. //. ; in the Vision of the Vials (ch. xvi.) 
it is omitted throughout. Except in the case of 
the sixth Trumpet (ch. ix. 13-15), where the 
Angel is commanded to act, the Angels merely 
announce the coming judgments. In the first 
four Trumpets, as at ch. xiv. 7; xvi. 2-8, the 
visible Creation is represented by its four 
chief civisions—the dry land, the sea, the 
rivers, the luminaries of heaven: see on 
ch. vii. 3. - 

Note the allusions, under the Trumpets 
pe Vials, to the description of Creation in 

en. i. 


and there followed hail and fire, mingled 
with blood,| (See vv. /l.). Cf. the note 
on ver. 5:—the participle “ mingled,” in the 
neuter plural, refers to both “ sail” and “fire.” 
Diisterd. explains that the hailstones and balls 
of fire descended in a shower of blood ;—others 
understand lightning and hail ;—“/ood” is not 
mentioned in Ex. ix. 24, and some take it to 
imply here the destruction of life. The 
connexion of fire with blood recalls the 
imagery of Joel ii. 30, which, as St. Peter 
(Acts ii. 16) declared, began to be ful- 
filled at the Day of Pentecost. The mention 
of “ail” connects this Trumpet with the 
plagues of Egypt ; and suggests the deliverance 
of Israel from bondage, which symbolizes the 
calling of the Church of Christ from the 
world :—see on ver. 6. And thus the Trumpet- 
Visions open, somewhat after the manner of 
the Seal-Visions, with the rise of Christianity 
and its progress amid trials and sufferings. 


and they were cast into the earth:] Or 
wpon,—as in ver.5. Or “it was cast,” i.e., 


REVELATION. VIII. 


[v. &° 


was burnt up, and all green grass was 
burnt up. 
8 And the second angel sounded, 


the fire (but see the gender, ~euter plural, af 
the participle). 

The “earth,” notes Vitringa, signifies in 
the Apocalypse the Roman Empire; the 
“sea” the barbarous races, as in ch. xii. 12. 


and the third part of the earth was 
burnt up,] This addition to the Textus Re- 
ceptus appears in all the uncial MSS. The 
sense seems to be that all in this third 
part is burnt up, except the classes of 
animals and plants afterwards specified. 
The preportion a “ third part” occurs 
throughout most of this Vision—in the first 
four Trumpets (vv. 7-12), and in the sixth 
(ch. ix. 15, 18): it also occurs in ch. xii. 4 
(cf. Ezek. v. 2, 12; Zech. xiii. 8, 9). 

The judgments increase in intensity. Un- 
der the fourth Seal (ch. vi. 8) the fourth 
part of the earth is afflicted; here the third 
part; under the Vials (ch. xvi.) a// Creation. 
Further: as in the sixth Seal (ch. vi. 12-16) 
—which represents the fulfilment of our 
Lord’s prediction in Matt. xxiv. 29, 30, and 
which brings us to the very eve of the final 
catastrophe—the judgment is universal, on 
all Creation; and as the third part denotes 
but a partial fulfilment, it results that the 
first four Trumpets precede the sixth Sail. 

Among commentators, Words. takes the 
“ third part” to denote simply “a large part.” 
Mede (p. 459) understands St. John as com- 
paring the Roman Empire to the Universe 
whose parts are earth, sea, rivers, sky, stars— 
the Seer denoting by “ the third part” of the 
earth. &c.. wherever the phrase occurs, the 
extent of the Empire which embraced the 
third part of the known world (see on ch. xii. 
4): “the third part,” he adds, is always taken 
“partitive” (p. 474),—see on ch. ix, 18. 
According to Elliott, the Empire under Con- 
stantine was divided into three parts; and 
the “third part” in the first four Trumpets 
refers to the Western division, the Eastern 
and the Illyrian (or central) divisions being 
as yet spared:—see Note A at the end of 
ch. ix. 


and the third part of the trees was burnt 
up,| I.e., all on that third part; or, it ma 
be, the third part of the trees on the who 
earth, as in ch. ix. 15. The destruction is 
caused by the fire, not, as in Ex. ix. 25, by the 
hail. 


all green grass| I.e.,on the whole earth. 


Vitr. explains, “all the grass of the third part 
of the earth ”—cf. vv. 10,12. The general 
import of the desolation under the first 
Trumpet, Bossuet observes, “ is vividly repre= 


¥. 9.) 


and as it were a great mountain burn- 
ing with fire was cast into the sea: 
and the third part of the sea became 
blood ; 


sented by the comparison of a beautiful and 
rich country which is laid waste by hail.” 
Many commentators of very different classes 
see in this Trumpet the judgment of war: 
e.g. I. Williams (“ The first Trumpet is the 
fall of the blood-polluted Jerusalem”) ;—Bengel 
(Thewars of Trajan and Hadrian);— W etstein, 
Herder (“Arma civilia”) ;—Hengst. (“‘ The 
scourge of war so far as it respects the oppo- 
sition of the heathen world to Christ ”) ;— 
Words., Elliott (The Gothic invasion of Cent. 
iv.— “this Trumpet is like a retributive 
sequel to the second Seal”). Vitringa un- 
derstands the pestilence and famine under 
Decius and Gallus;—Stern refers to the 
early heresies, and the persecutions in which 
bishops and priests (“the third part of the 
trees”), and all believers (“ all green grass”) 
suffered ;—Ebrard considers that the spiritual 
famine is signified, which those countries 
endure where the light of the Reformation 
has not been diffused (s. 582). 

As to the symbolism itself :—By the frees, 
notes Hengst., are denoted the high and 
mighty, according to the established ima- 
gery of the Old Test.; the grass indicates 
the people (Isai. xl. 6, 7); trees and grass 
occur in ch. ix. 4, as a designation of princes 
and subjects: see Introd., § 10, (b). Words. 
sees here “the princely Oaks and tall Cedars 
of the proud dynasty” of the heathen Empire 
whose pomp and glory like “green grass” is 
to be scorched by the Sun. However we 
interpret, it is to be noted that in the first 
Vial (ch. xvi. 2) it is men who are smitten, not 
the grass and trees. 

Renan, with other rationalists, refers to 
the fearful storms of the years 63, 68,and 69: 
—vis fulgurum non alias crebrior,” writes 
Tacitus (Ana. xv. 47; Hist. i. 3, 18). 


THE SECOND TRUMPET (8-9). 


8. And the second angel sounded,| See on 
ver. 7. 

and as it were a great mountain] Inthe 
Old Test. a mountain is the type of a great 
kingdom —Zech. iv. 7; cf. Dan. ii. 35; Jer. 
li. 25. The words “as it were” denote that 
a literal mountain is not meant :—compare the 
symbolical action in ch. xviii. 21, which rests 
on Jer. li. 63. The healing and life-diffusing 
stream of Ezek. xlvii. 8, 9, which is the source 
of the image here, forms the contrast to 
the burning and death-bringing mountain 
(Hengst.). 

qwas cast into the sea:] Compare ch. vi. 14: 


REVELATION. VIII. 


g And the third part of the crea- 
tures which were in the sea, and had 
life, died ; and the third part of the 
ships were destroyed. 


see also Ps. xlvi. 2; Matt. xxi. 21. The 
image is that of a volcano, “a burnt moine 
tain” (Jer. li. 25). Referring to St. John’s 
position in Patmos, Dean Stanley (see Introd., 
§ 4) writes: “The extraordinary aspect of 
Thera (the modern Santorin), even when its 
volcanic fires were dormant, may well have fur- 
nished this image,”—/.c., p. 230. The results 
which now follow also signify that this de- 
scription is figurative. Some, however (e.g. 
Stuart, Diisterd.), understand the natural 
result of a meteor cast down from heaven, 
which now causes putrescence in the sea. 

and the third part of the sea became blood ;| 
Cf. the first plague of Egypt, Ex. vii. 19, &c., 
which is the original of this description; 
although, as Stuart observes, “the image of 
the burning mountain is new, and appropriate 
to John.” Several applications of the pro- 
phecy are founded on this idea. The vol- 
canic mountain, withering with its lava all 
around, is Imperial Rome uprooted by the 
barbarians—its solid mass dissolved into a 
swelling sea agitated by the winds and waves 
of revolutions. So Bengel, who notes that 
from Patmos Europe appeared to St. John ens 
compassed by the “ sea ” ;—thus, too, Words, 
and others. The sea, according to Hengst., 
symbolizes the world and the nations (ch. 
xili. I; xvii. 15); and, combined with the 
burning mountain, denotes that an apostate 
world—not exclusively the Roman Empire 
—shall be punished by war and conquest. 
According to I. Williams, the “ mountain” 
is the Church of Christ “ cast into the sea ” 
of the nations (Matt. xxi. 21) by the prayer 
of faith, amidst the conflagrations of Jeru- 
salem. Accordingly the Angel of the Cove- 
nant in ch. x. 2, 5 “stands on the earth and the 
Sea,” intimating that Christ’s kingdom is estab- 
lished, embracing both Jew and Gentile 
(p. 146). 

9. and there died the third part of 
the creatures which were in the sea,] 
This may mean the third part of the creatures 
in all the whole extent of the seas; or perhaps, 
all in that third part which this Trumpet 
affects—death following naturally, as in Ex. 
Vii. 21 (See on ver. 7). 

[even] they that 4ad iife;] Gr. “ bad 
souls”—viz. “the living creatures”: cf. ch. 
xvi. 3; Gen. i. 30 (the nom., in irregular ap- 
position, refers to “creatures” in the gen 
plur.; cf. ch. ii. 20; iii. 12). From the mention 
of the earth, the sea the trees in ch. vii. 3, Alf 
infers that the piace of the first two Trumpet- 


601 


602 


10 And the third angel sounded, 
and there fell a great star from 
heaven, burning as it were a lamp, 
and it fell upon the third part of the 


REVELATION. VIII. 


[v. 1o—a4, 


rivers, and upon the fountains of 


waters ; 


11 And the name of the star is 
called Wormwood: and the third- 





plagues “must be sought after that sealing: ” 
but this assumes that the “ Sealing” is one 
act, once for all performed—see on ch. vii. 3. 

Writers usually allegorize here, and see in 
this Trumpet the signal of war:—e.g. Grotius, 
Vitringa, Bengel, Stern. In like manner 
Hengst. interprets, by the light of Matt. xxiv 
7, all the Trumpet-Visions except the last 
as signifying war. He understands the sea to 
mean “ the sea of the world,” in the sense of 
ch. xvii. 15—the death of the living creatures 
in it signifying the death of men, and the 
ships symbolizing communities in towns and 
villages. Words. (see on ver. 8) writes :— 
“They, who, amid the judgments that came 
upon Rome, clung to their mere animal life 
(Wux7), died in body and soul.” 

and the third part of the ships was des- 
troyed.| By the destruction of “ ships” Words. 
understands the destruction of the instru- 
ments of commerce and luxury (cf. Isai. 
ii. 16)—referring here to Alaric’s attack on the 
Roman arsenal at Ostia; see Gibbon, ch. xxxi. 
Similarly, Elliott refers to the destruction’ of 
the navies of Rome by the Vandals. The 
“ Iiving creatures,” notes Stern, are men living 
in the sea of this world :—“ the s4ips” mean 
primarily, little states, which, together with 
the fiery power of the Roman Empire, are 
engulphed in the “sea” of the nations; and 
secondarily, Christian churches, ruined by 
the Arian heresy, inasmuch as the entire 
Church is typified by a s4ip (Luke v. 1-10). 


THE THIRD TRUMPET (10-11). 


10. and there fell from heaven a great 
star, burning as atorceh,] (On the word 
“torph” cf. ch. iv. 5; John xviii. 3). Le, 
falling as a meteor which falls as it shines, 
and only shines in falling: see on ch. ix. 1. 
A Star, in the Apoc., is the symbol of a ruler 
—see ch. i. 20; vi. 13; &c. The Star does 
not appear in the third Vial (ch. xvi. 4) :— 
no Star alleviates that darkness. “It is ‘ the 
Star’ of the Apocalypse, the Angel of the 
Church falling from Christ’s hand or keep- 
ing ;—the corruption of Divine truth ;—heresy 
turning the waters of Baptism into the 
‘wormwood’ of death” (I. Williams). And 
so Words. explains: “A luminary of the 
Ghureh): sess: A fallen Star is emblematic 
of a false teacher ;’—and he refers to the 
temporal results seen “in the fury of the 
Asiatic Monophysites, of the African Circum- 
cellions, of the Arian Vandals under Genseric, 
A.D. 417.” “In the Seals,” he observes, 


“heresy is represented as a trial of the 
Church and as a severe suffering to be 
endured by her (ch. vi. 5,6). In the Trum- 
pets, heresy is treated as a judgment inflicted 
on men for sin, and brought upon them by 
themselves.” 


and it fell upon the third part of the rivers,] 
Elliott sees in this Trumpet Attila, “the 
scourge of God” (A.D. 450), during whose 
invasion “all the river and fountain waters of 
the Western Empire (‘the third part of the 
waters’) became, as it were, deadly as worms 
wood.” Renan, unable to find a literal event 
of the time corresponding to this Vision, re- 
fers to the foolish popular tales (“inepties ”) 
with which Tacitus fills his pages—/. c., 
p- 395. Alford mentions, “as an illustration,” 
“the deadly effect of strong spirituous drinks.” 
See Note A at the end of chapter ix. 


and upon the fountains of the waters ;] Ver. 
11 seems to imply the third part of the foun- 
tains; but cf. “ all green grass,” ver. 7, and 
see ver. 12. ‘‘ The fire with which the great 
Star burns is the fire of wrath, war, and 
plunder ” (Hengst.). 

Under the second and third Trumpets, as 
under the second and third Vials (ch. xvi.), 
“ the sea,” and “ the rivers and the fountains of 
the waters” are included under what are 
described generally in the narrative of the 
second and third Days of Creation as “ the 
waters under the heaven.” These waters are 
defined by a common name, “ Seas,” in Gen. 
i. to. One symbol is thus presented here 
under fawo aspects; and the distinction be- 
tween these two aspects consists in the dis- 
tinction between the judgments signified. In 
the one case the living “ creatures which were 
in the sea;” in the other “ sen” perish :—see 
VU. 9, II. 


ll. Wormwood:| The Artemisia absinthium 
of botanists—of frequent use as a medicine 
among the ancients, see Pliny, H. N., xxvii. 
28 (Heb. may, /aandh; LXX. mexpia, xodn, 
dvvn, avayxn. In Prov. v. 4, Aquila renders by 
ayivétov). “ The Orientals typified sorrows, 
cruelties, and calamities of any kind by plants 
of a poisonous or bitter nature... . Kitto 
(Phys. Hist. of Palestine, 215) enumerates 
four kinds of wormwood as found in Pales- 
tine— Artemisia nilotica, A. Judaica, A. fruti- 
cosa, and A. cinerea... . The Hebrew /aanah 
is doubtless generic.”—Smith’s Duct. of the 
Bible. The word is used metaphorically in 
the Old Test.—in Deut. xxix. 18, of the 
idolatry of Israel; in Jer. ix. 15; xxiii. 15; 


v. 12.] 


part of the waters became wormwood ; 
and many men died of the waters, 
because they were made bitter. 

12 And the fourth angel sounded, 


Lam. iii. 15, 19, of calamity and sorrow; in 
Amos v. 7, unrighteous judges “turn judg- 
ment to wormwood.” (The gender, usually 
fem., is here assimilated to that of 6 aornp, 
see vv. //.) 

and the third part of the waters] See vv. 
W.:—the Textus Receptus omits “of the 
waters.” 

became wormwood;| I.e., bitter as worm- 
wood. The name, describing the nature of 
the Star, declares (as the name “ Death” in 
ch. vi. 8) its effect, viz. causing ditterness— 
cf. Heb. xii. 15. 

and many men| See vv. il. Gr.“many of 
the men,” or, “of mankind”—a phrase 
found only here: cf. ch. ix. 20. 

died of the waters,| The prep. (éx) denoting 
qhence the result proceeded,—“ by reason 
of,” see ver. 13; ch. ix. 2; Xvi. Io, II. 

In these judgments, as in the Seals, blow 
follows blow. In this case, men; under the 
previous Trumpet, the creatures which were 
in the sea, perish. 

because they were made bitter.| It is plainly 
irrelevant to discuss whether wormwood is, 
in its nature, a deadly poison or not: it 
denotes here, as in the Old Test., a noxious 
influence. The application to the history of 
heresy “which corrupts and embitters the 
pure springs of Scripture—the fountains of 
truth ” (Lightfoot, Stern), is usual: see above. 
The contrast also which this plague presents 
to the sweetening the waters of Marah, Ex. 
XV. 23-25 (cf. 2 Kings il. 19-21), is often dwelt 
upon. 


THE FouRTH TRUMPET (12). 


12. And the fourth angel sounded,| This 
Trumpet corresponds to the ninth Egyptian 
plague of “darkness,” Ex. x. 21; and we 
pass from visitations upon the elements of 
earth, to judgments in the firmament of 
eaven. 

and the third part of the stars; that the 
third part of them should be darkened, and 
the day should not shine] Or, if the 
verb is accentuated as a passive, “should 
not appear”—see wv. //.; and cf. ch. xviii. 
23. 

for the third part of it,| I. e., during the 
third part of the day there was to be total 
darkness — cf. ch. vi. 12; Matt. xxiv. 29. 
Here we have one of the many proofs of the 
Frinciple of “ Recapitulation” : this Trumpet 


REVELATION. VIII. 


and the third part of the sun was 
smitten, and the third part of the 
moon, and the third part of the 
stars; so as the third part of them 


is clearly not subsequent to the sixth Seal, 
when the whole ‘sun became black as sacke 
cloth ”—see on ver. 7. 

Bengel, Ziillig, Stuart explain that the 
luminaries being shorn of one third part of 
their brightness, a sombre gloom would be 
diffused over the earth. 


and the night in like manner.] Te., 
either perfect darkness during a third part 
of the night; or the partial darkness arising 
from the third part of the moon and stars 
having been obscured. Hengst., as before, 
thinks that war is meant, the darkness import- 
ing trouble and distress ;—and so symbolical 
interpreters generally, according to whom 
this Trumpet denotes the confusion of nations 
or the obscuring of spiritual truth. Thus: 
the sun, writes I. Williams (p. 292), is the 
symbol of our Lord in the Incarnation; 
its being smitten here is the withdrawal of 
Christ’s light in the spiritual darkness which 
preceded Mohammedanism; after heresy 
follows infidelity; yet the faith is but par- 
tially eclipsed—the sun, the moon, and the 
stars are not fallen, they are still in heaven. 
Similarly Stern, who adds to the rise of 
Mohammedanism, the separation of the Eas- 
tern and Western Churches. 

In the exposition of the first four Trumpets 
we meet with illustrations of the various 
schools of interpreters :— 

I. The judgments are /itera/—affecting, 
like the plagues of Egypt, inanimate nature. 
(a) Preterists,” and Rationalists refer al! to the 
times before the Apocalypse was written: e.g. 
Renan (p. 395), refers the fourth Trumpet 
either to the numerous eclipses about A.D. 68 
(Tac., Ann., xv. 47; Hist., i. 86), or to the re- 
markable storm of January 10, A.D. 69 (Tac., 
Hist.,i. 18; Plut., Galba, 23). (6) “ Futurists,” 
such as Todd and De Burgh also regard 
these judgments as /itera/ visitations which 
are “to usher in the great tribulation of the 
latter times;” and so Bisping and Burger. 
Bleek only differs by understanding a general 
poetical description, borrowed from the Old 
Test., of great natural convulsions to be con- 
nected with or to precede the Lord’s Coming. 

II. The judgments are symbolical—they 
refer to the history of the Church: and (a) to 
the 4eresies which opposed her teaching. 
Thus De Lyra sees in these four Trumpets the 
heresies of Arius, Macedonius, Pelagius, Euty- 
ches;—Luther sees here Tatian, Marcion, 
Origen, Novatus. (4) Again on the “His- 
torical” system Mede explains the four by 


603 


604 


was darkened, and the day shone not 
for a third part of it, and the night 
likewise. 


13 And I beheld, and heard an 
angel flying through the midst of 


the events of the Empire from Theodosius 
the ( reat (A.D 395) to the humiliation of 
Rome py the Exarchate. (c) Vitringa com- 
bines (a) and (4) interpreting the first Trumpet 
of the wars of Alexander Severus; the second, 
of the Gothic invasion ; the third, of Arianism ; 
the fourth, of the overthrow of the Roman 
Empire—see also Note A at end of ch. ix. 
III. Diisterdieck, who rejects the sym- 
bolical interpretation, considers that as Matt. 
xxiv. 6-8 is related to ver. 20, so are the 
Seals to the first four Trumpets which, fol- 
lowing the sixth Seal, announce new tokens 
of the coming end :—see, however on ver. 7. 


THE THREE WOES (13-ch. xi. 14). 


18. This verse introduces the last three 
of these judgments, or the Three Woe- 
Trumpets :— 


And I saw, and I heard an eagle,| See 
wv. il. Gr. “one eagle ”—cf. ch. xviil. 21; 
xix. 17 (on the indefinite sense of the nu- 
meral, see Winer, s. 106). Some suggest “a 
sin gle” or “solitary eagle.” St. John be- 
holds in his Vision a literal eagle (cf. the Altar 
which speaks, ch. xvi. 7), whose cry as it flies 
on its prey (cf. Hab. i. 8) is here employed to 
announce the coming Woes: this considera- 
tion renders not unsuitable Ebrard’s reference 
to Matt. xxiv. 28. Ebrard sees in “ the great 
eagle” of ch. xii. 14, and the flight to the 
wilderness there described, a reference to this 
place : he also suggests that the reading of the 
A. V., “an Angel,” has arisen from a tran- 
scriber’s “ correction” of the text here, in 
imitation of ch. xiv. 6. Herder understands 
the eagle of the Roman Legions ;—Hofmann 
thinks that the resemblance between the 
Greek term for “ woe” (ovai) and the scream 
of an eagle suggested this symbol to St. John ; 
—Hengst. that the Eagk is named here in 
contrast to the Dove in John i. 32;—Stern, 
Stuart, De Wette explain by an Angel in the 
form of an eagle ;—De Lyra, and I. Williams 
see St. John himself;—Zeger, St. Paul ;— 
Words. writes: “One eagle. This oneness marks 
a special messenger . . . probably Christ Him- 
self, who is called ‘the great eagle, ch. xii. 
14, cf. Deut. xxxii. 11, 12.” Victorinus 
reads “an Angel,” whom he takes to mean 
the Holy Ghost speaking by St. John, as he 
had spoken by Malachi (iv. 5) of Elijah (see 
on ch. vii. 2);—Elliott (as Joachim formerly) 
takes the “ Angel” to be Pope Gregory the 


REVELATION. VIIL 


lv. 13. 


heaven, saying with a loud voice, 
Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of 
the earth by reason of the other voices 
of the trumpet of the three angels, 
which are yet to sound ! 


Great protesting against the title “‘ Universal 
Bishop ;”—Ziillig also rejects the authority of 
MSS. and of Versions, and maintains the read- 
ing “an Angel” whose successor is the Angel 
of ch. x. 1. 

Jying in mid-heaven,] “The meridian,” 
found in the N. T. only here and in ch. xiv. 
6; xix. 17:—clear as the sun at noon, and 
visible to all. From ch, xix. 17 Ziillig argues 
that the space midway between the earth and 
the concave of the sky is meant. 

Saying with a great voice,| Three judg- 
ments more awful still—those of the three 
Woe-Trumpets—are now announced: see 
eh. ix) 025) xis 245 

Woe, woe, ume, for them that dwell on 
the earth,| (See vv. /l. :—ovai is also followed 
by the accusative in ch. xii. 12). Woe for 
the ungodly world as distinguished from 
the Church: see on ch. iii. 10; vi. 10; and 
Words. concludes that, however terrible the 
remaining judgments may be, the Church, 
“who is not of the earth,” is here assured 
of the Divine protection—cf. Ps. xci. 4. On 
the other hand, Mede (p. 466) explains that 
the Christian inhabitants of the Roman world 
had given themselves over to idolatry while the 
first four Trumpets were sounding ; and that 
this sin, added to the previous slaughter of 
the martyrs, now draws down a more grievous 
punishment in the remaining Trumpets: thi 
punishment of idolatry he infers from ch. ix. 
20. So too, in effect, Elliott. 

by reason of the other voices] For the 
prep., see on ver. II. 

of the trumpet] Bengel takes the singular 
distributively ;—Diisterd. explains that one idea 
is common to the voices, viz. that each pro- 
ceeds from a Trumpet. 


of the three angels who are yet to sound.]| 
As three Trumpets remain, each is named 
“@qQ Woe”—see ch. ix. 12; xi. 14. What 
follows will indicate, observes Bossuet, that 
the Seven Vials are connected by the “ Three 
Woes” with the Trumpets, as the Seven 
Trumpets are connected with the Seals. A 
terrible cry, ringing through the air, de- 
nouncing calamity, is signified by the “Woes,” 
as in Ezek. ii. 10. 

Bengel’s interpretation is that the “ Woes” 
extend over the earth from Persia to Italy and 
the West. In this space lies Patmos, whence 
St. John beholds the Eagle. The “ Woes” are 
not found in the first four Trumpets, nor in 


REVELATION. VIIL 


the Seven Epistles, nor in the Seals, nor in 
the Vials. The frst “ Woe” is contained in 
ch. ix. r-:1; the second in ch. ix. 13-21; the 
third(touched on but not described in ch. xi. 18) 
is unfolded in ch. xiii., having been previously 
indicated in ch. xii. 12, “ Woe to the earth and 
sea” —words added to the announcements of 
the first and second “ Woes.” 

In the remarks on ver. 6 the symbolical 
character of the first four Trumpets has been 
indicated ; as well as the relation of the judg- 
Ments announced by them to the never- 
ceasing conflict of the Church with the world. 
On the principle of “ Recapitulation” the 
Trumpets follow. from the very first, a course 


parallel to the Seals; and, while they set 
forth calamities more intense than the Seals, 
they are themselves succeeded by a class of 
judgments still more intense represented by 
the Vials. The three Trumpets also which re= 
main present to the Seer, in the three “ Woes,” 
judgments far more formidable than any which 
had gone before. 

The first four Trumpets announce plagues 
inflicted immediately by Divine power; the 
remaining three—at least the fifth and sixth 
—are inflicted by the agency 2f the Spirits of 
the Abyss: for the seventh, see Bengel above. 
The first four Trumpets precede the sixth 
Seal: see on vv. 7, 12. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Chap. VIII. 


NoTE A ON VER. 1—THE SILENCE IN 
HEAVEN. 


Many interpretations have been given of the 
“ silence in beaven:”—The “ Silence” is “the 
type of the patience of the saints, a symbol 
of the Church’s peace [on earth] when her 
triumph is assured” (Vitr.) ;—“a transition 
merely to new events” (Ziilfig, who com- 
pares Ex. xiv. 13) ;—the “silence in heaven,” 
according to Hengst., “in reality belongs to 
the earth ;’—in like manner N. de Lyra sees 
here a prediction of the decree of the Em- 
peror Julian which imposed “ silence” on the 
Christians “tam in Ecclesia quam in militia 
academia et scholis.” 

Elliott explains the 4al/f sour to mean 
the s/ort interval between the death of 
Theodosius (A.D. 395) and the rising of the 
barbarian hordes ;—Bengel too (on his chro- 
noiogical system, see Introd. § 11, (4), IV.) 
understands four common days, or rather half 
a week ;—Ebrard also compares the short 
space of three and a half days (ch. xi. 11) of 
which short space the half-hour here is the 
168th part;—and so Arethas (én /oc., ap. 
Cramer). On the other hand Vitringa takes 
the 4alf-hour to mean the Jong state of peace 
(“per /ongum temporis intervallum”) which 
the Church is to enjoy under the seventh Seal ; 
—Lange understands the Millennium. Ona 
different system, Mr. E. King (Morsels of 
Criti-ism, vol. ii. p. 79), places the sal 
dour between the seventh Seal and the first 
Trumpet as a period of “twenty-five years 
precisely, from 312 to 337; and then began 
the storm of hail.” 

Hengst. takes the “ Silence” itself to mean 
“the dumb astonishment” of the enemies of 
Christ, Matt. xxiv. 30 (cf. Hab. ii. 20; Zeph. 
i. 7; Zech. ii. 13). Diisterd. (after C. a Lap.) 
understands the expectancy of the dwellers 
ta beaven looking for the catastrophe of the 


last Seal, the “stupor ccelitum” suitable to the 
requirements “ornatus et dramatice scenz;” 
—Ebrard, who rejects the principle of “ Re- 
capitulation,” refers to ch. iv. 8, where the 
Four Living Beings, the symbol of living 
Creation, sing praise night and day; under- 
standing by this discontinuance of their song, 
the indication of some awful event approach- 
ing. Nature is about to be convulsed, and 
Creation ceases its strain of praise. 


Note B ON VER. 2—THE TRUMPET. 


The word used in Joel (Dw, s4ophar) 
is not that used in Num. x. 2 (my)y¥n) 
chatsotserah)—the straight trumpet as seen on 
the arch of Titus; the sophar, or “ cornet” 
(shawm, P. B. version of Ps. xcviii. 6 where 
both words are found), being regarded by 
many as of pastoral origin, and derived from 
“the ram’s horn” (Josh. vi. 5). So St. Jerome 
on Hos. v. 8: “ Buccina pastoralis est et 
cormu recurvo efficitur unde et proprie He- 
braice sophar, Grece xepativn appellatur.” 
On the other hand, Credner takes the chazs- 
otserah, and the shophar to be the same in- 
strument (Joe/, s. 164, &c.); see too Note A, 
on Josh. vi. 4. They are held to be different 
by Winer (Bid/. Real WWB., art. Muszk. 
Instr.). The shophar is the signal-trumpet of 
the Jubile, Lev. xxv. 9, 10; the war-trumpet 
Of jobyxxxix25'-) Jer tvs Sig Vi Er 


NOTE C ON VER. 3.— THE WORD RENDERED 
“ CENSER.” 


This term, 6 \:Saverés, is thus defined by 
Grimm (Lex. Gr. Lat. in N. T.): “ (1) apud 
profanos thus, ex tov AiBavov destillans (1 
Chr. ix. 29; Hdt, Menand., Eurip., Plat.,. 
Diod., Hdian., al.) ; (2) thuribulum (ap. pro- 
fanos 7 \:Baveris).” The word is found 
only in 1 Chron, ix. 29, where it cer/sinly 


605 


606 


means the frankincense itself; and in Rev. 
viii. 3, 5, Where the context requires the 
meaning “ censer.” On the Hebrew term, 
nn, Gesenius notes: “ Gr. AiBavos, AuBa- 
vwros) thus, Lev. ii. 1, 153 Ve 113 XXIV. 7; 
Num. v. 15; Isai. lx. 6, 4 colore albo dictus,” 
&c.:—AiBavos is used to signify “frankin- 
cense”) in ch. xviii. 13. The term Anny (LXX. 


1 «* Frankincense,” said to be so called from 
its liberal distribution of odour, the gum-resin 
olibanum, is the produce of the Boswellia thu- 
rifera, and is imported from the Levant.— 
Brande and Cox, Dict. of Sctence. 


CHAPTER IX. 


3 At the sounding of the fifth angel, a star 
falleth from heaven, to whom is given the key 
of the bottomless pit. 2 He openeth the pit, 
and there come forth locusts like scorpions. 
12 The first woe past. 13 The sixth trumpet 


[Ver. 2 [N, B omit kai jvokev. . 


REVELATION. 


IX. [v. x. 


To srupeiov), rendered “ firepans” in Ex. xxvii. 3, 
is rendered “ censers” in Ley. x. 1; Xvi. 123 
Num. iv. 14; xvi. 6, &c. These seem to 
have been shallow metal vessels, which served 
to burn small quantities of incense, or for 
other purposes (ce. g. snuff-dishes, Ex. xxv. 38, 
LXX. droBépara ; in Ex. xxxvii. 23, éra= 
pvotpis, 2.e., “a vessel for pouring liquids,” esp 
oil into a lamp). The employment of this 
utensil to carry burning embers from “the 
Brasen Altar” to the Altar of Incense seems 
to furnish “their only claim to the name of 
censers. See on Num. xvi. 6;” cf. the note 
on Ex. xxvii. 3,—and also note A on ch. v. 8. 


soundeth, 
were bound. 


AS. the fifth angel sounded, and 


14 Four angels are.let loose, that 


I saw a star fall from heaven 
unto the earth: and to him was 
given the key of the bottomless pit. 


= THs aBicoou). Ver. 4 adixnoovow.—om. jovovs.— om. 


aurév. Ver. 5 BacancOnoovra. Ver. 6 o¥ px etpnoove. —pevye. Ver. 10 [N, A read dpoiors |.— 


KevTpa, kal ev T. oup. avtav 4 €€ovcia. Ver. 
Ver. 13 om. reoodpor. 
K. els THY TLep.— 
nkovca. 
TOV immov eV.... 


paxay].] 


Cuap. IX. THE FIFTH TRUMPET (I-11). 


1. And the fifth angel] Announces the first 
W oe—see ch. viii. 13. 


a star from heaven fallen] Not falling, 
but Aaving already fallen—the part. perf. 
active ; cast down as in ch. vi. 13, not descend- 
ing voluntarily asin ch. xx. 1. This Star, like 
the Star of ch. viii. 10, belongs to the imagery 
of this Vision, and represents typically that 
what follows results from the Divine com- 
mand. 

According to Reuss, this verse presents 
the most recent trace of the antique Semitic 
mythology—see Judges v. 20. 

unto the earth:| Not upon the rivers, as in 
ch. viii. 10 :—the prep. is eis as in ch. viii. 5, 7 


and there was given to sim] Here, as 
in ch. i. 20, the personal import of the Star is 
implied. In the Old Testament conception 
of ‘‘the host of heaven,” a Star and an Angel 
are kindred ideas—Job xxxviii. 7; Ps. cili. 
20, 21, and some personal agent of the 
divine justice is evidently intended. We 
can hardly understand, with Andreas, Bengel, 


II om. Ist kat. 
Ver. T4 Aéyovra.—o Exar. 
—WN, I omit kai jyépay]. Ver. 16 trav otpar. —Sdiopupiddes.—om. kai before 
Ver. 18 ar0.—raéy tpidv mAny@v.—om. the 2nd and 3rd ék. 
éoriv, kal é€v Tais ovpais avTar 
read ovd¢,—A, P, 1 read ovre|.—npooxuvncovow. 


Ver, 12 [N, A read épxerat]. 
Ver. 15 [A, P read xai muepav,—B reads 


Ver. 19 9 yap e€ovoia 
Ver. 20 [C reads ov perev.,—®, 
ra elOwda. Ver. 21 [N, C read gap= 





Bleek, De Wette, ‘a good Angel’ (cf. ch. 
xx. 1). The analogy of Isai. xiv. 12; Luke 
x. 18 (cf. Rev. xii. 9) suggests that an evil 
angel is described—so Arethas, Beda, Vitr., 
Todd, Alf., &c. He is Satan himself accord- 
ing to Tertullian (Hermog. c. 11) ;—ac- 
cording to Words. “a Christian Teacher” 
is to be understood (ch. i. 16, 20; Vili. 10), 
representing “the heretical apostasy of some 
who were designed to be Lights in the 
Church ;”—“ Hell,” notes Bossuet, “ does not 
open itself; it is always some false teacher 
that sets it open.” De Lyra sees in the Star the 
Emperor Valens ;—Elliott sees Mohammed; 
—Volkmar, “the demon Nero.” Not content 
with the symbolical meaning of “a Star” 
(Introd. § 10, a, note”), Hengst. adds that the 
giving to him the “key” “shows that the 
appearance of the Star was intermingled with 
that of the human form.” With reference to 
the character of this “‘ Woe,” he observes that 
the absence of all individual features shows that 
this “Ruler” is no single historical personage, 
but a whole series of real persons. And so, 
regarding war as the judgment inflicted in all 
the Trumpets, Hengst. adds: ‘‘ The last great 











v. 2—3.] 


REVELATION. IX 


2 And he opened the bottomless darkened by reason of the smoke of 
pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit. 


the pit, as the smoke of a great fur- 
nace; and the sun and the air were 


3 And there came out of the 
smoke locusts upon the earth: and 





embodiment of this Star was Napoleon ; but he 
shall not remain the last.” 

It has been observed that here, as under 
the third Trumpet (ch. viii. 10), it is not said 
to be “a Star of heaven,” but that his fall is 
from thence as of one unduly exalted. 


the key| Given by Christ Who holds the 
key (ch. i. 18):—permission is now given to 
let loose the demon host. The “fey” is the 
symbol of authority—see on ch. iii. 7. 


of the pit] ‘Deep shaft” or “well” 
(péap),—cf. Luke xiv. 5; John iv. 11, 12. 


of the abyss.] An adjective of two termi- 
mations, and signifying ‘“ dottomless ”’ —in 
Scripture it is used as a fem. subst. (7) @Bvacos, 
scil. yopa), asin Rom. x. 7. It is the equivalent 
in the LXX. of the word (¢ehdm) rendered 
“the deep” in Gen. i. 2 :—cf. “ the depths of 
the earth,” Ps. Ixxi. 20. Here, and in vv. 2, 
Ir; ch. xi. 7; Xvil. 8; Xx. I, 3, it denotes the 
abode of the Devil and his angels—their 
present abode, perhaps (see Luke viii. 31), 
as distinguished from “the lake of fire,’ ch. 
xx. to. Ebrard, on ch. xx. 1, thinks that no 
literal locality is meant, but a symbol of the 
limits assigned by God to Satan’s power, 
from the date of his fall to the Last Judg- 
ment :—Satan is here permitted to exert his 
full influence upon men; and so St. Augustine 
(De Civ. Dei, xx. 7) says of the Abyss, “ Quo 
nomine significata est multitudo innumera- 
bilis impiorum.” The fifth Seal and the fifth 
Trumpet both belong to the invisible world 
—the one to the domain of heaven, the other 
to the world of darkness. See on ch. xi. 7. 


THE First WOE (2-11). 


2. And he opened the pit of the abyss;] 
Thus, notes Ebrard (see on ver. r), is explained 
Satan’s appearance in ch. xii. 3. (Some good 
authorities omit these words—see wv. //.). 

On the rationalistic scheme, the phenomena 
exhibited in “the volcanic centre of the Bay 
of Naples” suggested the symbolism here 
and in ch. xix. 20; xx. 10, 14, “ten years 
before Nature, by 2 singular coincidence, re- 
opened the crater of Vesuvius.” — Renan, 
PP. 330-335: 

and there went up a smoke out of the pit, | 
Cf. Gen. xix. 28 ; Ex. xix. 18. We may, per- 
haps, with Hengst., take the smoke to denote 
a hellish spirit which penetrates to the earth 
(cf. ch. xvi. 13)—a contrast to “the smoke 
of the incense” in ch. viii. 4. 


and the sun and the air were darkened by 
reason of the smoke of the pit.| (On the 
preposition ¢éx, cf. ch. viii. rr, 13.) 

Diisterd. thinks that ¢ave results follow :— 
both the sun and the air are darkened, and 
not one of them only (Bengel); the air is 
darkened as the consequence of the obscured 
sun. Bochart (Hieroz., ii. p. 495) suggests as 
the source of this symbolism the fires which 
husbandmen kindle in order to destroy locusts. 
Vitr., Eichhorn, Ziillig, Volkmar refer to the 
dense clouds of locusts which impede the 
sunlight :—so it befell Egypt (Ex. x. 15). 

Mede’s interpretation (p. 467) has found 
favour with many :—The smoke is Moham- 
medanism which covered with a new darkness 
the world already illumined by the Sun of 
Righteousness. And so Words. :—Heretical 
teachers (‘the Star”) caused the opening of 
the Abyss; and Mohammedanism owes its 
origin to heresies, schisms, and corruptions 
in Christendom; ‘all the features of this 
Vision attract the mind to Arabia.” I. 
Williams also notes that this plague does 
not assume a definite character, as in ver. 3, 
until the “foul vapours of idolatry and in- 
fidelity had obscured the Sun of Righteous- 
ness: this plague is not of devastating armies 
only, or of any spread of infidelity, but of 
both combined; under circumstances, too, 
“such as attended the progress of the pro- 
phet-conqueror of Islam ” (p. 152). 

The general applicability of this Trumpet 
to Mohammedanism is deserving of notice 
Even were this to be admitted, the first 
“ Woe” would not be exhausted in this one 
application. 


3. And out of the smoke came forth 
locusts upon the earth;| It is to be noted 
that the “ ssoke” only is said to come up 
“ out of the pit,’ while the locusts themselves 
come forth “out of the smoke.” ‘These 
words, therefore, do not decide whether a 
demon-host from the Abyss is intended; or 
whether the locusts symbolize a host of hu- 
man watriors, instigated by Satan:—see on 
vv. 5, 11. Literally speaking, locusts are 
noxious creatures from which man has no 
means of defending himself. 

There is much however here which points 
to an outbreak of moral evil, the hellish smoke 
being the veil beneath which the locusts as- 
cend from the Abyss :—cf. the eighth plague 
of Egypt, Ex. x. 12-15. In the description 
of Joel ii. the imagery is taken from the 
flight and inroad of locusts :—‘The alle- 


607 


608 


unto them was given power, as the 
scorpions of the earth have power. 

4 And it was commanded them 
that they should not hurt the grass 


gory (notes Dr. Pusey in /oc.) is so complete 
that the prophet compares them to those things 
which are, in fact, intended under them, war- 
riors, horses, and instruments of war; and 
this the more because neither locusts nor 
armies are exclusively intended. The object 
of the allegory is to describe the order and 
course of the divine judgments. . . . Won- 
derful image of the judgments of God, Who 
marshals and combines in one, causes each 
unavailing in itself, but working together the 
full completion of His inscrutable will.”— 
The Minor Prophets, p. 112. The locust 
(Heb. arbehb, Joel i. 4) is the common 
name of a species forming a group or sub- 
genus ot the gry//us of Linneus. They have 
coloured elytra (the superior or first pair of 
wings in four-winged insects), and large wings 
disposed in straight fan-like folds, exhibiting 
bright blue, green, or red colours:—see Brande 
and Cox, ‘ Dict. of Science ;' and the notes on 
the Book of Joel. 


ana power was given them,] Or an- 
thority, as described in ver. 10. See also 
ver. 19. 


as the scorpions of the earth] These words 
imply that t4ese locusts are not of the earth 
(cf. ver. 5), but are possessed of a deadly 
power resembling that of the scorpions referred 
to in Deut. vili. 15.  Scorpion—“A well- 
known Arachnidan articulate, in which no 
spinnerets [organs with which insects form 
their webs] exist at tte extremity of the body, 
their place being supplied by a venomous ap- 
paratus.’ —Brande and Cox, /.c. There is no 
contrast to the so-called sea-scorpions de- 
scribed by Bochart (Hieroz., ii. p. 635). 

The interpretations are various and often 
arbitrary :—The locusts symbolize (1) evil 
spirits (Andreas);—(2) heretics (Beda) ;— 
(3) historical events, e.g. the Roman wars 
in Judza (Grotius); or the Gothic invasion 
(Vitringa) ; or the Vandals ( Aureolus) ; or the 
Mohammedans (Mede); or “ the commence- 
ment of the latter Three Times and a Half, 
the Saracenic Woe,” A.D. 604 (Faber.) ;— 
(4) events yet unfulfilled, e.g. “ verze locuste” 
(the Jesuit Less) ; “literal locusts ” although of 
supernatural origin (De Burgh); and similarly 
Todd, who holds that the “Star” is Satan, 
and the locusts evil spirits (perhaps in form 
resembling locusts), whose king is the Angel 
of the Abyss (ver. 11), sent forth by Satan 
against the Jews when restored to Canaan ;— 
(5) restless speculations as to the future (Mau- 
Tice) ;—(6) religious controversies: thus, 


REVELATION. IX. 


[v. 4 


of the earth, neither any green thing, 
neither any tree; but only those 
me which have not the seal of God 
in Nei surenead. 


— <3 <= 


Bullinger and Brightman see in the “ Star” the 
Pope, and in the locusts the mendicant 
orders ; and Scherzer sees in the “ Star” the 
papacy, and in the locusts the Jesuits, 
The figure of the fallen Star was applied by 
a class of Protestant expositors (e. g. David 
Chytrzus, A.D. 1575) to Pope Gregory the 
Great; and ine gives an elaborate 
reply (De Rom. Pont., iii. 23). Bellarmine 
himself sees in the “Star ” Luther, and in 
the locusts Protestants (Alcasar noting, 
“ Nimium honoris Luthero deferri existimo, si 
Apoc.” &c. &c.) ;—(7) Bisping, confessing his 
perplexity, assents to the allegorical interpre- 
tation of De Wette who takes the locusts to 
be a type of some unknown judgment which 
intensifies that of Ex. x. 12. 

Mr. Birks (Elem. of Sacred Proph., p. 377) 
takes the locust “ Woe” to illustrate Mr. 
Faber’s “maxim” (Provincial Letters, i. p. 
122) of “the systematic employment of minia- 
ture in hieroglyphical symbolization :” “ Thé 
locusts are a miniature symbol, insects for 
men or invading armies. The time . .. 
therefore is expressed (ver. 5) in a miniature 
form.” Dr. Pusey (/oc. cit.) also writes that 
locusts “ are little miniatures of a well-ordered 
army.” 

See note A at the end of this chapter. 


4. And it was said unto them that they 
should not hurt the grass of the earth,| Like 
literal locusts: of these locusts, therefore, the 
Old. Test. knows nothing—see Ex. x. 15 ; Joel 
ii.3. Cf. the restriction ch. vi. 6; and also 
Ex. ix. 26. (See vv. //.). 


neither any green thing, netther any tree,] 
Gr. “neither every green thing, nor 
every tree”—cf. ch. vii. 1. This plagueis 
to fall upon nothing except the persons of 
men. 


but only such men, as 4ave not the 
seal of God on their foreheads.| (See vv. 
//.). Baptism is “the seal of God” under 
the New Dispensation—cf. Rom. iv. 11; 
Eph. iv. 30. As to the immunity of the 
Sealed (ch. vii. 3) from a// the impending 
calamities, see the remarks introductory to 
ch. vii. The present verse, at the most, 
merely proves that the Sealed are not to 
suffer from the locusts which come up from 
the Abyss. Alf.employs this consideration to 
set aside the application of this Trumpet to 
Mohammedanism: “It is surely too much to 
say that [all God’s elect] escaped scathless from 
the Turkish sword.” Klliott, who s intere 


v% 5.) 


5 And to them it was given that 
they should not kill them, but that 
they should be tormented five months: 


REVELATION. IX. 


and their torment was as the tor- 
ment of a scorpion, when he striketh 
a man. 





it, refers to the command of the Koran 
enforced by Abubeker in his invasion of Syria 
(A.D. 632): “Destroy no palm trees, nor 
burn any field of corn. Cut down no fruit 
trees,” &c.—Gibbon, ch. li. According to the 
symbolical school of interpreters, the trees in 
ch. vii. 1, 3, correspond to the kings and 
nobles in ch. vi. 15 ;—trees and grass in ch. 
viii. 7 correspond to princes and subjects, the 
high and the lowly: and so here. That 
all suffer from this plague except the Sealed 
shows, notes Hengst., that the Sealed of the 
Trives of Israe in ch. vii. comprehend all 
believers :—see vu. ch. vil. 4. 


5, And it was given them hat they 
should not kill them,| [I.e., that the locusts 
should not kill the unsealed; as is also evident 
from what follows, and from ver. 6. Phy- 
sical evil is not now the judgment, but the 
outburst of moral evil. This latter is the 
plague of the fifth Trumpet. 


but that they should be tormented) ‘That 
the unsealed should be tormented. (See 
vv. I]. ; the indic. fut. follows ta, as in ver. 
4: cf. the use of both the infin. and the fut. 
in ch. vi. 4—see Introd. § 7, IV., £) 

Wordsworth notes that the Mohammedan 
persecution differed from that of ancient 
heathen Rome which ed Christians as 
such, in that the duty prescribed by the 
Koran was merely to subject Jews and 
Christians, if they refused to profess Islamism, 
to many disabilities (see Gibbon, /. ¢., ch. li.). 
During the seventh and eighth centuries the 
Saracens in Asia, Syria, and North Africa, did 
not persecute the Christian inhabitants on ac- 
count of their faith if they paid the tribute, 
but there were many occasions for arbitrary 
oppression, cruelty and insult. Cf. on ver. 
4. “Mohammed,” writes Gieseler, “was at 
first tolerant towards other religions (Sura 
ii.and v.). At a later period, by the ninth 
Sura, he made a religious war a duty, in 
order to root out idolatry and make Jews 
and Christians tributary ” (Kirchen-Gesch., i. 
S. 723). Mede’s explanation is that while the 
Saracens ravaged the Roman Empire they 
were unable to capture either Rome or Con- 
stantinople;—or, as Elliott (after Bishop New- 
ton) notes, could not annihilate the Christian 
body politic, but were repulsed time after 
time, both in East and West. 

Burger understands literal armies as- 
sembled in preparation for war. As yet they 
do not “4i/];? but they “ torment” and 
harass the land in which they are encamped: 
see on ver. 16. 


New Test—Vot. IV. 


jive months :| A period repeated in ver. to, 
and generally taken to be a feature of thie 
symbolism of this passage—locusts being 
popularly believed to continue their ravages 
from April to September (Bochart, ii. 495). 
Others perceive a reference, in the number 
Jive, to the number of this Trumpet :—cf. 
on ch. vi. 8. In either way of regarding it, 
this period of “five months” would signify 
an indefinite, but comparatively brief durae 
tion. To settle the chronology here, Bishop 
Newton considers the greatest difficulty of all :— 
to Mr. G. S. Faber, it appears an “ easy task.” 

The following are among the interpreta 
tions given :— 

(1) On the “ Year-day” theory, 5x 30 = 
150 mystic days = 150 common years: ac- 
cordingly the “ five months” signify the du- 
ration (a) of the Gothic rule [it may be 
perhaps 7ve common years, ove, under Alaric, 
and four under Ataulphus] (Vitringa) ;— 
(4) of Arianism (Calov.);—(c) of the Sara- 
cenic devastation of the Empire, from A.D. 830 
to A.D. 980; and it may be, as this period 
occurs again in ver. 10, that it is to be taken 
twice, aS 300 years, viz. from the rise of the 
Abasside Caliphate, A.D. 750, to the capture 
of Bagdad by Togral Beg, A.D. 1055 (Mede). 
[Sir I. Newton counts these 300 years from 
A.D. 637 to A.D. 936, five months at Dae 
mascus, and five at Bagdad.] Mede however 
is obliged to add five years in order to obtain 
the duration of the rule ofthe Caliphs : and he 
is followed, with variations, by Daubuz, Bishop 
Newton, Keith, Faber. Elliott counts this 
judgment of 150 years on Christian idolaters 
from Mohammed’s announcement of his 
mission, A.D. 612, to the settlement of his 
“locusts” at Bagdad, A.D. 762 ;—(d) I. Wil- 
liams, following Mede, refers to Gen. vil. 24— 
the 150 days during which the Deluge lasted, 
“ judicial and corrective, yet remedial, as difs 
fering from the final Judgment” (p. 156). 
To the same effect Ziillig. 

(2) Bengel on his system (see Introd., 
§ 11, b, IV.) understands five prophetic months 
as representing 79} common years—from 
A.D. 510 to A.D. 589—during which the Jews 
were persecuted in Persia. 

(3) Hofmann (ii s. 340) regards the 
number as borrowed from the ,fve sins 

cified in vv. 20, 21. 

(4) Hengst. regards 5 = 19 as the broken 
to—the “ signature” of what is incomplete, 
this Trumpet being incomplete as compared 
with the seventh, while in neither this nor the 
seventh Trumpet do we find the number one 
third. In fact, the fve, in relation to the 


QQ 


609 


610 


6 And in those days shall men 
seek death, and shall not find it; and 
shall desire to die, and death shall 
flee from them. 

7 And the shapes of the locusts 


REVELATION, IX. 


{v. 6—8, 


were like unto horses prepared unto 
battle ; and on their heads were as it 
were crowns like gold, and their faces 
were as the faces of men. 


8 And they had hair as the hair of 





twelve months, are of relatively Jong dura- 
tion, “and still not the longest.” And so 
Words. : “ Islamism has its ‘ five months,’ but 
the Gospel of Christ is everlasting” (Rev. 
xiv. 6). 

(5) “The meaning must be a short period,” 
notes Stuart; and thus, Todd, who under- 
stands jive literal months, refers to Matt. 
xxiv. 22. Burger also takes the time to be 
literally “ five months.” 

(6) Bleek explains: “a round number, like 
the ten days in ch. ii. ro.” 

(7) Renan writes: “Cinq mois (tout un 
été),”"—-/. c., p. 396. He would refer to the 
invasion of the Parthian cavalry, were it not 
that this is the subject of the sixth Trumpet, 
ver. 16. There may have been, he adds, in 
some province a plague of actual locusts. 


and their torment] TI.e., not, as Alf. ex- 
plains, “ that of the sufferers,” but the tor- 
ment caused by the locusts:—see the words 
which follow. 


[xvas] as the torment of a scorpion,| L.e., 
caused by a scorpion (the same construction 
as before, “the genitive of the subject ”). 


when it striketh a man.) They hurt, not 
the earth as locusts, but men by their fiery 
sting. 

6. And in those days] 
shall be fulfilled. 

men shall seek death,] Words. notes: 
“ Observe here ‘the men,’ the men who have 
not the Seal of God, ver. 4; cf ver. 10.” We 
may refer to Job iii. 21 ; Jer. viii. 3. 

and shaH in no wise find it ;] (See vv //.). 

Note here the prophetic instead o° the 
descriptive style, and the use of the prophetic 
future :—the Seer ceases to be the exponent of 
what he saw, and he describes what is to 
happen hereafter; see ch. iv. 1. In ver. 7 
he returns to describe the locusts. 


and they shall desire to die, and death 
fleeth from them.| (See vv. i/.). The 
poetic parallelism of the words has led some 
(Heinrichs, Bleek) to conjecture that this 
verse is a quotation from a lost poem. 

Beda here quotes the saying of St. Cyprian 
under the Decian persecution: “‘ Volentibus,’ 
inquit, ‘mori, non permittebatur occidi.’” 
Bengel illustrates this passage by the perse- 
cution of the Emperor Julian, in which the 
Christians were not put to death. Some 
would compare this verse with ch. vi 16. 


When the Vision 


Burger refers to Dan. xii. 1; Matt. xxiv. a1 
—the first four Trumpets have desolated ex- 
ternal Nature on which man depends for 
food and earthly existence ; and now a judg- 
ment still more bitter renders life itself a 
burden to him: in the confusion also and 
disruption of social life he has to reap the 
harvest which he planted when he departed 
from God. Mr. Keith evades the difficulties 
of this verse by taking “the men” who “ seek 
death” to be the /ocusts, or Mohammedans, 
themselves; and their seeking death and 
death fleeing from them, to imply their doc- 
trine of predestination: “They sought death 
in the faith that death could not thereby find 
them a moment sooner. . .. They desired 
death, but death fied from them for whom 
it had no terror.” 


7. Having described the issuing of the 
locusts from the Abyss and the torment which 
they are to inflict, St. John proceeds in vv, 
7-10 to depict more accurately their extraor- 
dinary shape. The tenth verse alone has 
express reference to what is said in wv. 3-5: 
the other features of the description—the 
lion’s teeth, the woman’s hair, the faces of 
men—relate rather to the supernatural than 
to the natural symbolism; and, while not 
applying to the injury to be inflicted by the 
locusts, afford room for allegorical expo- 
sition. 

And the shapes| Gr. “the likenesses ”"— 
cf. Ezek. i. 16; x. 21 (LXX.); ie., the forms 
corresponding to the type: so Rom. i. 23; 
Phil. ii. 7, Hengst. renders “likenesses” 
observing that four verses are devoted to a 
description of what the locusts are /ike, both 
generally and in detail. 

[were] like unto horses prepared for war;]| 
For the resemblance of the natural locust to 
the horse, see Joel ii. 4; cf. Job xxxix. 20:— 
as commonly noted, in German Heu-pferd, 
in Italian Cavaletta means a locust. 


and upon their heads as it were crowns 
like unto gold,] J.e., neither literal crowns, 
nor literal gold. In this feature of the 
imagery Eichhorn and Heinrichs see the 
helmets of soldiers. They are ‘‘ crowns vi 
victory,” asin ch. vi. 2 (Words.). Elliott (who 
represents the locusts in an engraving) un- 
defstands the Arab turban. 

and their faces [were] as the faces of men.] 
As before, a literal sense is excluded. Elliott 
supplies here the beard which the Arabs wore, 


#. 9—I1.] 


women, and their teeth were as the 
teeth of lions. 

g And they naa pbreastplates, as it 
were breastplates of iron; and the 
sound of their wings was as the sound 
of chariots of many horses running to 
battle. 

10 And they had tails like unto 


and by which “they were easily distinguished 
from the general mass of the men of 
Christendom.” 


8. And they had hair as the hair of women, ] 
The antenna of the locusts were like woman's 
hair. Hengst. sees here a token of bar- 
barism, long hair being opposed to ancient 
civilization. 

were as the teeth] of lions.] Note the re- 
currence of this image in ver. 17; and cf. 
Joel i. 6, where see Dr. Pusey’s comment: 
—‘* They appear to be created for a scourge; 
since to strength incredible for so small a 
creature, they add saw-like teeth. . . . Some 
are armed with two jaws toothed like a saw, 
and very powerful.” 


9. as it were breastplates of iron;| The 
natural thorax of the locust is, in the case of 
these supernatural locusts, compared to iron. 


(was] as the sound of chariots, of many 
Jorses rushing to war.] One idea,—the 
sound produced by chariots drawn by horses. 


10. And they have tails like unto scor- 
pions, and stings;] (See vv. //.). The plain 
meaning is :—“ they have tails like to the tails 
of scorpions, and stings in their tails;” for the 
constr. cf. ch. xiii. 11. On the other hand, 
Bengel, Winer, De Wette, Hengst. argue, 
from ver. 19, that the tails of the locusts are 
not merely like the tails of scorpions, but like 
the scorpions themselves. 


and in their tails is their power 7#o 
hurt men five months.| See vv. ll. The A.V. 
here translates a text different from that 
given in all the Uncials. Compare too the 
reading of the Textus Receptus in ver. 19. 

The nature of the plague committed to the 
locusts (wv. 3-5) is here described, and the 
details already given are resumed. It appears 
probable that, throughout this imagery, the 
description is in accordance with the popular 
idea of the locust entertained in the East. 
Niebuhr (quoted by Ziillig, ii. s. 113), gives an 
Arabian adage: “In head like the horse; in 
breast like the lion; in feet like the camel; in 
body like the serpent ; in tail like the scorpion; 
in antenna like a virgin’s hair.’ The crowns 
like gold and the faces of men (ver. 7) seem 
to be the more specially symbolical features 
of this description. 


REVELATION. 


1X 


scorpions, and there were stings in 
their tails: and their power was to 
hurt men five months. 

11 And they had a king over them, 
which is the angel of the bottomless 
pit, whose name in the Hebrew 


tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek t tnatss 
to say, A 
destroyer 


tongue hath Ais name ! Apollyon. 


By the #ai/s in this verse, Mede (/. c., p. 409) 
understands the African Saracens,—those most 
remote from the East; the assailants of the 
Empire from the East being represented by 
the upper part of the body of the locusts. 
Italy was ravaged chiefly by the hordes from 
Africa. 


ll. They have over them as king] 
(Omit And—see vv. /.). They are thus 
again distinguished from natural locusts who 
“have no king,’ Prov. xxx. 27. According 
to Hengst. (see below), the “éng” here, 
corresponds to the “ Star” in ver. 1. 


the angel of the abyss:] Cf. ch. xvi. 5 
The def. article points to a special agent— 
the agent, as Hengst. thinks, symbolized by 
the “ Star” in ver. 1. Burger hints at the 
possibility of understanding a suman agent 
(“ Angel” = “ Messenger”) of Satan. Some 
see in this Angel Satan himself (Ebrard, 
Elliott) ;—some, a chief among Satan’s angels 
(ch. xii. 7, 9): e.g. Stuart particularizes “ Sam 
mael, i.e., the chief of the evil angels ; ”—some 
an angel who in a particular sense is chief of 
the Abyss: so Bengel, De Wette, Diister=- 
dieck. In the face of the Greek article Reuss 
specially notes that we must understand “az 
angel, not ¢4e angel—wun ange de l’abime . 
non pas /ange.” 


his name in Hebrew] On the constr. 
cf. ch. vi. 8, and on the word rendered in 
Hebrew—a ’ phrase peculiar to St. John—see 
ch. xvi. 16; John v. 2; XIXGL "Ly. 20)-4 XX 16: 
the phrase is different in Acts xxi. 40; xxii 
2; XXvi. 14—“‘in the Hebrew dialect.” 
Introd. § 7, IV. a. 


[#s] Abaddon,| A Hebrew noun signifying 
“destruction :” it is combined with “ death” 
in Job xxviii. 22 ; and with the grave or Hades 
(Sheol) in Job xxvi. 6; Prov. xv. 11. Thus, 
including the idea of the “ Abyss,” it is used 
as the abstract of Apollyon “ the Destroyer:” 
—cf. Heb. ii. 14. 


andin the Greek [tongue] he hath the 
name <Afollyon.| The abstract personified ; 
cf. the different term used in Heb. xi. 
28. We note here St. John’s “ manner’—the 
Hebrew term is given and its Greek equi- 
valent: e.g. Rabbi, Messiah, John i. 38, 42; iv 
25 ;—Cephas, i. 42 ;—Siloam, ix. 7 ;—Thomas, 


QQ2 


See 


611 


612 


12 One woe is past; and, behold, 
there come two woes more hereafter. 
13 And the sixth angel sounded, 


REVELATION. IX. 


lv. 12— 13. 


and I heard a voice from the four 
horns of the golden altar which is 
before God, 





xi. 16;—Gabbatha, xix. 13 ;—Golgotha, xix. 
17;—compare Rev. i. 7; iii, 14; xii. 9. 
Bengel, Stern, Hengst., &c., contrast the title 
“ Jesus the Saviour” with “Abaddon the 
Destroyer.” Ebzard interprets: —‘“ He is 
Satan the ‘ destroyer,’ the ‘murderer from 
the beginning.’” He is called the Destroyer, 
observes I. Williams, from the peculiar cha- 
racter of Mohammedanism, which has not 
utterly destroyed Christianity, but bound it 
up in Mohammedanism,—a corruption worse 
than death,” see ver. 6. Bleek simply writes 
“Napoleon;” and Volkmar notes: “It is 
natural that writers, since 1800, have sought 
in the Antichrist for NApoleon as well as for 
Apollyon.” (“ Natirlich, dass man seit 1800 
in dem Antichristen gleich Apollyon den 
NApoleon gesucht hat”). 

Bengel’s comment is that this leader in 
the first ““ Woe” has a Hebrew and a Greek 
name; in the third “ Woe” (ch. xii. 9) a 
name Greek and Hebrew—“ the Devil and 
Satan.” See on ch. xiii. 3 the suggestion of 
Burger as to the relation of this passage to 
that which describes “the Beast from the 
sea.” 


12. The first Woe is passed:] Gr- 
The one Woe. These are not, as some hold, 
the words of “the Eagle” (ch. viii. 13) but 
of the Seer summing up the contents of 
wv. 1-11. The fact of the feminine form 
of the word “ Woe” (7 ovac) here, and in 
ch. xi. 14, Winer explains by the under- 
lying idea of tribulation or wretchedness 
(Oriis, tadaurepia). 

behold, there come] (Omit “and”). The 
verb is in the singular: it precedes the 
nominative plural—see wv. //. 


yet two Woes sereafter.| The second 
Woe extends from this point to ch. xi. 14. 
The first (see ver. 1) proceeds from the Abyss, 
and is produced by a power which had fallen 
from God. The signal for the second Woe 
is given from God’s presence, and proceeds 
from the Golden Altar (see vv. 13, 14). The 
description of this Woe is divided into sec- 
tions of which the first is given in vv. 13-21, 
introducing its chief infliction. The present 
verse is taken to imply that the Woes are to 
be “not contemporaneous, but consecutive” 
—some interpreters placing a comparatively 
short, others a long interval between the first 
and the second. Thus, Bengel (see on ver. 5) 
makes the first Woe, during the fve prophetic 
months, to end A.D. 589, and the second to 
begin A.D. 634;—Bishop Newton makes the 
first Woe to end A.D. 762, and the second to 


begin A.D. 1281;—Mr. Faber makes the 
first Woe to end A.D. 762, and the second 
to 4egin with the reign of Othman, June 9, 
A.D. 1301 (Sacr. Cal, vol. iu. p. 411);— 
Elliott places the end of the first Woe, éc., 
the abatement of its intensity, in the year 755 
—the reward, as it were, for the decrees of 
the Council held by Constantine Copronymus 
in 754, which condemned the use in churches 
of any artistic representation. In 755 the 
Caliphate was divided, and the scorpion 
locusts were carried to the Euphrates—see 
ver. 14. In 842, however, image worship was 
triumphant once more, and, the Moslem power 
being again loosed, the Turk became the 
chief of Islam. 

Bisping who adopts Kliefoth’s and Keil’s 
interpretation of Daniel’s “Seventy Weeks,” 
places the second and third Woes in the 
seventieth Week, ie., under Antichrist at 
the end of all things. The judgment on 
unbelieving Israel falls in the first “ half- 
week,” under the second Woe (ch. xi. 13); 
while under the third Woe, or second “ half- 
week” (the 42 months of ch. xi. 2), the 
Last Judgment comes on the rest of the 
antichristian world (/. ¢., s. 173) :—see ch. xi. 
14. 


THE SIXTH TRUMPET (13-21). 


13. And the sixth angel sounded,| The 
second “ Woe-Trumpet.” 

and I heard] What is heard, and what is 
seen (cf. ver. 17) are placed side by side in 
these Visions—cf. ch. vi. 1-8. 

a voice] Gr. “one voioe”—see on ch 
Vili. 13. 

from the horns of the golden altar] 
Omit four—see vv. /]. Diisterd. thinks that 
four was suggested to a copyist as a contrast 
to the preceding “‘ one voice,” and as a parallel 
to the “(four Angels” in ver.14. Vitringa lays 
emphasis on the numbers—one harmonious 
voice out of the four horns. Hengst. reads 
“the four horns,” and connects with the four 
Angels, ver. 14, and the four sins, ver. 21. 
The ‘Codex Sinaiticus’ merely reads “the 
voice of the Golden Altar,”—cf. ch. xvi. 7 
The preposition “from,” “out of (ex)” excludes 
the sense given to the words by Stern, that the 
voice proceeds “ from” God seated ehind the 
Altar (cf. Acts xix. 34). “The Golden Altar” 
(ch. viii. 3) is the Altar of incense before 
the Veil (Ex. xl. 26). “ Horns” projecting 
upwards at the corners (see Ex. xxx. 2) were 
attached to this Altar like those of the Altar of 
burnt-offering: see the note on Ex. xxvii. 2. 


v. 14.] 


14 Saying to the sixth angel which 
had the trumpet, Loose the four 





The voice—of which the source is not defined 
—issues, as in ch. xvi. 7, from the Altar, from 
the space included between the “ 4orns,” and 
where the prayer of the saints (see ch. vi. 
10) had been offered (ch. viii. 3, 4). Inver. 
14 we read the answer to that prayer. 


THE SECOND WOE (14—xi. 13). 


The judgment of the second Woe-Trum- 
pet is inflicted by a vast army of horsemen, 
ver. 16, &c.; and this is followed by two 
episodes (as in the case of the sixth Seal—see 
on ch. vii.), the first of which is contained in 
ch. x., where it is announced (ver. 6) that 
the delay adverted to in ch. vi. 11 was ap- 
proaching to its close; the second episode 
being contained in ch. xi. 1-14. 

Todd considers that the second Woe con- 
sists of two periods, (1.) ‘The hour, day, 
month, and year’ during which the third part 
of men will be slain (ver. 15); (2) the 1260 
days of the Two Witnesses, ch. xi. 3 (p. 176): 
—see on ver. 15. 


14. saying]. Or one saying—see vv. /I. 
For the gender and concord of the participle 
see on ch. iv. 1. 


to the sixth angel,| Here only is the Angel 
commanded to act—see on ch. viii. 7. 


which had the trumpet,| (See vv. U.). 
The Trumpet belonging to this Vision— 
“the nom. in irregular apposition;” cf. ch. 
ii. 20. Tregelles takes the participle (6 ¢yav) 
as the vocative, “Thou that hast.” 

Loose the four angels which are bound| The 
article, “te four Angels,” refers to the follow- 
ing “ which are bound,” cf. ch. viii. 2. There 
does not seem to be any reference to ch. vil. 
1, as Beda, Elliott (see on ver. 12), and others 
hold ;—Stuart makes the number refer to the 
four quarters of the desert whence the hosts 
are to come;—others (De Wette, Hengst., 
Diisterd., Words.) refer the number jour 
which in the Apoc. denotes universality to the 
four quarters of the earth (cf. ch. vil. 1; xx. 
8): it would thus signify the universality of 
the judgment ;—Ebrard explains that they are 
the four leaders of the demon host, to the four 
divisions of which they correspond (Ewald), 
contrasting in number with the oze king of the 

deusts (ver. 11) and not having any of the 
insignia of royalty ;—Ziillig considers that 
three types are combined under this Woe: 
(1) death, as in the last Egyptian plague, Ex. 
xii. 29; (2) the four kings of Gen. xiv. 9, 
typifying the jour Angels of destruction 
(opposed to the one Destroyer, ver. 11); (3) 
to the same effect, the four destroying king- 


REVELATION. IX. 


angels which are bound in the great 
river Euphrates. 


doms, Jer. li. 27, 28. Alf. takes them to be 
personifications merely, as they are immediately 
resolved into a host of cavalry. De Wette 
takes the four Angels to be ‘‘ Angels of destruc- 
tion,” although not ews/ Angels. 

Beda, Bengel, Ewald, Stern, Stuart, I. 
Williams, consider that they are evi/ angels 
(cf. Tobit iii. 17; Ps. Ixxviil. 49). Bossuet, 
Hengst., Words., are certain that they are 
good Angels—Angels of God for punishment, 
and hitherto restrained or “ound” by the 
Divine command : and Wordsworth observes 
that the word “ Angel” placed absolutely, as 
here, nowhere signifies in the Apoc. an evil 
Angel: he refers to ch. vii. 1, 2. Some 
have even suggested their names—Michael, 
Gabriel, Uriel, Raphael: see Andreas in Joc. 
(p. 51). 

So long as these Angels are “ dound, they 
stand “‘srepared,” as in ver. 15. 

at the great river Euphrates.| Compare 
the sixth Vial, ch. xvi. 12. (On the preposi 
tion here (emi) see ch. xxi. 12, John iv. 6). 
This is not a geographical, but a symbolical 
description which rests on the earlier history. 
Indeed, if we bear in mind the figurative 
character of this Vision, we cannot under- 
stand the Euphrates literally. In the Old 
Test. the chastisements on Israel proceeded 
thence—Isai. vii. 20 ; vili.7; Jer. xlvi. 10; and, 
according to one class of expositors, St. John 
using the language of the Old Test. (Gen. 
xv. 18; Deut. i. 7; Josh. i. 4) now employs 
the Euphrates as the boundary of the region 
whence the demon-host is to come upon the 
earth—so Hengst. and Diisterd. ‘“ The great 
river,” writes Stern, is “the symbolic limit 
which separates the Church from her 
enemies.” 

In a different manner Wordsworth also 
takes the verse figuratively :—it is the river of 
Babylon ; the four Angels represent the Divine 
word, summed up in the fourfold Gospel, 
which had been long bound in the mys- 
tical Babylon; by the aid of printing it has 
been translated into all languages; and thus 
the four Angels have been loosed. 

Elliott (and Alford adopts his conclusion) 
sees no difficulty in taking the Euphrates 
literally, and the rest of the Vision mystically : 
he appeals to such instances of Scriptural 
allegory as that in Ps. Ixxx. $ :— “ Thou hast 
brought a vine out of Egypt” &c., where 
Egypt is literal andthe Vine mystical. “It 
was the almost universal opinion of the an- 
cients,” notes Dr. Todd, “that Antichrist 
shall arise from this region” (p. 152); and 
on this principle, taking the Euphrates to 
mean the literal river, Mede, Vitr., Daubuz, 


514 


REVELATION. IX. 


15 And the tour angels were loosed, 


v. 15.) 


a day, and a month, and a year, for to 


yor.a, Which were prepared ‘for an hour, and slay the third part of men. 





Faser, Elliott, &c. refer this Trumpet to 
the invasions of the Tartarsand Turks. Bengel 
makes wv. 13, 14 describe the activity of 
Mohammed, A.D. 589-634. 

Again:—N. de Lyra understands by the 
Euphrates the Roman Empire; and he takes 
the four Angels to be the Emperor Anastasius, 
the Ostrogoth Theodoric, and the anti-Popes 
Symmachus and Laurentius. “ Preterists” 
(Hammond, Wetstein) usually refer to the 
Tiber, because Babylon (ch. xiv. 8) is Rome. 
Ewald and rationalistic “‘ Preterists ” refer to 
the literal Euphrates as the frontier of the 
Empire: thence the Parthian legions menaced 
the Roman power. In this sense Renen (p. 
398) takes the four Angels to be the Assyrian, 
the Babylonian, the Median, and the Persian 
kingdoms; he refers to Josephus (B. J., VI. 
vi. 2), and to Tacitus (Hist., iv. 51), where we 
read that Vologesus offered to aid Vespasian 
with 40,000 cavalry. This Trumpet, con- 
tinues Renan (p. 400), differs from the pre- 
ceding five which refer to events already past 
when the author wrote; here it is not so,— 
“mais il est probable que l’auteur la tenait 
déja pour un fait accompli.” He applies vv. 
14-21 and ch. xvi. 12-16 to the period of 
Jewish enthusiasm shared by St. John which 
followed the defeat of Cestius Gallus, Nov. 5, 
A.D. 66 (Jos., B. J., ii. 18, 9; Tac., Hist. v. 10; 
Sueton., Vesp. 4), when it was expected that, 
by the aid of the Parthians, the Roman power 
would be overthrown (/. ¢., p. 272). 

Mr. Maurice makes this loosing of the 
Angels denote that the barriers between the 
Babel kingdom, and the kingdom of Israel 
which Jerusalem represented, should exist no 
longer; and thus Jerusalem becomes the 
centre and capital of the Babel society (p. 
164). For other expositions see note A at 
the end of this chapter. 


15: which had been prepared] Cf. ch. viii. 
6. They had been “frepared,” but bound. 

for| I.e., “unto,” “ against, 
tion for (cis) ”—as in ver. 7. 

the hour and day and month and 
year,| The article prefixed to the first noun 
and not repeated gives unity to the common 
conception of time, fixing a determined 
moment—the hour of a definite day,—the 
day of a definite month, &c.—cf. Num. i. 1; 
Hag. 1.15; Zech. i. 7: “the hour of God’s 
judgment, the day of His wrath” (Words.). 
The article may also indicate the great 
appointed conflict at Armageddon (ch. xvi. 16) 
as well as that which is described in ch. xx. 7, 
8,—the opposing host being spoken of in ch. 
aly 14. 


» “ing reserva- 


Chronological calculations have also been 
founded on these words, as if there were 
no article at all, or as if it had been 
repeated before each noun: (1) On the 
“Year-day ” theory, a year=360 days = 360 
prophetic years; and hence Sir I. Newton 
counts 360+ 30+ 1 = 391 years (the “ hour” 
being altogether omitted)—viz. from A.D. 
1063, when Alp Arslan “passed the Eu- 
phrates at the head of the Turkish cavalry ”’ 
(Gibbon, ch. lvii.), to A.D. 1453, the date of 
the capture of Constantinople by the Turks. 
(2) Mr. Elliott, noting that we have here not 
“@ time” (kaipds, ch. xii. 14), but “a year” 
(euaurds), departs from the usual “ Y ear-day ” 
theory. He arbitrarily assumes a year in this 
place to be 3654 common days,—while he 
reckons 30 days to the month, and “ tave/ve 
hours to the prophetic day.” He thus obtains 
3654+ 30+1+,=396 prophetic years + t21 
days. As acommon year, however, is about 
eleven minutes Jess than 365+ days, and as 
this deficiency amounts in 396 years to three 
days, the true result is 396 years and 118 
days—or the interval between January 18, 
1057, when the Turks marched from Bagdad, 
to May 29, 1453, when they took Constan- 
tinople. These dates indeed require 396 
years +130 days, which exceed Mr. Elliott’s 
calculation “by 4ut 12 natural days, or /ess 
than half a prophetic hour” (vol. 1. p. 527): 
see Introd. § 11, b, II. Mede had adopted the 
same principle, and thus obtained the inter- 
val between 1057 and 1453; but he was 
puzzled as to “the Aour:” this he takes to 
mean “the opportune time ” (the first “ and” 
being “‘ exegetical),” “ parati in tempus oppor- 
tunum, zempe in diem, mensem, et annum.” 

(3) Mr. Birks thinks fit to adopt the reading 
of Codex B which places an article before 
“ day,” and translates: ‘‘ The Angels prepared 
for that hour and that day were loosed both 
a month and a year,” i. e., for 390 prophetic 
years—see Ezek. iv. 5—a period not found 
elsewhere in Scripture—E/em. of Sacr. Pro- 
phecy, p. 378. 

(4) Bengel, as already stated, makes a 
prophetic hour=8 common days, and a pro- 
phetic day=about half a common year (see 
Introd. § 11, b, IV.). He reckons here 214 
years, from A.D.634,the last days of Abubeker, 
to A.D. 847, the death of Mutezam ; and he 
makes this same space of time to be the 
duration of the sixth Trumpet. From this 

int he places the interval of too years 
Rawisea the second and third Woes. The 
third Woe thus began A.D. 947, and had 
not expired in Bengel’s time. 

(5) Daubuz (/c., p. 328) interprets: “ For 


® 16—17.] 


16 And the number of the army 
of the horsemen were two hundred 
thousand thousand: and I heard the 
number of them. 


a Year, Month, Day, and Hour, namely, so 
as to be ready upon any occasion or warning 
<v put this great event [the destruction of the 
Eastern Empire by the Ottomans] in exe- 
cution.” 

(6) Todd takes the words (as he renders 
them) “an hour, a day, a month, and a year” 
to imply duration, and to signify the frst of the 
two periods into which “ the events constitu- 
ting the second Woe” are divided ; the second 
period being the 42 months, or three years 
and a half, of ch. xi. 2 :—see on vv. 12, 13. 


that they should kill] Referring to 
“ prepared,” as in ch. viii. 6; or, it may be, to 
“qere loosed,” see above, ver. 14. 


the third part of men.] Apparently “ the 
third part” of “them that dwell on the 
earth” (see ch. viii. 13, and cf. ch. vi. 10) as 
distinguished from those who are sealed: see 
ver. 4, and the note on ch. viii. 7. It is now 
added that such persons are to suffer death, 
ir the same proportion as the trees and shzps 
in ch. viii. 7, 9, 11 suffer. 

Elliott understands the Eastern-third of 
the old Roman Empire—see on ch. viii. 7. 

What the Angels proceed to do is left 
untold: they are, probably, the leaders of the 
host in ver. 16; and hence the destruction 
which they are here said to cause is ascribed 
in ver. 18 to the fire, &c., proceeding from 
the horses’ mouths. 


16. And the number of the armies of the 
borsemen| Gr. “of the cavalry.” Burger 
(see on ver. 5) identifies this host with the 
locusts under the fifth Trumpet; comparing 
the imagery in vv. 8 and 17, in vv. 9 and 17, 
in vv. to and 19. 

was twice ten thousand times ten 
thousand:] Je., twice the number spoken 
of in Dan. vii. 1o:—“two myriads of my- 
riads,’ or 200 millions. The vastness of 
the number shows that no literal army is 
intended:—cf. ch. xx. 8. This description 
seems clearly to be based on that of the 
countless hosts of God, Ps. Ixviii. 17 (on 
which see the note); Hebr. xii. 22 ; Jude 14. 
Horsemen also constitute the Armies of 
Heaven in ch. xix. 11, 14, 19. 

Iheard the number of them.| (Omit “and” 
—see vv. //.). Ewald suggests that the Seer 
heard the number from one of the Elders, as 
in ch. vii. 13 ;—“ he was told what the number 
was; count them he could not” (Stuart): 
see on ver. 17. Two armies are described 
im the Apocalypse :—‘1) that which is de- 


REVELATION. IX. 


17 And thus I aw the horses in 
the vision, and them that sat on them, 
having breastplates of fire, and of 
jacinth, and brimstone: and the 


scribed here and in ch. xvi. 14,16; xx. 8, and 
of which the aspect had been foreshown in 
Ezek. xxxviii. 4, 15 ; and (2), in opposition to 
this host, the Armies of Heaven of which 
we read in ch. xix. 14. The vastness of the 
number, according to Hengst., excludes the 
idea of a particular war—“ we have here to 
do only with a personified species.” 


17. And thus I saw] “ After this manner,” 
“according to the following description.” 
Stuart refers “tus” to what precedes—“ In 
such vast numbers did I see them.” Some 
take it pleonastically—see on ch.ii. 15. On 
the union of “ I heard” and “I saw,” see on 
ch. i. 2; vi. 1. 

tn the vision,| (Asin Dan. viii. 2; ix. 21:-— 
cf. Acts ii. 17, and on ch. i. 1). These 
words, notes Diisterd., are added to “I saw,” 
in contrast to the “ I/eard” in ver. 16. Ebrard 
infers from this addition that we must not 
think of /iteral horsemen; and so Stuart, 
who sees in this Trumpet the most remote 
of all the symbols in the Apoc. from the real 
objects of the natural world. Mede inter- 
prets “in appearance” not “in reality ’— 
“non revera, sed aspectu”; and he refers 
to ch. iv. 3, where see the note. 


and them that sat on them, having) The 
participle “‘ Saving” refers to both horses and 
horsemen, both bearing armour—so Ziillig, 
Ebrard, Diisterd., Alf. On the other hand, 
Bengel, Ewald, De Wette, Hengst. consider 
that the Riders alone wear breastplates. 


breastplates [as] of fire and of hyacinth 
and of brimstone:| “The hyacinthus of the 
Romans is invariably blue and lustrous;” it 
was the favourite epithet “ applied to the flow- 
ing hair of southern beauty, the black of 
which exactly represents the violet reflex of the 
raven’s plumage.”—King, Precious Stones, p. 
197. For the distinction between the “ hya- 
cinthus ” of St. John, and the “ jacinth” of the 
Authorized Version, see the note on ch. xxi. 
zo. This description suggests the blue flame 
which issues between the fire and the brim- 
stone, and which is represented as “ ssoke,” 
below and in ver. 18: the three colours relate 
to what proceeds from the horses’ mouths. 
Ziillig understands “copper, steel, and 
brass” ;—Stuart explains “ particoloured ” ;— 
I. Williams takes the three colours to signify 
different degrees in intensity of evil (ch. xiv. 
10; xix. 20; Ps xi. 6) ;—Hengst., with whom 
every Trumpet signifies war, understands 
“wild exasperation, the thirst for murder, 


615 


616 


REVELATION. IX. 


heads of the horses were as the heads 
of lions; and out of their mouths 
issued fire and smoke and brimstone. 

*8 By these three was the third 
part of men killed, by the fire, and 
by the smoke, and by the brimstone, 
which issued out of their mouths. 

19 For their power is in their 


the desire of desolation:” and he concludes 
that but for the variations in the imagery the 
six Trumpets might be compressed into one. 


[are] as the heads of lions ;| There is,doubt- 
less, here, as many have noted, a reference to 
ver. 8, where behind their deceptive female 
hair, the locusts have the teeth of lions. The 
horses’ heads are now plainly lions’ heads— 
this Trumpet does not conceal its destruc- 
tiveness. See, on vv. 5, 16, the remarks of 
Burger on the connexion between the fifth 
and sixth Trumpets. 


and out of their mouths| 1. Williams notes 
that the word “mouth” is three times re- 
peated (vv. 17-19), as under the sixth Vial, 
ch. xvi. 13. 


proceedeth fire and smoke and brim- 
stone.| By a usual poetic figure, the horse 
breathes forth “fire and smoke” —“ volvit sub 
naribus ignem ” (Virgil, Georg., iii. 85 ; Ovid, 
Metam., vii. 104), to which “ brimstone,” as 
associated with evil, is here added: cf. ch. 
xiv, 10; xix. 20; xxi. 8. Mede and Elliott 
understand the Turkish artillery. Alf. gives 
a singular interpretation :—The plagues pro- 
ceed “ separately,” he notes; one of them “ out 
of the mouths of each division of the hust. 
It is remarkable that these divisions are 
three, though the Angels were four.” 

The fifth and sixth Trumpets, notes Reuss, 
bring on two plagues peculiar to the East— 
locusts, and the simoom. 


18. By these three plagues] (See vv. //.). 
Gr. from (ad) equivalent to the German 
durch (Winer, § 47, S. 332)—viz. by the fire, 
the smoke, and the brimstone. 


was the third part of men killed,| See on 
ver. 15, and on ch. viii. 7 The army of 
horsemen is not prohibited from killing, as 
the locusts were in ver. 5. 

Mede explains that the sufferers belonged 
to those styled “the third part of men” —4.¢., 
the inhabitants of the Roman Empire (see on 
ch. viii. 7); and they consist of some only of 
the inhabitants of that “third part” just as 
in ch. xvii. 16 only some of the “ Zen Horas” 
are meant; see also Judges xii. 7. 


by the fire and the smoke and the brim- 
stone] (Omit “ dy” twice—see vv. //.). Gr. 


[v. 18—s0, 


mouth, and in their tails: for their 
tails were like unto serpents, and 
had heads, and with them they «do 
hurt. 

20 And the rest of the men which 
were not killed by these plagues yet 
repented not of the works of their 
hands, that they should not worship 


“by reason of” (é*}—for the preposition 
see ver. 2; ch. viii. 11. 

which proceeded out of their mouths.) 
The participle (with its art.) agrees with the 
last noun, but applies to all three. 

Elliott refers this verse to the fall of Con- 
stantinople; and quotes Gibbon’s description 
of the Ottoman artillery (ch. Ixviii.). 


19. For the power of the horses is in 
their mouth, and in their tails:| See vv. Il. 
The Codex of Erasmus here differs from all 
the Uncials; and the A. V. translates a text 
different from the Textus Receptus. “The 
Authorized Version agrees with Beza (1589) 
against Stephens “1550).”—Scrivener, Intr. to 
Par. Bible, p. ciii. Cf. the imagery of ver. 10, 

for their tails [are] like unto serpents, and 
have 4eads;| Wetstein, Bengel, Herder, &c. 
quote, as the source of this imagery, what the 
ancients (Plin., H. N., viii. 35; Lucan, Pharsal. 
ix. 719) relate of a genus of serpents or 
ophidian reptiles called amphisbena “in which 
the tail and head are equally obtuse, and the 
scales of the head so similar to those on the 
back as to render it difficult to distinguish 
one extremity from the other. Hence these 
reptiles have been supposed to have the power 
of creeping backwards or forwards with 
equal facility”"—Brande and Cox, Dict. of 
Science. Bengel notes that certain tribes (of 
Turks) fight even while they retreat ;—Grotius 
sees a reference to the custom of foot-soldiers 
mounting behind horsemen ;—Stuart observes 
that the Turcomans train their horses to 
assault with their hinder part, as well as with 
the front;—Elliott refers to the horsetails 
borne as symbols of authority by the Turkish 
Pashas, the tails having 4eads denoting that 
authority ;—Stern, Ebrard, Hengst. see here 
a type of the malignity and treachery practised 
by these armies. : 

and with them they do burt.] Inflict 
pain by the bite of the serpent-heads. Elliott 
renders, “ they (é.e., the Turkish Pashas) com- 
mit injustice ”—a sense opposed to the use of 
the verb in ch. ii. 11 ; vii. 2, 3; ix. 4, 10; xi. 5. 

20. And the rest of mankind,] Iz., the 
remaining two-thirds, see ver. 18:—Gr. the 
men; cf. ch. viii. 11. 

which were not killed with these plagues,] 


v. 21.) 


*. 15-4 devils, and idols of gold, and silver, 


.135- 


and brass, and stone, and of wood: 
which neither can see, nor hear, nor 
walk: 





(Gr. “in”—as in ver. 19, “ with them do they 
hurt”). That is the plagues of ver. 18. 
Ebrard refers vv. 20, 21 to all the first 
six Trumpets, which have not succeeded 
in causing the ungodly to repent; the two- 
thirds of men who survive, not having been 
converted :—but see the true reading, “these 
three plagues,” in ver. 18. So also Ziillig, 
who regards these verses as explaining why a 
seventh Trumpet is to be added,—because had 
men repented in consequence of the preceding 
six, they would have been spared the more 
fearful judgment yet to come. He adds that 
“the men of the earth” are classed in the 
Apoc. as Jews (ch. vii; xv.) and Gentiles 
(ch. x. 11; xiv. 6-9); accordingly, the gross 
idolatry of the Gentiles is first censured, and 
then sins common to both Jews and Gentiles. 
Elliott refers these verses to Western 
Christendom—to “the men ofthe West” who 
were not killed as a body politic, and whose 
religion and crimes (e.g. the persecution of 
the Albigenses, &c.) throughout the Middle 
Ages he considers are here described. 
repented not of | (Omit “yet”). Gr. “from” 
see on ch. ii. 21. The meaning is explained 
by the clause “that they should not worship.” 
The final catastrophe is inevitable :—man will 
not accept the loving forbearance of God, 
a Pet. iii 9. Neither by the Trumpet- 
plagues here, nor by the Vial-plagues (ch. 
xvi. 21), are mankind moved to repentance. 
the works of their hands,| Either, generally, 
“the sins of their life,"-—so De Wette, Ebrard, 
Bleek; or (for it is not merely “ téeir works” 
as in ch. ii. 22; xvi. 11) “the idols wrought 
by their hands,” “their idolatry,” as we read in 
Acts vii. 41 (cf. Deut. iv. 28; Ps. cxxxv. 15; 
Isai. ii. 8)—so Bengel, Hengst., Diisterd., 
Words., Alf, Bisping, Burger. The rest of 
the verse indicates that this is the meaning. 
that they shouki not worship devils,| Gr. 
“the demons,” as in 1 Cor. x. 20, evil spiri 
of an inferior order, see on ch. ii. 10; xvi. 14. 
The verb is in the future (after iva), see vv. //. 
and the idols of gold,| See vv. ii. 
and of silver, and of brass, and of stone, 
and of wood; which oan neither see, nor 
bear, nor walk:| Cf. Dan. v. 23, whence this 
enum:ration is taken. In this verse, sins 
against God condemned in the first Table of 
the Decalogue—viz. demon-worship (cf. 1 
Tim. iv. 1), and its equivalent, idolatry (cf 
1 Cor. x. 19-21)—are recited. Seeon ver. 21. 


91. and they repented not of] As in 


REVELATION. IX 


21 Neither repented they of their 
murders, nor of their sorceries, nor 
of their fornication, nor of their 


thefts, 





ver. 20. The repetition of the verb “ repent” 
seems to have no greater significance then to 
connect more clearly the two verses. 


sorceries,| Gr. “the use of drugs,” denot- 
ing the magic rites of the heathen (ch. xviii. 
23). The word is used by the LXX. to de- 
scribe the “enchantments” of the Egyptian 
sorcerers (Ex. vii. 22), and of Babylon (Isai. 
xlvii. 9, 12), the form varying when used to 
describe the “‘ witchcrafts ” of Jezebel (2 Kings 
ix. 22). In Gal. v. 20 it is placed next to 
idolatry ; elsewhere in the N. T. the word 
occurs only in ch. xviii. 23:—cf. ch. xxi. 8; 
xxli. 15, both of which texts are cognate to 
this verse. Suicer connects the word with 
the use of drugs in causing abortion and 
infanticide; and thus its connection here 
with idolatry on the one hand, and with 
murder and fornication, on the other—ée,, 
with carnal and spiritual fornication—can be 
accounted for. 

fornication,| The use of the singular in the 
case of this word alone, is well explained by 
Bengel: “‘ There is one, never-ceasing impurity 
with those who are not clean in heart ” (“Alia 
scelera ab hominibus per intervalla patrantur; 
una perpetua wopveia est apud eos, qui munditie 
cordis carent”). The sins condemned in the 
second Table of the Decalogue, are now 
recited,—see on ver. 20. 


The great obscurity of the several Trum- 
pet-Visions, especially of the two Visions of 
this chapter, is admitted by all. As in the first 
four Trumpets we discern judgments under 
various forms of physical evil, so in the fifth 
and sixth we seem to discern manifesta 
tions of moral evil. In the fifth, the locusts 
issue from the Abyss (ver. 3), and their “ King” 
is “the Angel of the Abyss” (ver. 11). Their 
mission is not to “4ur¢” material Creation 
(ver. 4), or to “&i//” (ver. 5),—but by their 
poisonous influence (venomous as that of 
scorpions, vv. 3, 5, 10) to torment and injure 
men. The period of “fwe months” may, as 
already suggested, be only a feature of the 
imagery suggested by the symbol of natural 
locusts; or it may refer simply to the number 
of the Trumpet. Or, again, the sense may be 
that this is not the great outbreak of evil in the 
last times to which all prophecy points,—but 
that this short and “ broken” period indicates 
a partial exercise of Satanic power, confined to 
no particular generation. The sixth 
seems no less distinctly to announce a still more 
intense, perhaps the final (see ver. 15) one 


617 


618 


slaught of the powers of darkness. The 
binding of the four Angels (ver. 14) leads on 
the mind to the binding of Satan himself (ch. 
xx. 3); the mention of the Euphrates, the 
river of Babylon, at once suggests the thought 
of that great City which is specially chosen 
as the symbol of the God-opposing World- 
power (ch. xiv. 8; xvii. 5); the Army of 
Heaven is composed of horsemen (ch. xix. 
14), but here we see the antagonistic host 
as foreshown in Ezekiel xxxviil. 4 (cf. ch. xvi. 
16; xx. 8); the addition to natural imagery 
which we find in ver. 17, brings before us the 
symbols of hell employed elsewhere in the 
Apocalypse (ch. xiv. 10: xix. 20; XX. 10} XXi. 
8) ;—in a word, every token points to the 
great outbreak of evil. In the case of both 
‘Trumpets, moreover, the monstrous features 
added to the natural forms of locusts and 
horses confirm the reference of these two judg- 
ments to the exhibitions of moral evil in a//its 
aspects; and accordingly there is nothing 
singular in the very general application of the 
fifth Trumpet to Mohammedanism—the most 
striking, as it has been the most formidable 
manifestation of the antichristian Power hither- 
to developed under the Christian dispensation. 

Godet (/.c., p. 353) regards the first six 
Trumpets as forming one picture, exhibiting 
the preparation for the decisive trial which 
will determine the appearance of Antichrist : 
they are the signals of the dissolution of the 
old social order, and then of the establishment 


REVELATION. IX. 


and the ruin of the empire of Antichrist (see 
on ch. xiii. 1). Accumulated convulsions in 
the earth, the sea, the rivers, the air (the first 
four Trumpets) ; then convulsions in society 
which a diabolical epidemic undermines 
(the fifth Trumpet) and the foundations 
of which an invasion of barbarians overturns 
(the sixth Trumpet), such are the judg- 
ments which pave the way for the last 
Adversary. 

When Renan (/. ¢, p. 326, &c.) dwells 
upon the accumulated catastrophes of the 
Roman Empire from A.D. 59 to A.D. 79, may 
we not, in reply, ask him, Why should not 
similar catastrophes be repeated—nay, catae 
strophes still more intense—on the eve of the 
dissolution of our old world, and the birth- 
pangs of a new Heaven and a new Earth? In 
such commotions the physical and the moral 
worlds are not to be separated. The two 
domains are united by mysterious affinities. 
As Palestine has followed, in its alternations 
of desolation and of fertility, the destiny of 
Israel, why may not the fate be the same of the 
earth in relation to man?—cf. Godet, /.c., p. 355. 

Burger concludes that since, according to 
the two intervening Visions in ch. x.-xi. 14 
which precede the seventh Trumpet, the 
kingdom of Antichrist appears under that 
last Trumpet as a perfected World-kingdom, 
the preparation for this kingdom consists in the 
events under the fifth and sixth Trumpets; so 
thatall is now ready for ch. xiii. :—-see on ver. 16. 





ADDITIONAL NOTE on Chapter IX. 


Note A—THE TRUMPET-VISIONS. 


ANCIENT EXPOSITORS. 


VICTORINUS is the earliest expositor of the 
Trumpet-Visions. “The Trumpet,” he writes, 
“is a word of power.” What the Trumpets 
here announce the Vials (ch. xvi.) repeat ; not 
as if the thing were twice done, but in order 
to show the certainty of God’s decree—as in 
Gen. xli. 32 (“Quod ergo in tubis minus 
dixit, hoc in phialis est. Non aspiciendus est 
ordo dictorum, quoniam szpe Spiritus Sanctus, 
ubi ad novissimi temporis finem percurrerit, 
rursus ad eadem tempora redit, et supplet ea 
quz minus dixit ; nec requirendus est ordo 
in Apocalypsi, sed intellectus”):—see the 
remarks introductory to ch. viii. The 
Trumpets and Vials, therefore, describe: (1) 
The plagues sent on the world;—(2) The 
madness of Antichrist ;—(3) The blasphemy 
(“detractio”) of the peoples;—(4) The 
variety of the plagues ;—(5) The hope in the 
kingdom of the saints;—(6) The fall of 
cities ;—(7) The fall of that great City, 
Babylon, i. ¢. of the city of Rome. 


ANDREAS (see Note A on ch. vi.) regards 
the Trumpets as evo/ved, so to speak, from 
the seventh Seal, and as denoting the dissolu- 
tion of earthly governments: (1) In the first 
Trumpet, the hail denotes God’s wrath, and the 
fire and blood the ruin caused by the barba- 
rians ;—(2) The sea denotes, “ tropically,” the 
present life, and the “ great mountain” is the 
Devil burning with fiery wrath against men ; 
—(3) The fallen star (cf. Isai. xiv. 12) is Satan 
who orings the plagues;—(4) The fourth 
Trumpet is akin to Joel ii. 31. 

Inthese four plagues, God’s mercy restricts 
the judgments to the ¢4ird part. 

(5) The“ Star,” i. e.,a divine Angel, lets loose 
shortly before the end of all things the 
demons whom Christ at His Incarnation had 
bound, and the “jive months” denote “the 
shortened days” of Matt. xxiv. 22;—(6) “de 
Sour Angels” of ch. ix. 15 are not Archangels, 
but demons of the worst kind who had been 
bound at Christ’s coming, and who are now 
let loose by the divine Angel of ver. 13. Their 
being bound in the Euphrates he illustrates 
by the instance of the demons in Matt. viii. 32. 

BEDA follows, for the most part [Tichoe 


REVELATION. 


mus! and] Primasius. The Seven Angels 
signify the Church ; and the Trumpets signify, 
(1) The destruction of the ungodly by fire 
and hail—the heat of Gehenna, and bitter 
cold; “blood” denoting the spiritual death 
of the soul;—(2) The casting of the Devil by 
the Church into the sea of this world, as 
Christ promised His disciples in Matt. xxi. 
21 ;—(3) Heretics falling like stars from the 
Church, and corrupting the waters of Scrip- 
ture;—(4) The glory of the Church ob- 
scured by the falling away of-false brethren ;— 
(5) Heresy becoming more intense, as Anti- 
christ draws near; but heretics cannot kill the 
soul (ch. ix. 5);—(6) The open war of Anti- 
christ against the Church: “ Cornua altaris 
aurei Evangelia sunt Ecclesie praeminentia ” 
(ch. ix. 13);—(7) The Day of Judgment. 


MODERN EXPOSITORS. 


THE FIRST FOUR TRUMPETS. 


I. “ Historical” Interpreters :— 

MEDE takes the Trumpets to signify, (1) 
The subversion of the Roman world by the 
northern nations, who are symbolized as “‘ hail” 
(Isai. xxviii. 2); the “trees” are the chief 
men (Isai. xxxvii. 24; Zech. xi. 2), and, by 
analogy, the “grass” signifies the people at 
large. This Trumpet begins with the death 
of Theodosius, A.D. 395;—(2) The Roman 
world, or “sea,” is assailed by Alaric and 
Genseric, A.D. 410, and A.D. 455 ;—(3) The 
fallen “ Star” is Romulus Augustulus, A.D. 
476 (“de czlo potestatis sue revulsum ”), 
to whom the title “Wormwood” applies as a 
prince of bitterness and sorrow;—(4) The 
glory of Rome under the Ostrogoths is 
quenched by Belisarius and Narses, A.D. 542, 
who abolished the Consular dignity (the 
“ sun”), and the authority of the Senate (the 
“ moon” and the “ stars”). 

Birks: (1) A furious invasion of the Ro- 
man Empire, especially its Greek or Eastern 
provinces (A.D. 250-265, see Gibbon, chap. 
x., xi.), “with the pause of judgment,” A.D. 
270-365 :—(2) The extinction of the West- 
ern Empire, A.D. 365-476;—(3) Heresy, 
either Arian or Nestorian ;—(4) A notable 
eclipse of the Imperial splendour of the third 
or Greek Empire, A.D. 540-622. ‘The ex- 
pression “the third part,” writes Mr. Birks, 
“is found once in ch. xii. 4, and fourteen times 
in the Trumpet-Visions;” and as, when the 
Apocalypse was written, the judgment of the 
Grecian, the ¢4ird of Daniel’s four Empires 
(Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome), 
was still to come, Mr. Birks concludes that 
“whenever the ‘third part’ is specified in 
this V'sion, the direct reference is to the 


' See Note A on ch, vi. 


Ex 


Greek or Eastern Empire.”—-The Mystery of 
Providence, p. 65. 

The opinions of “ commentators of con- 
siderable eminence and reputation ” as to the 
first four Trumpets are thus summed up by Mr. 
Birks (/.c., p. 103) :—(1) “ The first Trumpet 
begins, according to Lowman, in the time of 
Constantine; according to Mr. Cunninghame 
and Mr. Frere, with the death of Valentinian, 
A.D. 376, and ends with the death of Theo- 
dosius, A.D. 395. But Mede, Newton, Dr 
Keith, and Mr. Elliott, make it degin with 
the death of Theodosius, and reach to the deith 
of Alaric, A.D. 410. Cressener and Whiston 
include in it both periods. Mr. Faber agrees 
with Mede and Newton, in its commence= 
ment, but continues it forty years after Alaric’s 
death, A.D. 395-450.” 

(2) “Thesecond, according to Lowman, Mr. 
Cunninghame, and Mr. Frere, reaches from 
Theodosius to Alaric, the exact interval which 
Mede, Newton, Dr. Keith, and Mr. Elliott 
assign to the first. Cressener refers it to the 
Transalpine invasions, a.D. 410-448; Sir I. 
Newton to the Visigoths and Vandals, 407-427; 
Whiston, Mr. Faber, and Dr. Keith to the 
Vandals only, but within different limits, A.D. 
406-450, 439-477, and 429-477 respectively.” 

(3). The third Trumpet by Sir I. Newton 
is applied to the Vandals, A.D. 427-530; by 
Whiston, Mr. Cunninghame, and Dr. Keith, 
to Attila and the Huns, A.D. 441-452; by 
Mede, Cressener, and Lowman, to the froze 
bles of Italy, or setting of the Western Cesar, 
A.D. 450-476; by Mr. Faber, to the same 
within narrower limits, A.D. 462-476; and by 
Mr. Frere to the Nestorian heresy.” 

(4) “ Lastly the fourth is referred by Mr. 
Cunninghaine to the fall of the Empire, A.D. 
455-476; by Whiston, to the extinction itself, 
A.D. 476; by Mede, Cressener, Lowman, and 
Dr. Keith, to the subsequent eclipse of Rome, 
A.D. 476-540; by Sir I. Newton to the wars 
of Belisarius, A.D. 535-552; by Mr. Faber, 
and Mr. Frere, to the reign of Phocas, and the 
Persian invasion of the East, A.D. 602-610.” 


II. (a) Ordinary “ Preterists” :— 

BOSSUET sees in the first four Visions :— 
(1) The desolation of the Jews under Trajan ; 
—(2) The last desolation of the Jews under 
Hadrian ;—(3) In the “Star” Barchochab 
(“Son of the Star”), the cause of the deso- 
lation under the second Trumpet ;—(4) The 
darkening of prophecy by the malice of the 
Jews at this very time; Christ is “the sun ;” 
the Church is “the moon ;” the Apostles, 
“the stars.” “On marque seulement la 
troisiéme partie, quand la menace ne regarde 
ni la totalité ni la plus grande partie.” 

WETSTEIN:—(1) The burnt trees and grass 
denote the villages and country parts of Judza, 
where the sedition first showed itself ;—(2) 
The burning ‘zountain” which stained the sea 


619 


620 


with blood, and also (3) The “Star” which 
made the waters bitter, signify the slaughter 
of the ‘ews at Cesarea and Scythopolis ;—(4) 
The obscuration of sun, moon, and stars de- 
Motes anarchy in the Jewish commonwealth. 

HERDER: The first four Trumpets are 
signals of tumults, massacres and contests 
in Judza, internal and external, under Florus 
and the Zealot Eleazar (Maran Atha, in loc.). 

(b) Rationalistic “ Preterists” :— 

VOLKMAR: In the first four Trumpets the 
Seer beholds the calamities which the world 
endured A.D. 63 (Tac., dun. xv. 47), A.D. 68 
(Tac. Hist. i. 3), and A.D. 69 (Hist. i. 18): the 
prodigy of 4/ood as rain was always believed at 

ome—‘ sanguine pluit’ (Liv. xxxix. 46) ; the 
Seer has also in his view, a Volcano, a falling 
Meteor, and an Eclipse. 

To the same effect RENAN 


III. “ Futurists” :— 

Topp assumes that the judgments predicted 
tm the first four Trumpet-Visions are to be 
understood literally. He appeals to the 
manner in which “ our Lord has predicted a 
visitation of the same kind as one of the signs 
of His future coming” (Luke xxi. 25, 26); 
and concludes that the judgments foretold on 
the sounding of these Trumpets are future 
and equally literal (p. 135). 

De BurGH: “I consider [the first four 
Trumpets] future ; and of this we have a two- 
fold evidence”:—(a) “The variety of ex- 
planations offered on the supposition of fulfil- 
ment”; (4) “The necessity, on that hypothesis, 
for a forcible accommodation of the whole 
language.” Thus if, as expositors contend, 
the trees, grass, &c., figuratively mean persons, 
then these four Trumpets affect the inhabit- 
ants of the earth as well as the last three; 
whereas under them inanimate objects alone 
are affected, while we read in ch. viii. 13: 
“Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabitants of the 
earth by reason of the other voices of the 
Trumpets of the three Angels, which are yet 
to sound!” Cf. also ch. ix. 4, where “the 
grass, trees, &c.” are distinguished from men 
(Lc., pp. 186-188). 

On the fact that scarcely any two expositors 
agree in the division of tne same subject 
among these four Trumpets, Mr. Faber ob- 
serves: “So curious a circumstance may well 
be deemed the opprobrium of Apocalyptic 
interpretation, and may naturally lead us to 
suspect that the true key to the distinct ap- 
plication of the four first Trumpets has never 
re been found, or, if found, has never yet 

en satisfactorily used.” 


THE THREE “ WOE-TRUMPETS.” 


The three remaining Trumpets, generally 
styled the “‘ Woe-Trumpets,” are introduced 
in ch. viii. 13. It will be convenient to give 


REVELATION, IX. 


here a summary of the principal opinions as 
to the fifth and sixth Trumpets (ch. ix.), ree 
serving for the present any remarks on the 
seventh, ch. xi. 15. 

(5) Dr. Todd reduces the various interpre- 
tations of the “locusts” in the #4 Trumpet- 
Vision to four classes: (1) The ancient 
opinion that they are evil spirits; and their 
appearance still future ;—(2) The medieval or 
controversial opinion, that they denote here- 
tics. ue is the one nom: Haymo, 
Berengaudus, &c., each applying the prop 
to the heretics of his own day. Order the 
head may be classed Roman Catholic writers 
(e.g. Bellarmin) who see in the locusts only 
Luther and the Protestants; as well as Pro- 
testant writers (e.g., Ussher, Bochart, Forbes, 
Pareus, &c.), who apply the Prophecy to the 
Pope, the Monks, the Inquisition ;—(3) The 
“Historical” interpretations: These were 
begun by Aureolus, De Lyra, and their fol- 
lowers who apply the prophecy to the Vandals, 
A.D. 441-536, and have since been adopted by 
subsequent writers, some of whom (including 
the “Preterists”—e.g. Hammond, Rosen- 
miller, Ewald, &c.) have had recourse to 
earlier times, and interpret the locusts of the 
Roman wars in Judza, ending in the de 
struction of Jerusalem. Modern commen- 
tators, since the time of Mede, a 
suppose this prophecy to have been fulfill 
in the victories or the religion of Mohammed ; 
although Vitringa rejects this theory, and 
returns to the more ancient application of it 
to the Goths and Vandals ;—(4) “ Futurists ” 
(eg. the Jesuit Lessius, and De Burgh) 
think that literal locusts are intended— 
“vere locuste,” as Lessius expresses i 
“licet peregrine et monstrose ” (/. c. p. 148). 

(6) Dr. Todd again sums up the opinions 
of modern writers as to the sixt/ Trumpet :— 


(1) “ Preterists.” Grotius takes the four 
Angels to be the generals of Vespasian, Titus, 
Mucianus, and Tiberius Alexander, whose 
armies penetrated as far as the Euphrates. 
Hammond supposes them to be the generals 
of Vespasian : these were ound, because Ves- 
pasian was for a long time hindered by the 
affairs of Rome from coming against Jeru- 
salem, and bound in the Euphrates, i.e., in 
Rome, for the Euphrates surrounded Baby- 
lon and is here put for the city Babylon, #.c., 
for Rome. 

(2) The “ Historical” commentators. 
Four nations are intended, viz., the Arabs, 
Saracens, Tartars, and Turks, who dwelt 
bevond the Euphrates, and were now per= 
mitted to cross it. So Parzus, Cotter, &c. 
Others of the same school (Durham, Forbes, 
Piscator) understand the Mohammedans, 
who are called four either to denote a suffi- 
cient number, or to indicate that this plague 
would extend to the jour corners of the 


REVELATION. IX. 


earth. Mede, Sir I. Newton, and Bishop 
Newton suppose the Turks to be the subject 
of the prophecy ; because they divided them- 
selves after they had crossed the Euphrates 
into four Sultanries ; and the loosing of these 
four took place after the Crusades, i.e. 
about the year 1300; or, as Daubuz sup- 
ses, when the Ottomans were invited over 
Cantacuzen, A.D. 1346. Faber takes the 
four Angels to be four Turkish dynasties, 
viz., Persia, Kerman, Syria, and Rhoum, 
A.D. 1092; who killed the third part of men, 
iz., destroyed the Roman Empire in the East, 
A.D. 1453; and so Keith and Habersion. 
With Lowman and Doddridge the Angels are 
the Saracens, who were loosed A.D. 513, and 
who are spoken of as four merely to denote 
the universality of their ravages. Mr. Cun- 


ninghame supposes the number four to be 
mystical, signifying complete, entire; and the 
Euphrates to be put for the Turkish nation 
(Pp. 154). 

As to “the hour, day, month, and year” 
(ch. ix. 15) some maintain that only a fixed 









Arius .. 
ee 

USe e 
Eutyches . 
Valens . . 
Heretics . 
Favourers of 
Heretics. 


SOuULWwW ow 


or appointed time is denoted (so Grotuus, 
Hammond, Daubuz, Lowman, Doddridge). 
Bishop Newton, on the “ Year-day” theory, 
makes the period 391 years and 15 days, ‘rom 
the first victory of the Turks over Christians, 
A.D. 1281, to the /as#, the taking of Cameniec 
from the Poles, A.D. 1672. Mr. Faber under- 
stands this period to be 396 years, 3 months, 
beginning with the reign of Othman, June 9, 
1301, and ending with Prince Eugene’s vice 
tory at Zenta, Sept. 1, 1697. Mr. Cunning- 
hame takes it to be the period of their prepara- 
tion for destroying men, or 391 years from 
A.D. 1057, to A.D. 1448; and so Mr. Keith, 
who reckons 396 years, 103 days, from A.D. 
1057 to A.D. 1453. Mr. Habershon makes. 
it the period during which the Turks will 
hold Constantinople, viz., 391 years, and 
one month, from May 29, 1453, to June, 
1844. 

Mr. Tyso (see Note A. on ch. vi.), sums. 
up, as before, the conclusions of the “ His- 
torical” commentators as to the dates of the 
several Trumpet-Visions :— 





This list of “ Historical” interpreters may 
be closed with a rather doubtful example :— 


I, With Stern (5) the #4 Trumpet denotes 
heresy, including the errors, from the end of 
Cent. iv., of the Cathari, the Albigenses and 
Waldenses, down to the Pantheists of our own 
day ;—(6) the sixth, the beginning of the last 
persecution, shortly before the coming of 
Antichrist. Then, at “the hour, day, month, 
and year” which God has determined on in 
His counsels, the Judgment falls. 


Il. (a) Ordinary “ Preterisis” :— 

(5) BossueT understands by the fifth 
Trumpet the heresies which, having their origin 
among the Jews against the Person of Christ 
and the Trinity, were subsequently revived 
by Theodotus of Byzantium (who succeeded 
Cerinthus), and by Artemon (A.D. 196). 
Heresy is a “scorpion,” which secretes its 
noxious venom; the sting is in the tail—i.e. 
concealed behind, for heresy has a fair aspect 
(vers. 5, 10). This Trumpet also indicates the 
war of Persia against Rome, and the calamities 
thence arising which made men weary of life 
(ver. 6). The “Jocusts” (ver. 7) have “as it 
qwere crowns ke unto gold,” i.e., of false gold, 


unlike the crowns in ch. iv. 4—heretics put 
forth a vain imitation of Truth. (6) The sixté 
Trumpet brings us down to A.D. 260, 270, 
and the Council against the heresy of Paul of 
Samosata, when the second “ Woe” begins 
(ver. 12). The Persian army crossed the 
Euphrates; and then, in the fall of Valerian, 
began the fall of Rome. In vv. 16, 17 is de= 
scribed the armour of the Persian ca ‘ 
which marched with the force of lions. The 
“serpents” in ver. 19 denote the arrows 
which, after the Parthian fashion, the Persians 
shot back upon the foe. 

(b) Rationalistic “ Preterists” :— 

VOLKMAR : His principle is that the Eagle of 
ch. viii. 13 is the type of the Roman Empire. 
(5) The “fallen Star” in the fifth Trumpet 
is Nero, who leads a demon-host from the 
Abyss against Rome and the Roman world, 
but not against the Christians (the “Sealed ” 
of ch. vii. 4; ix. 4), who however had been 
subject to the other natural plagues, except 
the pestilence in ch. xvi. 2. After Nero, or 
“ Apollyon” (ver. 12) follow two “ Woes”— 
Galba, now the reigning Emperor, and a 
seventh not yet come (ch. xvii. 10). (6) 

brings hi 


Nero, returning as Antichrist, 


625 


622 


hellish host nearer from the boundary of the 
Parthian Kingdom—the Euphrates. 


Ill. “ Futurists ” :-— 

Topp: (5) As a “Futurist” this writer 
treats the “locust” Vision as related to the 
Sealing of ch. vii. 3. After the restoration of 
the Jewish people to the land of Canaan, 
Satan will raise against them the agency of evil 
spirits; and these, either under the appearance 
of literal locusts, or by the instrumentality of 
natural locusts or of a human army, will not 


CHAPTER X. 


1 A mighty strong angel appeareth with a book 
open in his hand. 6 He sweareth by him 
that liveth for ever, that there shall be no 


EVELATION, X. 


[v. 5. 


injure vegetation, but will merely injure (not 
destroy) men, except the Sealed of the children 
of Israel. The torment of each is to continue 
for five literal months, or five literal months 
make up the entire duration of this judgment; 
—(6) The region of the Euphrates is here- 
after to become she scene of the last great 
struggle between “the Prince of this World” 
and the people of God,—the army of horse- 
men being now permitted to 4i// the third part 
of men, while the locusts were permitted onlv 
to torment.—(l.c., pp. 136-151). 


more time. 9 Fohn is commanded to take 
and eat the book. 


ND I saw another mighty 


angel come down from hea- 





[Ver. 1 7 tps. Ver. 2 éxav. 


Ver. 4 om. r. pavas éavrdv.—om. por.—pn avra [1, agreeing 


with the Comm. of Andreas, reads cai pera taira ypages. This, Er., after the et noli ea 
scribere of the Vulgate, changed into cai i raira ypawns]. Wer. § r. xeipa avrov rHy defiay. 


Ver. 6 [&, A om. kai tT. Oddaco. k. Ta ev airy ]—ovkére Eorat. 


SovAous Tovs mpop7ras. 
Ver. 11 Aeyovow.] 


tHE Two EPISODES (x. 1—xi. 13). 


Two episodes, that of the “ Little Book ” 
(ch. x. 2) and that of the “‘ Measuring of the 
Temple” (ch. xi. 1-13), now separate the end 
of the sixth from the beginning of the seventh 
Trumpet-Vision (ch. ix. 21; xi. 15); just as 
the two episodes of ch. vii. 4, 9 separate the 
sixth and seventh Seals. The relation of this 
tenth chapter to the general drift of the Vision 
is more difficult to discern than in the case of 
ch.vii. Among ancient writers, some (e. g. Pri- 
masius, Beda, Berengaudus,) understand by 
ch. x. the propagation of Christianity ; while 
others(e.g. Andreasand Arethas) merely regard 
it as introductory to what follows. Mede and 
Bishop Newton consider this chapter as in- 
tended to explain how St. John received the 
prophecy of ch. xi.—xiv.; and as giving an ac- 
count of his “ inauguration ” (“sic fuit Joannis 
inauguratio,” Mede, /.c., p. 478) into his pro- 
phetic office. Mede also regards the “ Second 
Woe,” ending at ch. xi. 14, as identical with 
the plague of the sixth Trumpet; while he 
makes the second chief prophecy of the 
Revelation to be that of the “Little Book,” 
which sets out from the same beginning of 
Apocalyptic time as the Seals, and proceeds 
from ch. x. 8 to the end. I. Williams thinks 
that as, in the first Seal, we see the single 
Horseman in Judea, and in the first Trumpet 
the Church going forth from the ruins of 
Jerusalem,—so here we have a Vision of the 
expansion of the Gospel throughout the world; 


Ver. 7 érekéoOn.—rois <avt. 


Ver. 8 Aadodcav.—héyoucay.— BiBriov.—rod ayy. Ver. 9 dovvat. 


the Book given to St. John veing “his in- 
auguration into the deeper knowledge of the 
kingdom,” and all that follows after ch. xi. be- 
ing “ Recapitulation,” and unfolding mysteries 
heretofore unrevealed. “The Little Book,” 
writes Mr. Maurice, “is to interpret those 
puzzling passages of human history which 
exhibit periods of revolution and anarchy ;"— 
“a Book of judgment ” (p. 172). 

De Wette, Alford, and others limit the 
“Second Woe” to ch. ix. 13-21 ; and Hengst. 
connects ch. xi. 14 with ch. ix.21. Ebrard, 
on the other hand (s. 348) would restrict the 
“Second Woe” to “the mystic earthquake ” of 
ch. xi. 13, explaining the interlude thus:—As 
in ch. vii. 1 the course of the Divine judge 
ments is arrested before that final judgment 
with which the delay allowed by Divine grace 
comes to an end; so here God strives to bring 
men to repentance, first through those un- 
revealed acts symbolized by “ the Seven 
Thunders” (ch. x. 4)—an effort which the close 
of Ps, xxix. tells us will not be without fruit; 
and secondly, by “the mystic earthquake” 
(or “Second Woe”) which occurs after the 
Law and the Gospel have ultimately failed, 
and which destroys the tenth part of the 
kingdom of Antichrist. On an opposite prin- 
ciple, Vitringa (pp. 422, 485) regards the cala- 
mities described from ch. ix. 13 to ch. xi. 14, 
as all belonging to the “ Second Woe,” that 
is, to tne sixth Trumpet; while Bengel ex- 
cludes from the “Second Woe” the whole 
passage from ch. x. 1 to ch. xi 13. 


— 


v. 2.) 


ven, clothed with a cloud: and a 
rainbow was upon his head, and his 
face was as it were the sun, aud his 
feet as pillars of fire: 


Bisping notes:—Before the “Third Woe,” 
comes the judgment on Israel; and these 
two Episcdes form the transition from the 
first to the second half of “the last World- 
Week” (s. 164) :—see on ch. ix. 12. 


CHAPTER X. 


THE LITTLE Book (1-11). 


1, And I saw another mighty angel] Cf. 
ch. v. 2; xviii. 21. This Angel corresponds 
to the “ another Angel” of ch. vii. 2; and the 
epithet “mighty” points to an analogy be- 
tween him and the Angel of ch. v. 2. where, 
in like manner, a “ Book ”— the “Sealed Book” 
—is the theme. De Wette understands the 
word “another” as distinguishing this Angel 
from the Angel of ch. viii. 13 (‘the Eagle”) ; 
or of ch. ix. 13; or of some one of the 
Trumpet-Angels. With the early expositors 
generally, Mede, Hengst., Words., Bisping 
understand Christ; the symbols—the “‘c/oud” 
(ch. i. 7), the “feet as pillars of fire” (cf. 
ch. i. 15), and especially the “ rainbow,” 
(ch. iv. 3)—denoting how God tempers justice 
with mercy. To the same effect Hippolytus 
(“ Ancolitus ”—see Note A on ch. xii. 3; La- 
garde, /.c., p. 26), writes that St. John here, 
and Daniel (xii. 1-7) both beheld the Word of 
God. Vitringa, arguing from the oath in ver. 
6, concludes that it can be no created being 
(cf. Hebr. vi. 17); and he leaves it uncertain 
whether the reference is to Christ or to the 
Holy Ghost. On the other hand, Bengel 
argues from ver. 6 that this Angel cannot be 
Christ; and so Stern: we may also note 
how the description here differs from that 
in ch. i. 13-16 where Christ appears. In 
“the mighty Angel” Daubuz sees Luther ;— 
Keith and Elliott, the power of Christ mani- 
fested in the Reformation, and discerned by 
Luther ;—the descent of the Angel,” writes 
Mr. Cunninghame (The Seals and Trumpets, 
4th ed. ch. vili.), “is the French Revolution 
of 1789.” 

coming down out of heaven,| Alford con- 
siders that the Seer, as in ch. iv. 1, is still in 
heaven :—but cf. vv. 8, 9. Hengst. justly ob- 
serves that there is a latitude as to St. John’s 
position: when the Vision is seen on earth, 
he is on earth—e.g. “in the wilderness” (ch. 
xvii. 3); but when the Vision is in heaven, he 
is there (ch. xi. 16; xix. 1), 

clothed with a cloud;| ‘The cloud, charged 
with lightnings and thunders, is the symbol of 
judgment—see ch. viii. 5; xi. 19; xvi. 18. 


REVELATION. X. 


2 And he had in his hand a little 
book open: and he set his right foot 
upon the sea, and Ais left foot on the 
earth, 


and the rainbow [qas] upon bis head,| 
(“Upon”—see the noteon ch.i. 20). The “rain- 
”—the well-known emblem of mercy, 
Gen. ix. 13. Compare ch. iv, 3; Ezek. i. 28. 


and bis face [was] as the sun,| The em- 
blem of the glory with which he was invested 
—cf. ch. i. 16; xviii. 1; Luke ix. 26. 

as pillars of fire;| Not merely shining, as in 
ch. i. 15; but intimating the fire of judgment, 
ch. xx. 9. Referring to ch. ili. 12, Hen 
understands by “i//ars ” unchangeable stede 
fastness. 


2. and he had in his hand| (Gr. and 
having—see vv. //.). As commentators point 
out, his /ef hand—see ver. 5. 


a@ little book| The diminutive of the word 
used in ch, v. 1 :—see note A at the end of this 
chapter, and on ver. 8. This Book, as to 
the contents of which nothing is revealed, 
is, apparently, altogether distinct from the 
“Sealed Book” of ch.v. It probably cone 
tains the commission given to the Seer in 
ver. 11 :—cf. Ezek. ili. 2, 11. 


open:| Incontrast to the “Sealed Book” of 
ch. v.:—it lies unrolled on the Angel’s hand, 
seever. 8. The “ Little Book,” notes Bisping, 
(see on ver. 8), forms part of the “Sealed 
Book;” and because its seventh Seal had 
been broken (ch. viii. 1) this portion of it is 
“open”: and so Burger ;—it is open, notes 
Ebrard, in contrast to the concealed meaning 
of the Thunder-Voices, ver. 4;—it is open, 
notes Stuart, because, as it concerns the 
pagan persecutors of the Church, it has less 
mystery than the “Sealed Book” which con- 
tains the destiny of God’s people. 


and he set his right foot on the sea, and his 
left on the earth;| Intimating the judicial 
authority committed to him over the whole 
world, as contrasted with the partial judg- 
ments of the first four Trumpets (ch. viii. 7— 
12):—cf. Ps. viii. 6. Bleek takes the words 
to mean the colossal form of the Angel, visible 
to the Universe. Among allegorizing interpre- 
tations, C. a Lapide and Alcazar refer to 
Christ’s preaching to Jews and Gentiles ;— 
Bengel understands Europe and Asia ;—Keith, 
England (the sea), and Germany (the land) ;— 
Hengst. interprets, as in ch. viii. 8, “the sea of 
the nations,” and he takes this passage (vv. 2-7) 
as intended to calm the disquietude which the 
contents of the “ Litt/e Book” were likely to 
produce ;—according to Elliott, the Angel 
with the “ Little Book open” is a vrediction 
of the Reformation. 


623 


624 


3 And cried with a loud voice, as 
when a lion roareth: and when he 
had cried, seven thunders uttered their 
voices. 

4 And when the seven thunders 





8. and hecried witha great voice, as alion 
roareth:| Denoting the menacing tone of the 
voice. What the utterance was the text does 
not explain—cf. Hos. xi. 10; Am. iii. 8. 
Alford regards this entire description as a 
literal representation of the Vision ;—Bengel 
would refer the cry to ver. 6 ;—Ebrard thinks 
that the Angel by his cry gives the signal to 
the Seven Thunders, as in ch. ix. 14 the Angel 
of the sixth Trumpet gives the signal to the 
four Euphrates-Angels. 


and when he oried, the seven thunders] 
It is to be noted that the Jews were wont 
to speak of thunder as “ the seven voices”: this 
usage was founded on the seven-fold repetition 
of “the voice of the Lord” in Ps. xxix.—see 
Eisenmenger, Entdecktes Judenthum, i. 426. 
Accordingly, there is here a personification, 
as if the seven spirits of thunder uttered their 
voices together :—cf. ch. xiv. 2. They issue, 
4S it were, from the cloud which veils the 
Angel, and are the echo of his lion-voice. 

Beda takes the Seven Thunders to be iden- 
tical with the Seven Trumpets ;—Mede under- 
stands seven Oracles of unknown import, 
which divide the seventh Trumpet into certain 
periods ;—Ebrard, seven events occurring be- 
tween the sixth and seventh Trumpets, which 
conduce to the repose of the saints and the 
discomfiture of God’s enemies ;—Vitringa, the 
seven Crusades (see Gibbon, ch. lix.) ;—Dau- 
buz, the seven kingdoms that received the 
Reformation ;—Elliott, the Bull fulminated 
from the Seven-hilled City against Luther ;— 
Burger thinks that God’s judicial omnipotence 
is intended; and he compares the expression 
“ the Seven Spirits” in ch. i. 4; iv. 53 v. 6. 

Many explain the article—“ the Seven 
Thunders”—by the constant use of the 
number seven in Apocalyptic imagery (e.g. 
ch. i. 20); and thus, seven being the symbol of 
completion, Words. understands “a// the 
thunders.” Hengst. observes that, except in 
Mark iii. 17, where St. John himself is des- 
cribed as a “son of thunder,” the word 
“thunder ” is found in the New Testament 
only in St. John’s writings :—see John xii. 29, 
on which verse our Lord Himself gives a 
comment, in vv. 30, 31, with reference to His 
glory, and to the future Judgment. 


their vowes.| Gr. “their own voices” 
—voices of a character peculiar to them ; with 
a reference, perhaps, to their remaining un- 
written 


REVELATION. X. 


lv. $—@ 


had uttered their voices, I was about 
to write: and I heard a voice from 
heaven saying unto me, Seal up those 
things which the seven thunders ut- 
tered, and write them not. 


4. And when the seven thunders uttered 
[their voices],| See vv. Jl.:—Gr. sake. 


I was about to write:] Viz. what they 
had uttered: according to the command in 
ch. i. 11, and as the Seer seems to have 
understood the words—see ch. i. 19. 

It seems to be intimated here that St. John 
was employed in writing during the intervals 
of his Visions. 


and I heard a voice from heaven] As to the 
indefiniteness of the speaker, see on ch. i. 10. 


saying, Seal up the things] Omit 
“ unto me” —see vv. H. 


which the seven thunders uttered, and write 
them not.| (On the text of codex 1—as of the 
Complutensian and other Andreas-texts,—see 
vv. ij.) Although understood by St. John, 
what was uttered is not revealed to us (Actsi. 
7); while in ch. xxii. to he is commanded not 
to seal the prophecy, “for the time is at hand.” 
The details of the catastrophe are passed over 
in silence by the Seer in this passage, and a 
similar silence as to details may be noted in 
ch. xi. 15-19. Stuart considers that what is 
thus passed over in ch. xi. 15-19 is that which 
the Thunders here declared, and that which 
St. John is forbidden to write, through pity 
for the weakness of men. Reuss inter- 
prets: All is known to the prophet; yet he 
must not yield to the natural impatience of 
mortals by at once describing the final re- 
sult:—he must disclose the events in suc- 
cession, “according to the regular evolution 
of the facts.” 

The command not to write, observes 
Andreas (/.c., p. 55), is a command to fix 
the voices in his memory; the fulfilment is 
reserved for the last times. Until that time 
when their fulfilment gives light, the voices, 
notes Hengst., are only provisionally sealed 
(cf. Dan. viii. 26; xii. 4). In the continuous 
narrative of the Apocalypse, observes I. 
Williams (p. 478), there occurs this excep- 
tion; and the silence here may account for 
the difficulty in attempting to elucidate the 
nature of the last conflict with Antichrist :— 
“We learn from St. John and from St. Paul, 
that their churches had been informed of 
the coming of ‘the wicked one,’ or nal 
Antichrist; and that they knew well of the 
power that withholdeth: but of these things 
the next generation hac no knowledge” :—see 
St. August., De Civ. Des xx. 19, 


%5—7-] ° 


5 And the angel which I saw 
stand upon the sea and upon the 
earth lifted up his hand to heaven, 

6 And sware by him that liveth 
for ever and ever, who created heaven, 
and the things that therein are, and 


6. which Isaw standing on the sea and 
on the earth] Viz. in ver. 2. 

lifted up his right hand to heaven,] (See 
vv. i].). The gesture of one who swears,— 
Gen. xiv. 22: cf. Dan. xii. 7. His left hand 
held the “ Little Book.” 


6. and sware by him] (For the constr. 
cf. Matt. v. 34, &c.). In order to remove the 
possible doubts of the suffering Church, or 
of the unbelieving world (2 Pet. iii. 4). 


that liveth for ever and ever,| AA title 
taken from Deut. xxxii. 40; cf. Isai. Ivii. 15. 


the Leaven, and the things that are 
therein, and the earth and the things that 
are therein, and the sea and the things 
that are therein,| (MSS. of very high 
authority omit “and the sea, and the things 
that are therein”—see vv. ij.) The form 
of this oath confirms the conclusion that the 
Angel, in ver. 1, is not Christ. 

that there shall be time no longer:] Or 
that there shall be delay no longer:] 
See vv. //. For the word rendered “ time” 
(chronos), see on ch. i. 3; ii. 21). 

There are different interpretations here :— 

(1) That there should be the ezd of that 
portion of finite duration which we call time, 
and the Jeginning of eternity; viz. that all 
shall be finished under the seventh Trumpet. 
now about to sound (cf. ch. vi. 11) :—“ There 
will be then, says Aretas, no evening; no sun 
to mark the courses of time; the sun shall be 
hidden by a far greater Light, as the stars are 
now by the day. (Ecumenius: Time will be 
then no more, inasmuch as it will not be 
measured by the sun, but life everlasting ex- 
ceeding the numbering of time. The seventh 
Seal, and seventh Trumpet are as the seventh 
Day in Genesis, which has no evening.”—I. 
Williams, /.c., p. 180. 

(2) Rendering differently,—and this seems 
to give the correct meaning,—“ There shall 
be no longer delay,” “ respite,’ “an in- 
terval” cf. ch. ii. 21, and the verb in Matt. 
xxiv. 48 ; Luke xii. 45. Diisterd. argues that 
the seventh verse imposes a “chronological ” 
sense: and he adds, “ The Angel swears that 
between the present point of duration—sud- 
sequent to the close of the sixt4 Trumpet, ch. 
ix. 21, but defore the end of the second Woe, 
cn. x1. 14—and the fulfilment of the mystery 
under the seventh Trumpet, no time shall 
intervene.” So Hammond, “There shall be 


New Test#—Vot. IV. 


REVELATION. X. 


the earth, and the things that therein 
are, and the sea, and the things which 
are therein, that there should be time 
no longer : 

7 But in the days of the voice of 
the seventh angel, when he shall begin 





no longer delay,”—as in Hab. ii. 3, “it will 
not tarry” (ov py xpovion); ci Heb. x. 37. 
So also many others,—“the little time” re- 
ferred to in ch. vi. 11 having now come to an 
end. Thus Hengst.: The Church is consoled by 
the promise that there shall not be under the 
seventh Trumpet the same de/ay in the coming 
of God’s kingdom as there had been before. 

(3) Ebrard understands “a space of time 
wherein to repent” (‘‘ Gnaden-Frist,”), as in 
ch.ii.21. Bishop Wordsworth: “There shall 
be no longer any de/ay or respite for re- 
pentance save only in the days of the /ast 
Angel.” See on ver. 7. 

(4) Mede explains: The time of the Four 
Monarchies, or rather of the last kingdom 
—i.e., the Roman—the last period of the 
‘time, times, and half a time’ (ch. xii. 14, 
where, however, xaipos is used ]—shall be no 
longer; and the fourth, or Roman Beast 
being slain (Dan. vii. 23-25; xii. 7), the 
kingdom shall be given to the saints of the 
Most High (p. 476). 

(5) Bishop Newton, Lowman, Daubuz,&c., 
accepting the reading of the Textws Receptus, 
take the words to signify : “ The time [of the 
fulfilment] shall not be yet, but it shall be 
when the seventh Trumpet sounds.” 

(6) Bengel (see Introd.,$ 11 (b), IV.), taking 
a“ Chronus” to be 11114 years, counts from 
the earlier part of A.D. 725 (“ Eudo Saracenos 
A.726 vicit”); and renders: ‘there shall not 
elapse a Chronus.” Hence he places the end 
of all things in the year 1836. On this verse 
he also founds his period of a “ Non-chronus,” 
greater than 9998 (1000) years, and less than 
11114 years; and counting from A.D. 800, the 
date of the origin of the German Empire under 
Charles the Great, he again obtains’ as the 
time of the end A.D. 1836. 


7. but in the days} The connexion, ac- 
cording to the second interpretation of ver. 6, 
is: “There shall be no delay: on the con- 
trary, when the seventh Angel is about to 
sound, then is finished,” &c. 

Words. (see above on ver. 6) understands, 
“ except,” or “save only”—see Matt. xx. 23; 
Mark x. 40: God, in His mercy, will give a 
brief respite on the eve of the final consum- 
mation, in order that the ungodly may repent. 

Bengel considers that the seventh Angel 
will sound continually during the days at 
the end of which comes “the last Trump’ 
(1 Cor. xv. 52). 


RR 


625 


626 


to sound, the mystery of God should 
be finished, as he hath declared to his 
servants the prophets. 





when he is about to sound,] These 
words are an explanatory description of “the 
woice of the seventh Angel” (cf. Mark xiii. 4). 

Elliott renders, “at what time soever he 
may have to sound,”—an indefiniteness which 
scarcely agrees with the usage of the N. T. 


then is finished] Or fulfilled] (See 
vv. Il,—cf. John xiii. 31; xv. 6). So Winer, 
“dann ist vollendet,” the apodosis beginning 
with «ai. Ebrard and Diisterd. make xai 
with the aorist correspond to the Hebr. Vav 
with the perfect in Ex. xvi. 6, 7; xvii. 4,— 
where the LXX. use xa/ with the future. Or, 
We may render, “when he is about to 
sound [all shall come to pass]: and the 
mystery of God is finished.” 


the mystery of God,] As being still 
future (1 Cor. ii. 9); cf. on ch. i. 20; xvii. 5. 
The “nearest authentic explanation of the 
mystery” Diisterd. finds (under the seventh 
Trumpet) in ch. xi. 17, &c.;—in ch. xi. 15, 
18, notes Hengst. “the things concealed here 
from the Church actually appear.” Stuart 
considers that these words absolutely demon- 
strate that the “Sealed Book” is brought to 
a close in ch. xi:—the world looked on in 
silence (ch. viii. 1) when the last Seal was 
broken and divided into Seven Trumpets; 
the Trumpets admit of no subdivision; there 
is an interval (ch. xi. 1-14), and then the 
mystery is fulfilled —Vol. ii. p. 210, note. 


according to the good tidings which 
he declared to his servants the prophets.| 
Or brought to. Asin Amos. ili. 7. For the 
construction with the accusative,see vv. //.,and 
cf: Luke iii. 18; Acts viii. 25. In the N. T. 
the verb (evayyeAi(w) is found in the active 
only here, and in ch. xiv. 6; it does not 
occur elsewhere in St. John’s writings :— 
we-may translate literally, “as He evangel- 
ized His servants.” 

De Wette makes the period of three years 
and a half, spoken of in Dan. vii. 25; xii. 7, and 
referred to in Rev. xi. 2; xii. 143 xiii. 5, to 
begin now; and in this fact he finds the 
meaning of the present verse. So also 
Bisping notes: “The 33 ‘times’ of Daniel 
are identical with our ‘days of the seventh 
Trumpet. With the sounding of the seventh 
Trumpet begins the second half of Daniel’s 
World-week :”—the mystery revealed of old 
to the prophets will be fulfilled under the 
Seventh Trumpet. 

Hitherto, according to Mede, the second 
prophecy of the Apocalypse has referred to the 
fate of the Roman Empire; henceforward it 
treats of the fortunes of the Church:—the 


REVELATION. X. 


fv. & 


8 And the voice which I heard 
from heaven spake unto me again, 
and said, Go and take the littl k 


former was the theme of the “Sealed yok 
ch.v. 1; the latter is the theme of the “ Li 
Book” of this chapter; and from the eighth 
verse here to the end of the Apoc., the ¢hird 
chief division of the Revelation p 

although “some of the sequent Visions fe. g. 
ch. xii.] do begin at the beginning of Apoca- 
lyptical time” (/.c., p. 583). The whole Book 
is thus divided by Mede into three chief pro- 
phecies, each ushered in by “a t voice 
as of a Trumpet”—viz. at ch. i. 10; ch. iv. 13 
ch. x. 4, 8. 

8. And the voice which I beard from 
heaven,| See ver. 4. 

{I heard it] again speaking with me, 
and saying,] See wv. I. Cf. ch. iv. 1. 

Go,] Cf. ch. xvi. 1; the command is obeyed 
in ver. 9. (Omit avd.) 

take the book] See wv. J. In ver. 2 
it is described as “a Little Book,’ which, 
as usually explained, is contrasted with the 
“Sealed Book,” ch. v. 1. Of the contents of 
the Sealed Book the “Little Book” forms 
part,—so Vitringa, Diisterd., and others. As 
differing from “the great sealed roll of God’s 
purposes,” Alf. understands by it “ one portion 
of those purposes which was to be made the 
Seer’s own for his future prophesyings,” £2. 
the subject of the rest of the Book ;—It is 
“less copious” than the “‘ Sealed Book,” notes 
Stuart ;—It is diminutive, according to Bengel, 
as opposed to the great form of the Angel, 
ver. 1 ;—According to Eichhorn, its size has 
a reference to the eating of the Book by 
the Seer, ver. 9. Beda sees in it the New 
Test., as contrasted with the Old;—The 
‘Sealed Book,” according to Hengst., con- 
tains the judgments on the world; the 
“ Tittle Book” differs from it, it contains the 
destinies of the degenerate Church (cf. Mede 
in the note on ver. 7) ;—According to Ewald 
it contains the destiny of Jerusalem ;—Ebrard 
finds the contents of the “ Little Book” in 
ch. xi.;—De Burgh applies it solely to the 
testimony of the “Two Witnesses ;’—Elliott, 
to the special commission of Christ to Luther 
and the preachers of the Reformation :—Stern 
sees in it a special revelation respecting 
Antichrist ; and it lies “‘ open,” because while 
Antichrist rules no one can plead ignorance 
as to the destinies of the Church. 

Godet, who considers that the contents of 
the “ Little Book” are summed up in ch. xi. 
1-13, also includes a reference to Antichrist 
(see on ch. xi. 13; xvii. 16): he takes the 
“ Little Book” to be, as it were, a paren- 
thesis in the “ Great Book” of ch v. 1; and 


v. 9—10.] REVELATION. X. 627 


which is open in the hand of the book. And he said untc me, *Take ¢2=@ as 


8.238 


angel which standeth upon the sea 
and upon the earth. 

g And I went unto the angel, and 
said unto him, Give me the little 


it, and eat it up; and it shall make 
thy belly bitter, but it shall be in thy 
mouth sweet as honey. 

1o And I took the little book out 





to be the announcement (anticipated in the 
prophetic picture itself) of the conversion of 
Israel. In proof Godet refers to the appear- 
ance of Antichrist, the Beast, in ch. xi. 7, who 
has quitted Rome for Jerusalem (ch. xi. 8), 
where we recognize the faithful Jews who 
worship at the Altar (ch. xi. 1) ; as well as the 
rest of the people, “almost completely pagan- 
ized,” represented by the “court which is 
without” (ch. xi. 2).—/.c., pp. 355-357- 

Mr. Faber regards the episode of the “‘ Little 
Book” as identical with ch. x.—xiv., or the 
history of the Western Church, from A.D. 604. 
This episode he interposes between the first 
and second divisions of the great Sealed Book 
—see on ch. v. 1; and he makes the period 
embraced byit to begin with the 4#4 Trumpet 
(ch. ix. 1) with which it partially synchro- 
nizes, and to extend to the end of the world. 

Wordsworth: “ We shall see reason to 
believe the /i#t/e rol] of St. John concerns the 
power which is called the LirrLe Horn, 
by Daniel (vii. 8, 20), namely the spiritual 
power of Rome;’—The introduction of the 
“ Tittle Book” before the seventh Trumpet 
arises, notes I. Williams (p. 180), from the 
fact that St. John, after partaking of the 
hidden knowledge which it contains (ver. 9), 
proceeds through the rest of the Apoc. to 
recapitulate the Church’s history as to its 
inner nature; for he had heretofore traced 
its development only as visible to the ex- 
ternal eye. It is not “the Large Bock” of 
the Church universal, but, alas! “a Little 
Book,” “of a sacred remnant of the little 
ones of God;”—It is Jefore the seventh 
Trumpet, notes Stuart, because the Angel 
who declares that “time shall be no longer” 
in respect to the completion of the first great 
Catastrophe, or “overthrow of the Jewish 
persecuting power” (ch. vi.—xi.), also gives 
St. John a new commission ; and assures him 
that his duties will not end with the full dis- 
closure of the Seven-sealed Book (/.c., p. 206). 


which is open in the hand of the angel that 
standeth on the sea and on the earth.| See 
vv. /j.; and the note on ver. 2. 


9. And I went] Alf. renders “I went 
away,” i.e, “from my former place as a 
tor in heaven :”—but see on ver. I as 
to St. John’s position. 
saying unto him that he should give 
me the little book.| See vv. i].; and the note 
on ver 2 


And he saith unto me, Take it, and eat it 
up;| For the symbolism here see Ezek. ii. 9— 
il. 1. The meaning is explained in Ezek. iii. 
10: “All my words that I shall speak unto 
thee, receive in thine heart, and hear with 
thine ears.” In fact the Seer was to assimilate, 
to make thoroughly his own, the contents of 
“ the Little Book.” 


but in thy mouth it shall de sqweet as 
boney.| See Ezek. iii. 3; cf. Jer. xv. 16: 
‘** Thy words were found and I did eat them; 
and thy word was unto me the joy of mine 
heart ;” cf. also Ps. xl. 8; cxix. 103. 


10. and it was in my mouth sweet as 
honey: and when I 4ad eaten it, my belly 
was made bitter.] In Ezekiel, the sweet- 
ness only of the book is expressed (iii. 3); 
for God’s judgments “are sweeter than 
honey and the honey-comb”—Ps. xix. Io: 
but “the bitterness” is not only implied 
in Ezek. ii. 10, but expressed in Ezek. 
iii. 14, the former of these two verses ex- 
plaining what “the bitterness” imports— 
viz. “lamentation, and mourning, and woe.” 
As to this latter effect, cf. Jer. viii. 21; 
Dan. viii. 27; Rom. ix. 2: “Very sweet,” 
says Origen, “is this the Book of Scripture 
when first perceived, but bitter to the cons 
science within.”—Pdilocal. v. 

The following expositions are given:— 
Andreas, who takes the “ Little Book” to 
be the record of the deeds of the wicked, 
explains that St. John thus learns that the 
sweetness which sin at first presents, is after= 
wards turned to bitterness. The same Book, 
we are told by others, cannot be both sweet 
and bitter, and hence some (Heinrichs) ex- 
plain by the different nature of the contents, 
or (Todd) by “the mixed character of the 
succeeding prophecies ;’—others (Hofmann) 
that the Book causes joy to the spiritual 
mind, but bitterness to the carnal ;—others 
(Ebrard) consider that, at first, the revelation 
appeared pleasing (ch. xi. 5-6 and 11-12}, 
but after calm reflection, sorrowful (ch. xi. 
7-I0). 

St. John, notes Elliott, symbolizes how 
Luther at Wartburg, and his companions 
pondered the word of God. 

“Why,” asks Mr. Maurice (as a “ Pre- 
terist”), “should the Book be sweet like 
honey in the mouth, if it is so full of woe? 
... St. John might have hoped that the 
open Book would have told him the judge 


RR2 


628 


of the angel’s hand, ana ate it up; 
and it was in my mouth sweet as 
honey : and as soon as I had eaten it, 
my belly was bitter. 


REVELATION. X 


[v. tz. 


11 And he said unto me, Thou 
must prophesy again before many 
peoples, and nations, and tongues, and 
kings. 





ment on the great Babel-Empire of the 
world. . . . The seventh Trumpet might 
have announced the fall of Rome. No! 
when it sounds Jerusalem will fall” (/.c., 
p. 186). 


11. And they say unto me,| (See vv. //.). 
The plural is indefinite as in ch. xii. 6—“‘on 
dit,” “man sagt.” Auberlen observes that 
(as in Dan. vii. 5, 13) the third person plural 
refers to heavenly powers—see the note on 
Dan. vii. 5. Ewald refers to the Angels gene-= 
rally, in contrast to the chief Angel spoken 
of in vv. 4, 8, 9. 


Thou must] Not the subjective necessity, 
resulting from eating the “ Little Book” (as 
Bengel, Hengst.); but the odjective, arising 
from the command of God—see ch. i. 1, &c., 
and cf. Acts xxiii. 11. 


prophesy| Here only (cf. ch. i. 3; xxii. 7, 
Io, 18, 19) is St. John said to “ prophesy.” 
His new consecration (vv. 9, 10) now places 
him side by side with Ezekiel, Daniel, Ze- 
chariah; and points to the change in the 
Apocalyptic announcements introduced by 
ch. xi. 1-14, and beginning at ch. xii. 1. 


again| Asin the former part of the Book, 
and in addition to it; ze., as in the Seals, and 
the first six Trumpets. 

The eating the “Little Book,’ and “to 
prophesy,” are related one to the other as 

revelation” and “ prophecy,” ch. i. 1, 3. 

Victorinus—see Introd., § 2, b, No. (23)— 
applies this verse to St. John’s return per- 
sonally, on the death of Domitian, from 
Patmos to Ephesus, and there publishing the 
Apocalypse. Many ancient writers—Are- 
thas, cumenius (ap. Cramer, Catena), Pri- 
masius, Beda, &c.—take the word “ again,” as 
referring to the subsequent composition of St. 
John’s Gospel. Mede understands, “to re- 
peat former utterances ;”—Bengel, “ to speak 
as did the old prophets ;’—Todd, “to per- 
form, under the New Test., as regards the 
Gentiles, the office which the prophets of the 
Old Test. had performed for Israel,” cf. 
ch. xi. 1, 2, with Ezek. xl. 3 ;—Elott explains 
that the Reformers were to preach, not, as 
before, in their papal ordination, but by Christ’s 
commission. 


concerning many peoples and nations and 
tongues| Te., “In the case of,” “with re- 
ference to’—the datives, as in John xii. 16, 
being the object of the prophecy: see on ch, 
xxii. 16. Ebrard, referring to Ezek. iii. 4, 


renders, as does the A. V., “ before” (but cf 
Acts xxv. 26 ; xxvi. 2, where the prep. governs 
the genitive). 


and kings.| Bishop Wordsworth considers 
that the commission now given to “ prophesy” 
has been executed in ch. xi—xvii.; and he 
compares the repetition here of kings, peoples, 
&c., with ch. xvii, 12, 15. Hengst. tes 
“peoples and nations and tongues, and many 
“kings ”’—“by the mention of many kings we 
are taken out of the relations of the Seer’s 
own time, in which the Christian Church 
had to do with only one king, the Roman 
Emperor.” 

The new commission now conferred, notes 
Stuart, shows that the Vision of the Sealed 
Book is closed; and that St. John needed 
new directions for the future: when the 
seventh Trumpet shall have sounded his task 
will still proceed, the scene and persons being 
changed. According to Renan, the first six 
Seals and Trumpets refer to events already past 
when the author wrote. The Apacatase 
drama was indeed over; but in order to 
prolong his Book, St. John gives himself a 
new prophetic mission; and what follows re- 
lates, for the most part, to the future (p. 400). 

The present verse, taken in connexion with 
John xxi. 22,23, has received a strange interpre- 
tation from some early writers,—e.g. Arethas 
and Ccumenius (ap. Cramer, Catena), and 
Ephraim of Antioch (ap. Photius, Cod. 229), 
—viz. that St. John still survives, and that he 
will reappear with Enoch and Elijah, in the 
days of Antichrist. 

The first of the two episodes—intended, like 
the two in ch. vii., for the support and conso- 
lation of the Church—ends 4ere on the eve of 
the seventh Trumpet, as ¢4ere on the eve of 
the seventh Seal. The presence of the 
“mighty Angel” of ver. 1, who pauses to 
announce (vv. 6, 7) that the delay spoken of 
in ch. vi. 11 was about to close, and that the 
great and final catastrophe was soon to be ac- 
complished, is heralded by the Thunders 
which are the usual prelude of the Divine 
judgments—see ch. viii. 5; xi. 19; xvi. 18. 
The command not to write what the Thunder 
Voices had proclaimed may, like the sience 
as to the judgments under the seventh Trum- 
pet (ch. xi. 15-19), signify a merciful reserve 
—a tender regard to human fears—when 
declaring the Divine wrath: at all events, no 
information is given in either case as to the 
events of the Great Day. The announce- 
ment of vv. 6, 7, is followed by the de- 





v. 1.] 


livery of the new commission to St. John to 
“ prophesy again ;’ and this commission—“ the 
mystery of God” having been fulfilled under 
the seventh Trumpet—naturally relates to 


REVELATION. XL. 


that part of the Apocalypse which begins 
at ch. xii. 


From this point begin Mede’s “ Synchren- 
isms ”—see Introd., § 12, (2). 


ADDITIONAL NOTE on Chap. X% 


Nore A ON VER. 2— THE WORD B:fapisdiov. 


The word B:8Xior, 76, is a dim. from BiBXos, 
», (see ch. i. 11; iii. 5; cf. Matt. i. 1; Luke iv. 
17), the inner bark of the papyrus (BvBdos);—the 
paper made of this bark. BiBrjis, 7 = BrBaior, 
@ cord of BiBdos. BiBdtdi0v, 74, is a dim. from 
BiBXis. BiBALddprov, rd, a second dim. of BiBNis, 


CHAPTER XI. 


3 The two witnesses prophesy. 6 They have 
er to shut heaven, that it rain not. 7 

The beast shall fight against them, and kill 
them. 8 They le unburied, 11 and after 


—Arist. Fr. 596—see Liddell and Scott. * Among 
the diminutives of the N. T., writes Winer 
(Ss. 87), BiBAapidioy is deserving of remark; 
formed first from B:8Adpiov, which Pollux 
quotes, instead of the older forms 6:8Aidior, 
and B:BAcdapiov (as ipariddpioyv from iparid- 
tov). Lob. Pathol. 281.” 
This form is not found in profane writers. 


three days and a half rise again. 14 The 
second woe ts past. 15 The seventh trumpet 


soundeth. 
ND there was given me a 
reed like unto a rod: and 





€f. I om. Kal 6 dyyedos ciotnKer.—éyetpe. 
€£@).—xat dvo [8, P om. kai]. Ver. 4 xai ai 5. A.—rovd xupiov.—éorares. 


Ver. 2 €£wOev (twice, in place of €cwbev and 
Ver. 5 Geket.— 


Gehyjon. Ver. 6 rhv eLove.—om. év—ras npepas.—ev maon mA. Ver. 7 [After rd Onpiov 
A inserts 75 réraprov]. Ver. 8 rd mr@ua.—rtys modews.—é Kip. aiTav. Ver. 9 Bdémovar- 


—r6 mrapa—adiovow.—prjpa. Ver. 10 xalpovow.—edppaivorrat. 
SN, B—cf. Ezek. xxxvii. 10 ;—A reads év atrois,—C, 


Ver. 11 eis avtovs 
P, 1 read avrots|.—émémecev. Ver. 14 


so 
ea B read jxovca]. Ver. 15 éyévero 7 Baowdeia. Ver. 16 om. the 2nd kai. Ver. 17 om. cai 6 
épxopevos.—[®, C read kai Gre etAnd.,—A, B, P om. xaij. Ver. 18 rovs pixpovs x. T. peyddous 


eC. 2 Led > 
Ver. 19 5 év Ta, ovp.] 


Cuap. XI. THE SECOND EPISODE (1-13). 


The second of the two episodes, separating 
the sixth and seventh Trumpets, and in- 
tended to support and console the Church 
under the calamities about to befall the 
world, is contained in ch. xi. 1-13. St. John, 
having taken rank after his new consecration 
(ch. x. 11) among the Prophets of the former 
Covenant, now proceeds to perform a sym- 
bolic action such as we read of in their case 
—see Isai. xx. 2; Jer. xix. 1. Preparation is 
also made for that change in the character 
of the Apocalyptic announcements which we 
notice after the end of this chapter. We are 
now introduced to symbolism of a type dif- 
ferent from that heretofore employed :—we 
read (ver. 2) of “the Holy City” the City of 
God, the Church, in contrast to “the Great 
City” (ver. 8; cf. ch. xiv. 8; xvil. 5; xvili. ro), 
which is the emblem of the World (cf. vv. 9, 
10); - we read the mysterious description of 
“the Tawo Witnesses” which exhibits the 


history of the Church in the world ;—we 
have also, presented by anticipation in ver. 7, 
the Beast from the Abyss, who fills so large a 
space in the Visions that follow. 

Alford considers that this passage, vv. 1-13, 
is a compendious summary of the prophecies 
which follow, “for it introduces by anticipas 
tion their dramatis persone.” 

Interpretations:—I. On the “ Preterist ” 
scheme Déollinger and Alford agree in dis= 
tinguishing “ tHe Holy City” from “the Great 
City,”—Dollinger understanding by “ the Great 
City” the pagan Roman Empire ;—Alford un- 
derstanding “Rome pagan and papal, but 
principally papal.” According to Stuart, “the 
symbolic transaction” of vv. 1, 2 denotes “the 
preservation of all which was fundamental 
and essential in the ancient [ Jewish] religion, 
notwithstanding the destruction of all that 
was external in respect to the Temple, the 
City, and the ancient people of God”; and the 
mention of the Two Witnesses means that 
faithful Christian teachers were to proc aim 


629 


630 


the angel stood, saying, Rise, and the altar, and them that worship 
therein. 


measure the temple of God, and 





the Gospel to the Jews, during the inva- 
sion of Judza and the siege of Jerusalem, 
while the Jews, by destroying them, 
would bring upon themselves an awful doom. 
Diisterdieck, on an opposite principle, under- 
stands the whole passage (vv. 1-13) literally. 
He identifies the phrases “Holy City’ and 
“Great City,’—-both of them denoting the 
literal Jerusalem destroyed by the Romans,— 
and he accounts for the variation between this 
description and our Lord’s prediction in Matt. 
xxiv.; Luke xxi. 20-24 by saying that our 
Lord announces the definite fact of the de- 
struction of the City, while St. John envelops 
the details in symbolism. This passage, as 
well as ch. xiii, and ch. xvii., Diisterd. 
(Einleit., s. 51) regards as furnishing “ direct 
chronological testimony ” that when the pro- 
phecy was written the destruction of the 
Holy City had not as yet come to pass; and 
this he infers from a comparison of vv. 2, 
8, with St. Luke xxi. 24. (But see Introd. 
§ 4, b; together with the notes on ver. 2, 
and on chapters xiii. and xvii.) 

For the interpretation of the Rationalistic 
“‘ Preterists ” see on ver. I. 

II. On the “ Futurist ” scheme, De Burgh 
interprets literally :—“ The City” (vv. 2, 8) 
is the literal Jerusalem; but all is to be 
referred to the future, and to the Jewish 
people which is hereafter to be again sub- 
Jected to the Gentiles. To Israel are to be 
sent two literal prophets, Moses and Elijah: 
these are to be put to death by Antichrist ; 
and his doom, intimated in ver. 13, is fol- 
lowed “ quickly” by the seventh Trumpet 
with which the judgment of the Jews is 
ended, and the judgment of the Gentiles— 
i.e., of apostate Christendom—follows, at the 
time of the Lord’s Coming. Similarly, Todd 
refers to the future when Jerusalem shall be 
inhabited again, the Temple rebuilt, and all 
once more destroyed by the Gentiles whose 
power in the “ Holy City,” or the duration 
of Antichrist’s deminion, is to be 1260 days, 
during which time the two (literal) Witnesses 
are to prophesy. See also on ch. xvii. 16 the 
aspect of this interpretation given by Godet. 

III. On the “ Historical” scheme, Bishop 
Newton, Elliott, &c., refer this episode to the 
Reformation and the causes which led to 
it—among which are reckoned the capture 
of Constantinople by the Turks, and the 
effect of this event on the revival of learning 
in the West. See on ch. ix., where the in- 
terpretations of the fifth and sixth Trumpets 
supply the poists of connexion. 

IV. Interpreting “ Allegorically,” Words- 
worth understands this passage as signifying 


REVELATION. XI. 


[v. 





the word of God which measures the Church’s 
faith (vv. 1, 2); from which the transition 
(vv. 3-13) is easy to the Old and New Testa- 
ments—z. e., the Two Witnesses by which the 
Holy Ghost gives light to the Church. Hengst. 
divides this section into favo, (1) vv. 1, 2 
give the promise that the faith of the elect 
shall not expire; (2) vv. 3-13 certify the 
continuance of the office of witnessing :—the 
full import is given in the Lord’s words, 
Matt. xxiv. 9-13. 

I. Williams sees here a recapitulation of 
the past :—In the sixth Trumpet the nations 
proceed against the Holy City for its idolatry, 
and here ‘“‘ the Holy City” is trodden under foot : 
in fact the same thing which was before repre= 
sented—“ the Church of God 
the world ”—is seen over again in deeper in- 
sight and knowledge (p. 183). Ribera, Viegas, 
Bossuet, Stern, note that the New Test. (cf. 
ch, iil. 123.2 Cor, Vi 165, Eph ie atoeear 
1 Tim. iii. 15) regards the Temple as the type of 
the Church : and they see here in “the Temple” 
with its worshippers the true members of the 
Church; in “¢he Court” without, weak and 
wavering members who fall away under Anti- 
christ; while the Church itself extends through 
the conversion of the heathen and the Jews 
owing tothe preaching of the “ Tavo Witnesses.” 

Mede, who has divided the entire of the 
Revelation into three chief parts—(1) The 
Seven Epistles, beginning at ch. i 10; (2) 
The Sealed Book, beginning at ch. iv. 1; (3) 
The Little Book, beginning at ch. x. 8,—re- 
gards ch. xi. as containing the first Vision of 
the Little Book, and as embracing the whole 
course of Apocalyptic time from the beginning 
to the end (p. 491). This result depends 
on his method of “ Synchronisms”—see Introd 


§ 12, (2). 
THE MEASURING OF THE TEMPLE (1-2). 


1, And there was given me} It is not said 
by whom—cf. ch. vi. 11; viii. 2; and see 
ver. 3. In the parallel Visions ch. xxi. 15; 
Ezek. xl. 3 the reed is in the Angel’s 
hand. 

a reed like untoarod:| Large as a staff— 
see ch. ii. 27; Matt. x. 10; cf. 1 Cor. iv. 21. 
Words. takes the reed (xaayos) to be “the 
Hebrew faneh,’ whence the word canon is 
derived (see Ezek. xl. 3, LXX.: in Zech, 
ii. 1 it is “a measuring /ime”); and he 
explains it to mean “the Canon of Scrip- 
ture.” [The word, however, here is not 
canon which is used as a measure or limit in 
2 Cor. x. 13, 15, 16; and ethically to denote 
* @ rule” in Gal. vi. 16]. 


REVELATION. XI. 


The “ reed,” notes Elliott, is a type of the 
outward authority to preach given to the 
fathers of the Reformation by the Elector 
John. 


saying,| Or [and] one said,] (Omit 
the words “and the angel stood” —see vv. /l.). 
The participle in the nom. is out of con- 
struction, cf. ch. iv. 1; and hence Bengel 
follows Andreas in taking the “reed” to be 
the speaker — Andreas explaining allegori- 
cally; Bengel referring “by metonymy” to 
the giver. 


Rise, and measure] See vv. /l.; i.e., “Up 
and measure,” cf. John v. 8. The mention 
of worshippers proves that the measuring 
is symbolical. To “ measure” (cf. ch. xxi. 
15) is to separate for sacred purposes, see 
Ezek. xl. 3, and the notes on Ezek. xl.—xliii. : 
what is excluded from the measurement is, 
accordingly, more or less mingled with evil. 
Hence, in this place, what is measured— 
the true believer typified — is to be exempted 
from the judgments in which what is zot 
measured (ver. 2) is involved: cf. Num. xxxv. 
5; 2 Sam. viii. 2, and the “Sealing ” in ch. vii., 
which is a figure corresponding to “ measur- 
ing.” Differently:—(1) Alf. understands the 
taking the dimensions of that which is to be 
measured, as in ch. xxi. 15; so that the ser- 
vants of God may be thus distinguished from 
those who have the mark of the Beast. (2) 
To measure is said to denote “ to destroy ”—see 
2 Kings xxi. 13; Isai. xxxiv. 11; Lam. ii. 8; 
Amos vii. 7-9. (3) It denotes “to rebuild,” 
Ezek. xl., whether literally in the future, or 
allegorically by the restoration of the true 
Church. 


the temple of God,| The Naos, or Sanc- 
tuary, including the Holy place and the 
Holy of Holies as distinguished from the 
Hieron—the Temple-court, the whole com- 
pass of the sacred enclosure. Hieron, not 
found in the Apoc., occurs eleven times in the 
Fourth Gospel, e.g. John ii. 14 (see on ch. 
iii. 12). De Wette notes that St. John 
cannot conceive a kingdom of Christ upon 
earth without a Temple: it is not so in 
the heavenly Jerusalem, ch. xxi. 22. “The 
Temple of God,’ notes Words., is always 
the Church in the Apoc.—see ch. iii. 12; 
vii. 15; &c. Cf. the reference to the Temple 
in ver. 19. 


and the altar,| The Altar of Incense, “the 
Golden Altar” of Ex. xxx. 3; Num. iv. 11, which 
alone was within the Naos—see on ch. viii. 3. 
Hengst. (so too Grotius, Vitr.) takes it to be 
the Altar of Burnt offering in the outer Court, 
“the real place of resort of the people,” but 
here transferred to the Sanctuary, the ideal 
dwelling of the people; and Burger agrees, 
arguing from the absence here of the 


631 


epithet “golden,” whxdh is found in ch. viii. 
315, IXsLEst 

and them that worship therein.| Viz. in the 
Naes, to which now not the priests alone, but 
all Christians have admission. Vitringa ex- 
plains, “those who worship at the Altar” 
(apud illud, i.e., as above, the Altar of Burnt 
offering) ; protection being thus secured for 
the true worshippers (cf. ch. vii.), the “ living 
stones” of the true Temple—see 1 Cor. iii. 
16; 2 Cor. vi. 16. Godet (see on ch. x. 8) 
takes those who worship at the Altar to be 
the body of faithful Jews when Antichrist, 
in the last days, reigns in Jerusalem :—see on 
ch. xvii. 16. Bisping understands generally 
believing Israelites, as distinguished from 
Judaism hostile to Christ, on which the 
judgment is now about to fall. 

On the other hand, Diisterdieck understands 
the /iteral Temple and Altar at Jerusalem: 
the measuring of the worshippers signifies 
their preservation during the approaching 
overthrow of Israel—St. John “ idealizing ” 
(not ‘“allegorizing”) in his use of Jewish 
symbols. In this result are expressed the prin- 
ciples of modern rationalistic exegesis as to the 
date and meaning of this Book (see Introd. § 4, 
b.). The literal Temple is assumed to be still 
standing, and the Apocalypse, accordingly, to 
have been written not under Domitian but 
before the City was taken by Titus:—the pa- 
triotic feelings of the Seer impel him to give 
up only the outer Court (ver. 2) and a tenth 
part of the City (ver. 13) to destruction. To 
foretell the deliverance of the City to the Gen- 
tiles was, writes Renan, in the first months 
of the year 69 no great exercise of the power 
of prophesying (‘il ne fallait pas un grand 
effort prophétique ’—p. 400). Another writer 
of the same school, Krenkel (/.c. s. 71), obs 
serves : “ The author expresses as definitely as 
possible the expectation that the Roman be- 
sieging host will certainly destroy the City, 
but spare the Temple.” And Volkmar :— 
“Since the Seer expects the deliverance of 
the Temple, he could have known nothing 
of the predictions in Mark xiii.; Luke xxi.; 
Matt. xxiv. This increases the probability that 
these discourses in the Gospels were com- 
posed post eventum.” ‘To all this Reuss adds: 
“Our text declares in the most positive 
manner that the Temple will not be injured.” 

In reply to such conclusions one may 
fairly ask,—If St. John had here predicted 
the preservation of the Temple which, as 
all the world knew, was destroyed by Titus, 
how can the acceptance be explained of the 
Apocalypse as inspired Scripture during the 
first and second centuries? (See below on 
ver 2.) 

For the opinion of other “ Preterists,” see 
the note on ver. 2; and note A at the end 
of this chapter. 


632 


2 But the court which is without 


§Ge.cast the temple ‘leave out, and measure 


it not; for it is given unto the Gen- 


2. And the court which ts without the temple] 
(See vv. //. The codex of Erasmus reads 
“within ;” and so Luther rendered “ den 
innern Chor des Tempels”). ‘The “Temple” 
is Naos as before. There is no need (with 
Mede, Vitr., Ewald, Ziillig) to distinguish 
between an “inner” and an “ outer” Court 
(1 Kings vi. 36; Ezek. xlvi. 1,21): nothing is 
said here of any such distinction (cf. note A 
at the end of Ezek. xlii.) ;—what is here meant 
is every part of the Hieron (see on ver. 1) 
except the Naos. Mede distinguishes be- 
tween an (assumed) “ inner Court,” or the 
primitive state of the Church, defore idolatry 
pervaded it; and the “ outer Court,” or the 
Church after it became idolatrous during the 
apostasy of the 42 months. Stuart argues 
for this distinction between an “inner” Court 
comprising the Naos, and an “ outer” Court, 
by referring to Ezek. xl. 17, 19—but see the 
notes on these verses. 


leave out,| Gr. cast out, “exclude from 
thy measurement ”—an expression involving 
the idea of rejection. Or leave without, 
see vv. /]. It is emphatically added— 


and measure it not;| Include it not in the 
symbolic act which is to guard and preserve 
the Sanctuary and thus, in a figure, ensure the 
safety of the Church of God from the assaults 
of the world. 


for it was given] Or for it hath been 
given]. The natural force of the aorist is 
that it had actually been given over (€5d6n) 
“unto the Gentiles” (see Luke xxi. 20-24) 
when St. John wrote. St. John is referring 
to the Temple already destroyed; just as 
in ch. xii. 5 he refers to the birth of Christ 
which was likewise past. 

Diisterdieck explains ‘already given over 
in the Divine counsels,’ ‘ by a Divine decree;’ 
and this he supports by a reference to the 
future tense that follows. Bleek, who also 
places the date of the Apoc. before the 
destruction of the Temple, concludes that 
the Sanctuary and Altar of Incense only 
are to be under God’s care during the 
siege, not the Court and Altar of Sacri- 
fice—St. John thus indicating that, under 
the new Covenant, not bloody victims but 
the prayers of the devout, of which the 
Altar of Incense was the symbol, are pleasing 
to God. So the “Preterists.” Other writers 
— Futurists,” who in like manner understand 
the /iteral Jerusalem (e.g. Todd, De Burgh) — 
refer this passage to the time of the Lord’s 
Second Advent, the measuring of the Temple 
denoting its restoration ,after which the Holy 


REVELATION. XI. 


{v. 2 


tiles: and the holy city shall they 
tread under foot forty and two 
months. 


City is to be once more trodden under foot by 
the Gentiles. In opposition to this conclusion 
of the “ Futurists,” the orthodox “ Preterists ” 
take the passage to have been fulfilled in the 
early days of the Church ; e.g. Bossuet, in the 
persecution of Diocletian ;—and Hammond, 
in the rebuilding of Jerusalem by Hadrian, 
and his setting up heathen worship there. 

Many writers of the “ Historical ” school 
(Vitr., Bishop Newton, Faber, Elliott) sup- 
pose the prophecy to denote the separation of 
the Reformed from the corrupt portion of the 
Church in Cent. xvi. 

Godet (see on ch. x. 8) takes the Court 
trodden down by the Gentiles to be the Jewish 
nation unfaithful to their ancient Law. See 
Note A at the end of this chapter. 

The “ First Temple,” according to Sir I. 
Newton (/.c., p. 467), was “illuminated by 
the Lamps of the Seven Churches.” This is 
now demolished ; and a new Temple is built 
for those who will not worship the Beast 
(ch. xiii.\—namely, the 144,000 who are 
styled in this chapter the “Tavo Witnesses.” 
The number #awo he derives from the “Two 
Wings” of the “ Great Eagle” (ch. xii. 14), 
and it is again represented by the “ Tavo 
Candlesticks” in ver. 4. 


unto the nations:] J.e., the enemies of 
Christ,—Gentiles as opposed to Jews who 
throughout the Apoc. denote true believers, 
see ch. ii. 9; iil. 9. The overflowing of the 
Church (so far as it had become corrupt) by 
the world is here indicated; and this is 
symbolized by the fact, already consummated, 
of the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus. 


and the holy city shall they tread under foot | 
See Luke xxi. 24. Jerusalem is styled “ the 
Holy City” in ch. xxi. 2, 10; xxii. 19; Neh. 
xi. 1, 18; Isai. xlviii. 2; lii. 1; Matt. iv. 5; 
Xxvil. 53. In the Apoc.—as in Gal. iv. 26; 
Heb. xii. 22— Jerusalem is the symbol of the 
Church in her collective and diffusive charac- 
ter. The measuring “ reed,” like the “plumb- 
line” in Amos vii. 7, sets apart the true Is- 
raelites from those who are like “ beathen 
men and publicans”” (Words.); and the City 
now trodden down includes the entire Temple 
(Hieron), except the Sanctuary (aos) marked 
out as still God’s dwelling place. “The 
knowledge of the Church as it came from 
heaven was sweet as the Angels’ song that 
announced it at Bethlehem; but... . bitter 
as the roll of Ezekiel is the history of its 
reception among men. This is now first 
shown in the measuring of the Temple.”— 
I. Williams, p. 183. 





v. 2.] 


forty and two months.| Note the inser- 
tion of xai—as in John ii. 20; v. 5—though 
the /arger number precedes. According to 
usage the copulative is inserted only when 
the sa/ller number precedes, e.g. ch. iv. 43 
vil. 4; xix. 4; John xxi. rz: cf. Winer 
(§ 37, 4) j—see vv. II. 

This period of prophetic time almost all 
commentators assume to be represented 
under three forms in the Apocalypse :—(1) 
here and in ch. xiii. 5 as 42 months ;—(z) 
as 1260 days (=42 x 30) in ver. 3 and in 
ch. xii. 6;—(3) as “a time (or year, xatpos) 
and times and half a time” (=3 x 360+ 180 
= 1260 days) in ch. xii. 14 (cf. ver. 6), and see 
Dan. vii. 25; xii.7. The “ Year-day ” theory 
takes the 42 months or 33 times to be equal 
to 1260 years: see Introd. § 11, b. II., and 
note B at the end of this chapter. 

According to Andreas (/.c., p. 58) the forty- 
two months denote the shortness of the time. 

Joachim of Floris (+ 1202) makes the 1260 
days to be the ‘“‘ World-age” of God the Son— 
which it exceeds by 260 years: he argues from 
the 42 generations in St. Matthew’s gene- 
alogy, each of which he counts as 30 years. 

Among those who interpret the period of 
42 months /iterally is Dionysius of Alex- 
andria, who referred it to the persecution 
under the Emperor Valerian (A.D. 253-260), 
which lasted three years and a half (Euseb. 
H. £., vii. 10). Coming to modern times, 
Stuart writes: “ {t is certain that the invasion 
of the Romans lasted just about the length of 
the period named until Jerusalem was taken. 
. ... This is a natural, simple, and easy 
method of interpretation to say the least.” 
So the rationalistic school generally. This is 
also the interpretation of Mr. F. D. Maurice 
(d.c., p. 190). 

[It may be well to state here the conclusion 
of St. Augustine as to these measures of time : 
“Tempus quippe, et tempora, et dimidium 
temporis, annum unum esse, et duos, et dimi- 
dium: ac per hoc, tres annos et semissem, 
etiam numero dierum posterius posito, di- 
lucescit ; aliquando in Scripturis et mensium 
numero declaratur.”—De Civ. Dei, xx. 23]. 

On the identity of these three designations 
of time, Mede (/c., pp. 419, 481, 597) founds 
his first “ Synchronism ” (viz.(1) The Woman, 
ch. xii. 1,14; (2) The Beast from the Sea, 
ch. xiii. 1, 5; (3) ch. xi. 2; (4) ch. xi. 3); and 
he explains why the profanation by the Gen- 
tiles is measured by months, and the preach- 
ing of the Two Witnesses by days, because 
the oon presiding over months is the symbol 
of idolatry and darkness, the light of day 
denoting truth. I. Williams also suggests 
that the duration of evil is expressed by 
months, that of good by days,—and so here in 
two successive verses (p 187). 

The question of the Apocalyptic numbers 


REVELATION. XI. 


633 


has been considered in the Introd., § 11, b. 
It is there contended that the numbers in this 
Book properly belong to the province not pf 
chronology but of symbolism. That periods 
of definite time are not intended here seems, 
as has been often observed, to follow of itseif 
from the variety in the forms of expression; 
while the recurrence of the same extent of 
duration in all three, indicates that the events, 
to which these periods are assigned, are con- 
temporaneous. In all three cases we have 
“the broken week” of years—half the mystic 
“week ” of Dan. ix. 27,to which Daniel him- 
self points in ch. vii. 25— the time, in short, in 
which the power that resists all that is of 
God, the “ mouth speaking great things” 
(Dan. vii. 8; see Rev. xiii. 5) “shall wear 
out the saints of the Most High” (Dan. vii. 
25); and this, it is submitted, is precisely that 
course of events with which the present verse 
is concerned. Whether the time be expressed 
by years, months, or days, all intimates a 
breaking off, as it were, of time—like the 
half-hour space of silence in ch. viii. 1. The 
days “are shortened” for the elect’s sake, 
Matt. xxiv. 22. Among the Jews this period 
of 42 months was a chronological expression 
significant of a time of suffering:—e. g. the 
time of famine in the days of Elijah (Luke 
iv. 25); or the desolation of Jerusalem by 
Antiochus Epiphanes, Dan. xii. 7; 1 Mace. i. 
(cf. Vitr., pp. 449, 463):—‘‘ The waste of 
sacred things by Antiochus [Epiphanes] last- 
ing for three years and a half [Joseph, 
Antt., Xi. i. 5], the Jews retained that very 
number as famous, inasmuch as they often 
made use of it when they would express 
anything very sad and afflictive” (Lightfoot, 
Chronogr. Inquiry, vi. 4, quoted by Words.). 
Auberlen observes of the three and a half 
years that “this number does not, like 
Ten, designate the power of the world in its 
fulness, but a power opposed to the Divine 
(which unfolds itself in the number Seven), 
yet broken in itself, and whose highest triumph 
is at the same time its defeat. For immedi- 
ately after the three and a half times, judgment 
falls on the victorious powers of the world, 
see Dan. vil. 25, 26” (p. 137). And thus, as we 
were directed above, by the use of the aorist, 
“it was given” to an historical founda- 
tion for this symbolism,—viz., to the destruc- 
tion of the Temple by Titus,—so, counting 
from that event, the mystic 42 months extend 
to the close of the Church’s conflict with the 
World-power, and the judgment on Anti- 
christ, and the final victory of Christ. It 
should be noted, too, that this result is not 
obscurely indicated in our Lord’s words: 
“ Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the 
Gentiles, until the times (kaipoi) of the Gen- 
tiles be fulfilled” (Luke xxi. 24)—with which 
passage the language of the present verse 





634 REVELATION. XI. [v. 3. 
wesw §=—63: And 'I will give power unto my phesy a thousand two hundred and that 


my swe two witnesses, and they shall pro- threescore days, clothed in sackcloth. phage 





agrees in a remarkable manner. Ebrard, with 
whom Auberlen agrees as to this “ church- 
historical period” of the 42 months, makes 
the close of the period to be the conversion 
and return of the Jews to Palestine (Zech. xii. 
4, 6). See also Burger quoted on ch, xii. 6. 

On the question “ Are these three periods 
successive or contemporaneous?” see Note D 
on ch. xiii. 5, and Note B at the end of 
this chapter. 


THE Two WITNESSES (3—12). 


8. And I will give unto] The object of 
the verb is not introduced either directly, or in 
the form of an insinitive as in ch. vi. 4; Vii. 2; 
but, according to a Hebrew idiom (cf. Ezek. 
XXXVil. 26), it is supplied by the independent 
clause which follows, “and they shall pro- 
phesy.” It is not necessary to supply such 
an accus. as “ power” (A. V. and De Wette); 
or “constancy and wisdom” (De Lyra, C. a 
Lapide) ; or “the Holy City ” (“ dabo illam,”’ as 
Beza, contrary to the context). The speaker 
isthe “voice from heaven” (ch. x. 4, 8), inthe 
name of Christ. Afterwards (perhaps in ver. 
4, certainly in ver. 8), the Angel of ver. 1, or 
St. John himself, is the speaker. In ver. 11, 
where the prediction passes into narrative, 
St. John continues the description. Some 
consider that it is Christ Himself who now 
speaks : they argue from the word “ my,” and 
frow. .he expression “ ¢4eir Lord,” in ver. 8. 


my two witnesses,| Gr. “the Two 
Witnesses of me:’—as to the emphatic 
article see on ver. 4. 

In the previous verses has been repre- 
sented the ordinary condition of the Church 
in the world (Matt. xiii. 47, 48) throughout 
the Christian period. Together with the 
faithful few, the “seven thousand in Israel, 
all the knees which have not bowed unto 
Baal” (1 Kings xix. 18), who are in every 
age marked out by the Divine measuring 
reed, and who are here symbolized by the 
Sanctuary and the Altar,—is included the 
diffusive body of professing Christians, luke- 
warm like Laodicea (ch. ili. 15-19), whose 
faith is assailed by the evil World-power, 
a power ever hostile to the Church, and 
which from time to time tramples upon 
her. Under this latter aspect, the Church 
is symbolized by “the Court without the 
Temple” which God has not measured. She 
is still “the Holy City” which “the Nations,” 
the enemies of Christ, “tread under foot”; and 
the questions arise, ‘How is the Church 
under her former aspect to be preserved 
holy?’ and, ‘How under her latter aspect can 


the light of true faith be preserved from ex- 
tinction within her borders?’ The answers 
seem to be supplied by that most obscure 
passage (vv. 3-13) on which we now 
enter. The key-note of the Apocalypse, as 
indeed of all St. John’s writings (John i. 7; 
1 John v. 9, 10), is “the Witness of Jesus” — 
“the testimony to be borne to Him” (see 
ch. 1. 93 VL-9 5 xil. 11, 17% kee) 5 ton ate 
added expressly in ch. xix. 10 that “the 
Witness of Jesus is the Spirit of prophecy.” 

As there are here “ Tavo Witnesses” on the 
side of God, so in ch. xiii. there are tao Beasts 
on the side of Satan—one representing the 
physical World-power, the other the intellec- 
tual World-power. This analogy may, per- 
haps, suggest that the “‘Tavo Witnesses” are de- 
signed to symbolize, one of them, the Church’s 
outward organization and polity, the other, 
her spiritual and evangelical teaching. 

As a reason for taking this verse to be 
symbolical, Ebrard notes that our Lord laid 
stress on His having “ Witnesses” (John vy. 
31, 39; Xv. 26): this “ witness,” it is here 
promised, will still be maintained; and ac- 
cordingly the testimony to be borne is per- 
sonified as “ My two Witnesses,’ who are to 
“ prophesy” throughout the mystic period 
(42 months, or 1260 days) of the Church’s 
conflict with the World-power (cf. the 
Riders in the Seal-Visions, ch. vi.). 

Such explanations of the “Iavo Wit- 
nesses” as the Law and the Gospel,—or 
the Old and the New Testament,—or the two 
Sacraments, are of course included under 
the symbolical system of interpretation. 

Mede and Hengst. take the “ Witnesses” 
to be real persons. They observe that Christ 
always sent forth His disciples two and two 
together—as in earlier times Moses and Aaron 
were sent, and Joshua and Caleb, and Elijah 
and Elisha, and Zerubbabel and Joshua, and 
Haggai and Zechariah. Burger notes that 
what Haggai and Zechariah (by whom he 
understands “the two Olive Trees” of ver. 4 
as explained in Zech. iv. 14) were once to the 
Jews, so will the “Iavo Witnesses” be to 
the Church of the last days. As the ground of 
this form of personification, numerous exposi- 
tors, ancient and modern, have pointed to the 
“Two Witnesses” “ who appeared in glory,” 
and whom St. John himself beheld on the 
mountain of Transfiguration (Luke ix. 28- 
31)—Moses and Elijah, the Law-giver and 
the Prophet of the Old Test.; and it may be 
remarked that in Mal. iv. 4, 5, Moses as 
the “servant” of God is “the prophet” 
named together with Elijah. Many histo- 
Tical confirmations are supplied by the de- 





: 
: 








a 
33, 14 


ve 4—-5.] 


4 These are the *two olive trees, 
and the two candlesticks standing 
before the God of the earth. 


REVELATION. XI. 


5 And if any man will hurt them, 
fire proceedeth out of their mouth, 
and devoureth their enemies: and if 





scription which follows. That Moses satis- 
fies this explanation, is illustrated by Deut. 
xviii. 15. Mr. Sanday (Authorship of the Fourth 
Gospel, p- 30), on John i. 21, “ Art thou 
Elijah? Art thou the Prophet?” refers to 
Rey. xi. 3-12, adding: “‘We have the Two 
Witnesses again, representing Moses and 
Elias, whose martyrdom is to be the begin- 
ning of the end.” The “ martyrdom” of the 
Witnesses would thus be the temporary ob- 
scuration of faithful testimony. 

Enoch and Elijah are suggested by many 
of the ancient writers, and numerous other 
explanations have been offered:—for some 
account of these see note E on verse 3; 
and also Maldonatus on Matt. xvii. If the 
“ Witnesses” are to be identified with actual 
persons spoken of in the Old Test., this can 
only be in the sense in which John the Bap- 
tist was Elijah, Luke i. 17; Matt. xvii. ro-13. 
Compare too the words of Christ in Matt. xi. 
14 respecting John, “This is Elijah which is 
to come” (6 peANav epxeo Oat). 

Alford pronounces that “No solution has 
ever been given of this portion of the pro- 
phecy.” 

and they shall prophesy] Like the old 
prophets, proclaiming God’s judgments (see 
ver. 5), and preaching repentance, and espe- 
cially bearing testimony to Christ (see ch. 
xix. 10). Some—e. g. Alford—understand, 
as in ch. x. 11; 1 Pet. i. 10; Jude 4, the 
simple announcement of the future; but 
this is not consistent with their office as 
“ Witnesses.” 


a thousand tavo hundred [and] threescore 
days,| I.e., during the 42 months. 

Bisping and Burger (see above on ver. 
2) argue that these 1260 days are not 
identical with the 42 months; but that the 
“ Witnesses” prophesy during the jrst half of 
the last World-week, while the 42 months 
constitute the second half. Diisterd. thinks 
that the use of “days,” intimates that the 
“ Witnesses” are to prophesy daily during this 
whole period of a literal 33 years. Elliott 
notes :—‘ My Witnesses,” so-called,—two in 
number, but sufficient, though few; for “the 
testimony of two men is true” (John viii. 
17); and so Stuart, vol. ii. p. 226. They are 
the line of Witnesses for Christ, adds Elliott, 
such as the‘ Magdeburg Centuriators,” Foxe’s 
“ Martyrology,” &c., from the early com- 
mencement of the Apostasy, through the dark 
ages of the Papal Antichrist, for 1260 years: 
they are ever in a state of mourning, for the 
corruptions against which they cry. 


clothed in sackcloth.| As preachers ot ree 
pentance (cf. Isai. xxii. 12; Jer. iv. 8; Jonah 
lil. 5 ; Matt. xi. 21). Wordsworth considers 
that the ignominious treatment which the 
Word of God is to receive is represented by 
the mournful garb of the “ Witnesses.” Note 
the points of resemblance to the history of 
Elijah :—the sackcloth (2 Kings i. 8), and the 
garb of his antitype the Baptist (Matt. iii. 4); 
—the 32 years of the famine predicted by 
him (1 Kings xvii. 1; Luke iv. 25; James v. 
17) ;—the facts mentioned in vv. 5, 6. 


4. These are the two olive trees and the two 
candlesticks,| Gr. lampstands. See vv. I, 
The articles, as in ver. 3, refer, not to well- 
known persons, but to well-known types. See 
Zech. iv., which is the source of this description, 
and where (ver. 14) Zerubbabel the anointed 
Ruler, and Joshua the anointed Priest (Zech. 
ili. 1) are the persons typified. This verse 
(cf. Ebrard iz Joc.) supplies two additional 
types, to which “t4e Two Witnesses” cor= 
respond. Moses the Law-giver, and Zerub- 
babel the Ruler, represent the Law; Elijah 
the Prophet, and Joshua the High Priest, 
represent the Gospel:—“They bear,” notes 
Hengst., “the name of lamps and of olive-trees, 
as the concentration of the light which belongs 
to the Church of God, and as an instrument 
of Divine grace for her.” The design of the 
reference here is, doubtless, to enforce the 
truth stated in Zech. iv. 6; viz. that the pur- 
pose of that Vision was to encourage Zerub- 
babel not to trust in the arm of flesh, but in 
the Spirit of Jehovah—a truth entirely in ac- 
cordance with the present context (see the 
notes on Zech. iv.). In Zech. iv. 2 but one 
Candlestick with seven Lamps is spoken of; 
and the explanation of the Lamps given by 
Zechariah in ver. ro, is given more fully by 
St. John in Rev. iv. 5; v. 6. If we bear in 
mind that St. John intentionally departs 
from the symbolism of Zechariah by identify- 
ing the “Tavo Witnesses” with the “ tave 
Candlesticks,’ we avoid the difficulties which 
many writers evidently feel. For instance :— 

According to Sir I. Newton (see on ver. 2), 
of the Seven Churches of Asia Minor, five 
“were found faulty; ..... the other favo 
[Smyrna and Philadelphia] were without fault; 
and so their ‘ Candlesticks’ were fit to be 
placed in the Second Temple... The ‘ Tae 
Witnesses’ are not new churches: they are 
the posterity of the primitive Church, the 
posterity of the ‘Two Wings’ of the Eagle 
[ch. xii. 14]... When the ‘First Temple’ 
was destroyed, and a new one built for them 


635 


636 


any man will hurt them, he must in 
this manner be killed. 
6 These have power to shut 


REVELATION. XI. 


[v. 6. 


heaven, that it rain not in the days 
of their prophecy: and have power 
over waters to turn them to blood, 





who worship in the Inward Court, Two of 
the Seven Candlesticks were placed in the 
New Temple” (/.c., p. 467). 

I. Williams suggests that by the “¢qwo 
Candlesticks” here in place of the one, is signi- 
fied “division in the Christian Church,” not 
only of the East from the West, but of the 
sections of Christendom now disunited : “The 
primitive martyrs, or witnesses, are the one 
‘man child’ (ch. xii. 5), but after the Holy 
City is profaned they are two” (p. 194). 
Words. explains this variation by saying, that 
as the Candlestick represents the Church 
(see ch. i. 20) which with its Seven Lights 
appears before God (see ch. ii., iii.), there 
is but Oze Church of Christ, consisting of 
Jews and Gentiles, while in a certain sense 
there are #wo Churches. And as here the 
Two Candlesticks “ drink in oil from the two 
Olive-trees, the Jewish Church, on its side, is 
reminded that it cannot have light without the 
New Testament; and the Christian Church 
is taught, on its side, that it cannot burn 
brightly without the Old.” 

Todd (p. 182) thinks that St. John, by “the 
Two Candlesticks,” refers to the “two Olive 
Branches” of Zech. iv. 12. These are to be 
distinguished from the “two Olive Trees” of 
ver. 11 “which the Angel, by giving but one 
answer to the twofold question of the pro- 
phet, plainly identifies with the ‘ two Anointed 
Ones’ (ver. 14) ;”? and which, as “emptying 
through the two golden pipes the golden oil 
out of themselves.” St. John may have re- 
garded as lamps. 

The freedom, however, with which St. John 
borrows the symbolism of former prophets 
(cf. ch. xiii. 2 with Dan. vii. 4-6), as well as 
the obvious necessity for his description here 
of ‘using the number “wo” throughout, 
renders any laboured explanation of the varied 
image needless. 

Observe that in Jer. xi. 16; Rom. xi. 17, 
the “ Olive-tree” stands for the Church. For 
the word “ Candlestick” see on ch. i. 12. 


which are standing before the Lord 
of the earth.] See vv. ij.; and cf. Zech. iv. 14. 
The construction of the masc. participle with 
the fem. article, points to the persons denoted 
by the symbols (cf. ver. 1, and ch. iv. 1). 

Note, on the reference to the Book of 
Zechariah in this verse, that Zech. iii. and iv., 
on which the passage rests, are preceded by 
the words in which “the measuring” of 
Jerusalem is commanded (Zech. ii. 1, 2). 


5. And if any man desireth to burt them, ] 
VU. The present tense here points 


to the continued enmity of the world to the 
Church, during the entire course of the Wit- 
nesses’ testimony (cf. on ver. 7). 


fire proceedeth out of their mouth,| The 
Jirst token of the “ Witnesses.” 

Take as comment: “I have put my words 
in thy mouth;” “Behold I will make m 
words in thy mouth fire, and this people ied: 
and it shall devour them” (Jer. i. 9; v. 14). 
See in ch. i. 16 a similar figure; and cf. 
Ecclus. xlviii. 1, where Elijah is spoken of. 


and devoureth their enemies :| See above, Jer. 
v. 14; and “I have slain them by the words of 
my mouth,” Hos. vi. 5. History supplies 
the illustrations—the fire that consumed the 
opponents of Moses (Num, xvi. 28, 35), and 
that which came down at the word of Elijah 
(2 Kings i. 10, 12; cf. Luke ix. 54); see 
above on ver. 3. 

and if any man shall desire to Surt 
them,] See vv. ij. In this change of tense 
the usual style is resumed. 


even so must he be 4iHed.] Namely, 
by fire (cf. Ecclus. xlviii. 3); and according 
to the jus talionis, see ch. xviii. 6. 

In opposition to any form of allegorical 
description, Alf. says: “ Individuality [? Per- 
sonality] could not be more strongly indi- 
cated” than it is in this verse. Not so, how= 
ever, as Ebrard justly notes ;—St. John could 
not more clearly tell us that he does not mean 
literal persons, than by pointing in ver. 4 to 
Zerubbabel and Joshua, and then to Moses 
and Elijah, as satisfying the same figurative 
language :—see above on ver. 3. Bisping 
(s. 176) nearly agrees witn Ebrard. 


6. These have the power to shut the 
beaven,| (See vv. Jj.). As Elijah did, 
1 Kings xvii. 1; Ecclus. xlviii. 3; and for 
the same space of time. Luke iv. 25; James 
V. 17. 

The second token of the “ Witnesses.” 

The “power to shut the heaven” Beda 
considers to be the “ potestas clavium ” ;— 
Elliott refers to Isai. v. 6, and Amos viii. 11, 
which he takes to mean the “shutting up 
of heaven”; and he recognizes in this con- 
nexion, among the line of Witnesses for 
Christ’s truth and against the ram! of 
Eastern origin, the Paulicians from Cent. 
vii. [who virtually held the Manichzan heresy, 
see Gibbon, ch. liv.; Robertson, Hist. of 
the Chr. Church, vol. ii. p. 164; Archbishop 
Trench, Medieval Church Hist., ch. xv.] who, 
with the Christians of Piedmont in the West, 
were blended together, in one line, from the 


v. 7] 


and to smite the earth with all plagues, 
as often as they will. 


REVELATION. XI. 


7 And when they shall have 
finished their testimony, the beast 





end of Cent. xii., in the Waldenses;— Words. : 
“If any one despises them [by “them” he 
understands ‘the Scriptures’],.... they can 
shut heaven, like Elias, and exclude all who 
reject them. The dews of divine grace are 
withheld from all who scorn them.” 


during the days] (See vv.//.). Le, 
the 33 years (Luke iv. 25; James v. 17)— 
the “ 1260 days” of ver. 3. 


and they have power over the waters to 
turn them into blood,| As Moses did—see 
Ex. vii. 19. Cf. ch. vi. 8. 

The third token of the “ Witnesses” :—all 
three pointing to Moses and Elijah as repre- 
senting the “ Law” and the “ Prophets.” 


and to smite the earth with every plague, | 
(See vv. //.). And not merely with the 
plagues with which Moses smote Egypt,— 
Ex. viii. 16; ix. 15; 1 Sam. iv. 8 (LXX.). 
On the historical foundation of the symbolism, 
see On vv. 3, 5, above:—“ Quis non videt,” 
writes Maldonatus on Matt. xvii. 14, “ Mosem 
quasi digito demonstrari? ” 


as often as they shall desire.] Mede 
(p. 483) considers that this power, once dis- 
played in Egypt, is now to be exhibited 
under the Vials (ch. xvi.) ; and in like manner 
Godet considers that the judgments spoken 
of here and in ver. 5, as inflicted by the “ Tavo 
Witnesses” preaching repentance at Jeru- 
salem, are those of the Seven Vials described 
in ch. xvi. which are inflicted on the human 
race subjected to Antichrist. It is this, he 
argues, which accounts for the presence of 
the Beast at Jerusalem, as we read in ver. 7 
Gc; p: 312): 


7. And when they shall have finished their 
testimony,| Viz. at the end of the 1260 days 
(“ Grav with the aor. conj. for the Lat. futurus 
exactus, John iv. 25; xvi. 13.”— Winer, § 42). 

Alf. translates ““ When they had finished.” 
He objects to Mede’s interpretation “when 
they shall be about finishing ;’—to that of 
Daubuz, “whilst they shall perform ;”—to 
that of Elliott, “ when they shall have com- 
pleted,” not the whole course of their witness, 
“but any one complete delivery of it.” I. Wil- 
liams translates, “ when they shall be accom- 
plishing ”—i.e., while “ Antichrist is through- 
out [the 1260 days] contending with the Two 
Witnesses.” Hengst. seems to give the true 
sense: “They shall only be overcome when 
they have finished their testimony, when God 
has no further need for their service, when 
their death can produce more fruit than their 
life. . . . What is said here of the Witnesses 
of Christ, was exemplified in Christ himself.” 


the beast that cometh up out of the 
abyss] (See ch. ix. 1,11). The coming up 
of the Beast from the Abyss is twicementioned 
—here and in ch. xvii.8. The Hebrew system 
of the Universe included four regions, viz. 
heaven, earth, sea, and abyss. Satan first ap- 
pears in 4eaven as the opponent of Christ (ch. 
xii. 1-5 )—he has endeavoured from the very 
beginning to frustrate the Incarnation. This 
attempt having failed, the opposition of Satan 
is transferred to the regions of the sea and the 
earth (ch. xii. 12; xill. 1, 11), and the enmity 
ofthe Beast from the sea begins with ch. xiii. 1. 
But the Beast is subsequently to emerge from 
the ddyss as the enemy of the Church of God, 
as he emerged from the sea ; and it is by this 
Beast from the Abyss that the “ Witnesses” are 
here said to be put to death. The Beast may 
be expected to rise from the Abyss when Satan 
comes out of it (see ch. xx. 1-7) ;—namely 
when Gog and Magog are to collect their 
hosts (ch. xx. 8), and the old Pagan principle 
of antipathy to the Church is to be renewed. . 
Whether the slaughter of the “ Witnesses” be 
or be not future,—whether they are to be 
personal leaders of the Church, or whether 
they are merely an expression of the fact that 
the Church, as personified in Zechariah’s pro= 
phecy, was shadowed forth by the Olive-trees 
which grew on each side of the Altar,—in any 
case, they are to make head against the 
Beast, who appears in this place not as the 
Beast from the sea, but as “the Beast from 
the Abyss”—from “the Abyss” as Satan’s. 
special instrument, the revived form of the 
World-power. 

The noun rendered “ Beast” (see on ch, 
iv. 6) here, in ch. xiii., and in ch. xvii., has in 
itself an evil signification: it denotes a wild 
or predatory animal (cf. Acts xi.6). This, the 
concrete representation of the anti-christian 
World-power, is first introduced in the 
present episode by anticipation, as Babylon 
is introduced in ch. xiv. 8. He appears for 
the first time in action in ch. xiii. 1. 

Wordsworth (on ch. xvii. 3) suggests that 
St. John uses in the Apoc. the term ( Apviov) 
denoting the ZLamé as a contrast to the term 
(@npiov) denoting the Beast ; there being “an 
exact correspondence of syllables and ac- 
cents ”—see on ch. v. 6. : 

Some (Ebrard, Zillig) question the identity 
here and in ch. xvii. 8, of the “ Beast from 
the Abyss,” with the Beast from “the sea,” 
ch. xiii. 1; but the article clearly indicates. 
the identity—see on ch. xiii. 1; xvii. 3. As 
yet, indeed, the Beast is not described as con- 
nected with some mysterious spiritual iniquity 
—see ch. xiii. 11: Xvi. 13; xvii. 5; but the 


637 


638 


that ascendeth out of the bottomless 
pit shall make war against them, and 
shall overcome them, and kill them. 





imagery of Dan. vii. is manifestly suggested 
by the context. Hence, doubtless, the read- 
ing of the Alexandrine MS., “the fourth 
Beast” (see Dan. vii. 7):—this reading, 
observes Renan, is explained by that of the 
Codex Sinaiticus, “the Beast which then 
cometh up;” see note C at the end of this 
chapter. By the present participle (76 dva- 
Baivov) the continuous activity cf the World- 

ower in opposition to “The Witnesses’ is 
intimated, as in ver. 5. 

Ewald (see Note C on ch. xii. 3) states 
that (the Arabic) Hippolytus “ correctly sees 
here, not the locusts or their leader,—as 
several modern writers,—but Antichrist, to be 
described more accurately hereafter.” 

Many in recent times further regard this 
Beast from “ the Abyss ” as being the personal 
Antichrist, “the man of sin” of 2 Thess. ii. 3. 
Bisping takes him to represent “the Anti- 
nomian spirit of Judaism, which will know 
nothing more of Moses and the Prophets :” 
the “ coming up out of the Abyss” signifies the 
devilish wickedness that shall hereafter cha- 
racterize Judaism, which will not believe 
on Christ. He becomes at last the hellish 
Dragon himself who gives his power to anti- 
christian Judaism. 

shall make war withthem, and over- 
come them, and kill them.| (For the repeti- 
tion of this idea, see ch. xiii. 7; and for a 
different result of the conflict, see ch. xvii. 14). 
This is the last manifestation of unbelief. For 
a time, but for a short time, the World-power 
will extinguish the outward testimony of the 
Church, although “the Temple of God, and 
the Altar, and they that worship therein” 
are still preserved by the Divine care. 

Mede concludes that the description of the 
fate of the Witnesses is taken from the 
narrative of the Lord’s Passion. 

Various interpretations :— 

The Beast is the Imperial general Belisarius 
(De Lyra) ;— With Aretius, Vitr., and others, 
he is the Pope;—Elliott notes that the 
Witnesses being symbolical, the death spoken 
of was to be symbolical also: this predic- 
tion, he adds, can be satisfied by no period 
of European history other than the open- 
ing of Cent. xvi., just before the Reformation, 
when, as Milner writes, the Waldenses were 
too feeble to resist the Popedom, and the 
Hussites, divided among themselves, were 
reduced to silence;—Renan’s comment is: 
“The Beast which ascends from the Abyss 
(the Roman power, or rather Nero reappearing 
as Antichrist) will kill them” (p. 402): it 
is Nero who has suggested the whole con- 


REVELATION. XI. 


{v. & 


8 And their dead bodies 
lie in the street of the 
which spiritually is called 


skall 


reat ci 
eodom a 


ception of the Apocalypse: “Caligula a eté 
l Anti- Dieu, Néron sera ’ Anti-Christ. L’Apo= 
calypse est congue” (p. 179). 

8. And their dead bodies} Gr. their 
dead body, and so in ver. 9—see wv. Ji. 
The singular is used collectively —* what is 
fallen of them” (7d mr@pa, “id quod col- 
lapsum est, seu cecidit, corpus mortui, cadaver” 
—Grimm). Cf. Matt. xiv. 12; Mark vi. 29. 

Wordsworth’s explanation is: “They are 
two and yet one; the Old and New Test. 
are two, and make one Book.” Bisping 
notes :—The type of the profanation of the 
Law and the Prophets; the Old Test. is “a 
dead \etter” (“ein blosser Leichnam”) for 
the unbelieving Jews. 

[lie] in the streef} Gr. And their dead 
body lieth on. There is no verb in the 
original; but the present, rather than the 
“ shall lie” of the A. V., better suits the series 
of present tenses in vv. 9, 10,down to “ shall 
send” in ver. 10 ;—see vv. Il, Their corpses 
remaining unburied on “the broad way” (as 
the word imports) denotes the contempt with 
which the Witnesses were treated. The 
Jews were especially careful to bury their dead 
(Gen. xxiii. 4; 2 Sam. xxi. 9-13; Isai. xiv. 
19, 20):—for the sentiment of the heathen on 
this matter see Winer, R. WW. B., s. 172; 
and compare Hor. Od. i. 28; Sophocl., Antig., 
and djax. 

of the great city,) Observe, not “ the Holy 
City,’ as in ver. 2. The phrase “ the Great 
City” occurs eight times in this Book—here; 
ch. xvi. 19; xvii. 18; xviii. 10, 16, 18, 19, 
21. It is never used of Jerusalem; it is not 
read in ch. xxi. 10. “The great” is always 
the epithet of Babylon—ch. xiv. 8; xvi. 19; 
Xvil. 5 ; xviii. 2; cf. also Dan. iv. 27 (30). See 
the explanation of the Angel in ch. xvii. 18. 

This result is, in effect, adopted by Vitringa, 
who understands the City or Empire of 
Rome;—by Déllinger, who understands the 
Empire of Rome ;—by Alf., who understands 
“the Great City which will be the subject of 
God’s final judgments.” 

Elliott, and, with variations, his schoo, 
understand Rome Papal, where the “ Wite 
nesses” were triumphed over, and where their 
Lord was (figuratively) crucified. 

On the other hand, “the Greut City,’ 
writes Todd (p. 188), “can denote Jerusalem, 
and Jerusalem only.” So Bisping and others 


which spiritually is called Sodom and Egppi,] 
“ Spiritually,” i. e.. “typically,” cf. 1 Cor x. 
3, 4. Auberlen, appealing to 1 Cor. ii 
7, 14, takes the word “‘ spiritually” to core 





2 


% @] 


Egypt, where also our Lord was 
crucified. 
9 And they of the people and 


REVELATION. XI. 


kindreds and tongues and nations 
‘shall see their dead bodies three 
days and an half, and shall not 





respond with the word “ mystery,” im ch. 
xvil. 5 (/.c., p. 275). “Ihe Great City” being 
now described as a country —“ Egypt”—cannot 
strictly mean any city; and, being styled 
“Sodom,” it cannot represent Jerusalem “the 
Holy City” (see on ver. 2). Both Sodom and 
Egypt are again referred to in ch. xviii. 4; 
and Sodom specially in ch. xix. 3. Further, 
Jerusalem is never called Egypt:—in Ezek. 
XXIli. 3, 4, it is Israe/ which is spoken of : and 
in Isai.i. 9, 10, the Jewish zation is the subject 
of the comparison with Sodom; cf. Ezek. xvi. 
48, and see the note on Ezek. xvi. 44. The 
common reference to Isai. iii. 8, 9, is scarcely 
relevant; and the same may be said of Jer. 
Xxill. 14; cf. Matt. x. 6, 15. 

The conclusion then is that as we read in 
the Apoc. of “the City of God” of which 


' Jerusalem is the type; and of “the City of the 


World” of which Babylon is the type, and 
which is expressly styled in this Book “the 
Great City,” we are to interpret this verse 
of the latter.—of Babylon,—of “the Great” 
World-city. This is called Egypt on account 
of its oppression of the people of God, and 
Sodom on account of its moral corruption. 

Jerusalem, as described by our Lord in 
Luke xili. 33, 34, has suggested a third charac- 
teristic of the World-city—a_ characteristic 
symbolized here by the putting the “ T2vo 
Witnesses” to death. This thought is ex- 
pressed in the words which now follow :— 
see the remark of Ziillig quoted below. 


where also their Lord was crucified.| (See 
wv. /].). And slainas well as they :—the Wit- 
nesses cannot expect any other fate than that 
which befell their Lord (John xv. 20). 

The majority of commentators. relving upon 
this close of the verse, insist that Jerusalem 1s 
meant—the “Holy City” of ver. 2, nowno longer 
“ holy” after its desecration. So Hengst. and 
Ebrard who compare Jerusalem to Egypt, on 
account of the religious corruption with which 
it infected Israel (Ezek. xxiii. 3,8, 27); and to 
Sodom, on account of its morals (Deut. xxxii. 
32). We thus have “ the degenerate Church;” 
and Hengst. goes on to explain that the word 
spiritually is to be supplied to the expression 
‘where our Lord was crucified; —“ Outwardly 
the Lord was crucified in the city called Je- 
tusalem; but spiritually in the degenerate 
Church.” Diisterd. notes that the compari- 
son of Jerusalem to Sodom and Egypt rests 
simply on the fact that Sodom and Egypt re- 
sembled each other in their enmity to God 
and His people. Ziillig, taking the “ Great 
City” to mean Babylon, explains that not ¢avo, 
but three symbolic names are here given to 


Jerusalem, viz. Babylon, Sodom, Egypt :— 
the name Jerusalem, he adds, is not intro- 
duced, because the city has been desecrated, 
and no longer deserves the name which does 
not reappear until we come to “the New 
Jerusalem.” To the same effect Auberlen 
Jerusalem, representative of the Old Test. 
Church, has become like the godless and 
doomed World-city and World-power, be- 
cause she rejected and crucified the Lord. So 
the New Test. Church is called after the 
World-city, Babylon, Rome, because she has 
forsaken Christ (p. 275). And thus, dis- 
regarding the marked distinction between 
“the Holy City” and “‘the Great City,” many 
understand in this place Jerusalem,—which is 
called “ spiritually,” i.e., allegorically, “ Sodom 
and Egypt;” and 4istorically the city where 
Christ was crucified: see Todd quoted above. 
Burger leaves the question undecided. 


9. And from among the peopies and 
tribes and tongues and nations} For the 
constr. cf. ch. li. 10; v. 9; John xvi. 17; 
2 John 4—see Winer, § 47, s. 328. See on 
ver. Io. 


do [men] look upon their dead bodies’ 
Gr. dead body:—see wv. //.; and for the 
use of the present tense in prophetic narrative, 
cf. ch. xvill. 9, 11. ‘As if though silenced 
in death they continued Witnesses still.”—I 
Williams, p. 203. Understanding the literal 
Jerusalem, Diisterd. notes that men from all 
nations (ch. v. 9), Jews and Gentiles (see ver 
2), are assembled there, and behold the out- 
rage offered to the remains of the “ Witnesses” 
—see on ver. 8. 


three days and an half,| (Accus. of duration, 
as in ver. 3). Corresponding to the years of 
their ministry—the 33 years which are equiva- 
lent to the 42 months and 1260 days in vv. 2, 
3; z.e., half the mystic Seven: for ‘“‘the victory 
of the world,” notes Hengst., “is always a 
transitory one.” “ Futurists” take the 33 days 
literally, e.g. Todd and De Burgh (and so 
Tertullian, Victorinus, Andreas, &c.): with 
Bengel and Ebrard they place them at the 
end of the world in the time of Antichrist. 
Ebrard adds that the duration of the punish- 
ment for treading down Jerusalem, and the 
duration of the tyranny of Antichrist are 
related as 33 years to 34 days (and so 
Vitringa). Ziillig perceives an allusion to our 
Lord’s lying three days in the grave (to the 
same effect Volkmar), and also to Hos. vi. 2. 
Bleek regards the period as “a round mystical 
number to denote a space of several days.” 
Reuss, on the other hand, understar ds “A 


639 


suffer their dead bodies to be put in 
ves. 

10 And they that dwell upon the 
earth shall rejoice over them, and 
make merry, and shall send gifts one 
to another; because these two pro- 
phets tormented them that dwelt on 
the earth. 

11 And after three days and an 


REVELATION. XI. 


(v. ro—zs. 


half the Spirit of life from God ene 
tered into them, and they stood upon 
their feet; and great fear fell upon 
them which saw them. 

12 And they heard a great voice 
from heaven saying unto them, Come 
up hither. And they ascended up to 


heaven in a cloud; and their enemies 
beheld them. 





wery short space of time, according to the style 
of the Apocalypse”; and Stuart refers to the 
short time during which the bodies of the dead 
remain without putrefaction. Prosper, Pri- 
masius, Beda, and others explain these days 
as years; and, on the “ Year-day” theory, 
Elliott understands the interval between the 
ninth session of the Lateran Council, May s, 
1514 (where the exclusion of heretics from 
burial was one of the Papal enactments con- 
firmed), and the day of Luther’s posting up 
his theses at Wittenberg, October 31, 1517— 
the interval being three years and 180 days, 
“ precisely to a day, three and a half years.” 
On this conclusion Alford observes that 
the three years from May 5, 1514, to May s, 
1517, being years of 365 days each,” Elliott’s 
“half year from May 5, 1517, to October 
31 of the same year is 180, or half 360 days: 
s2., wanting 22 days of the time required 
according to that reckoning.” Alford should 
have added that three civi/ years of 365 days 
(omitting ours) = 1095 days, and that the 

ear 1516 was a leap year; consequently, 
Instead of Elliott’s 1260 days, the interval 
stated by him gives us 1096 + 1823 = 12783 
days—a period unknown to the prophecy: 
see Introd., § 11 (b), II. 

and suffer not their dead bodies to be laid 
in a tomb.] For the ¢qwo readings here see 
vv. /j.; and for the verb “to suffer” cf. 
Mark i. 34; xi. 16. 

Note that in this third place, we have the 
plural “ dead bodies” —ntopara. 

Mede (p. 485) suggests that these beholders 
may be the jriends of the “ Witnesses ;” and 
that they do not permit them to be buried 
because they are convinced that they will 
miraculously rise again—see ver. 11. 


10. And they that dwell on the earth| The 
godless world—as proved by ch. vi. 10; viii. 
13: see on ch. iii. ro. 


rejoice over them, and make merry;] 
(Both verbs are in the present tense,—see 
wv. ij., and on ver. 8). J.e., rejoice at the 
outrage offered to the “ Witnesses.” 


and they shall send gifts one to another ;| 
Acustom usual in times of festivity—cf. Nek 
vii, 10, 12; Esth. ix. 19, 22. 


Note the future tense—see vv. 8, 9. 

tormented] Hengst. explains: “ They have 
no weapons other than the word. Their 
word, weak and contemptible in itself, has an 
ally in the hearts and consciences of those 
against whom it is directed.” Sardis and 
Laodicea (ch. iii. 3, 15) had nothing of this 
spirit. Others (e.g. Bengel, Diisterd., Stuart, 
Alf.) refer this expression solely to the plagues 
mentioned in vv, 5, 6. 

them that dwell on the earth.) Whose 
representatives now appear in “ the Great 
City” —-see ver. 9. 


il. And after the three days and an balf} 
Viz. those spoken of in ver. 9. 


the Spirit of life] Or the breath of life: 
Gr.,a spirit, or a breath; compare Luke 
vill. 55. ‘‘ Spirit” in the original is indefinite: 
—see ch. xiii. 15; and Ezek. xxxvii. 5. 
entered into them,] See vv. Il. 


and they stood upon their feet;| See Ezek- 
xxxvil. ro (LXX.), the language of which 
Vision is closely followed here—see also 
2 Kings xiii. 21. 


and great fear fell upon them which beheld 
them.| On the verb “ sede/d” here, and in 
ver. 12, see Introd. § 7, IV., (c). Compare 
Matt. xxvii. 54, to which place Diisterdieck 
justly refers. 

Elliott notes :—After vain agitation to put 
them down, the Lutheran Reformers pro- 
claimed that they were but the “‘ Witnesses” of 
Christ risen up again; i.¢., when in 1530 they 
united themselves at Smalcald under the name 
of Protestants. 


12. And they heard] In support of this 
reading, Hengst. refers, not at all appro- 
priately, to John v. 28. In opposition to the 
weight of authority, Dtsterd. (so also Beng., 
Ewald, De Wette, Stuart, Elliott) accepts the 
reading “I heard,” for so we find the Seer 
expressing himself, in ch. vi. 6 ; ix. 13 :—if the 
voice, adds Diisterd., were directed to the 
“ Witnesses” themselves the description would 
have been after the manner of ch. vi. 11; ix. 4. 


JSrom beaven| Elliott interprets not the 
teaven of the Divine presence, but the 
eezven of political power, to which the “ Wis- 


v. 13.] 


13 And the same hour was there 
a great earthquake, and the tenth 


nesses” ascended ; thus predicting the triumph 
in Germany and elsewhere of Protestantism, 
after the peace of Passau, 1552 (so Bishop 
Newton) :—Elliott similarly takes “ seaven” 
to mean “ earth” in ch. viii. 1. 


And they went up into seaven in the 
cloud;| Cf. 2 Kingsii. 11; Actsi.g. The 
‘ymbolism is founded on the facts of the Lord’s 
Passion and Ascension (see on ver. 7 Mede’s 
remark). This is indicated by the reference 
in ver. 8 to His Crucifixion. The Ascension, 
notes Hengst., is not mentioned in St. John’s 
Gospel, yet is attested here:—cf. the “ great 
fear,” ver. 11, with Matt. xxvii. 54; and “the 
earthquake,” ver. 13, with Matt. xxvii. 51; 
xxvill. 2. In confirmation of the allegorical in- 
terpretation of the “Tavo Witnesses,” —e. g. the 
Law and the Gospel,—Ebrard observes that 
the words avacraors and ¢yeiperOuare avoided 
in this description; and that a resurrection 
or ascension to heaven of two actual persons, 
or of the collective body of believers, before 
the Third Woe and the Seventh Trumpet 
(wv. 14, 15), would be impossible. 
See Note D at the end of this chapter. 


18. And in that our] In which the 
“ Witnesses” were glorified (ver. 12), ven- 
geance falls on their enemies. 


there was a great earthquake,| See on 
ch. vi. 12. Some who include this verse 
under the sixth Trumpet identify the time of 
the sixth Trumpet with that of the sixth Seal. 

The earthquake synchronizes, notes Mr. 
Faber, with the death and ascension of the 
“ Witnesses :” “it denotes the Revolution in 
England, in 1688, when the Papists were 
excluded from political power.” — Sacred 
Calendar, vol. iii. p. 8. Elliott expounds it 
to be the mighty disruption of Saxony, 
Prussia, Sweden, and Denmark from the 
Papacy. 

and the tenth part of the city fell;| Le., 
“the Great City” of ver. 8. Bengel, Herder, 
Ziillig, Bisping, &c., understand Jerusalem : 
—see above on ver. 8. 

Carrying out his idea, Elliott writes: The 
Great City, including in its Empire just ten 
kingdoms, /e//. England, one of the most 
uotable of these kingdoms, threw off the 
Papal yoke. 


and there were killed in the earth- 
quake seven thousand persons:] Gr. 
“names of men, seven thousands.” 
Cf. ch. iii. 4; Acts i. 15. Stuart and Alf. 
understand a precise statement, as from a 
catalogue of enrolment. Words. explains 
“persons known and distinguished.” The 


New Test— Vor. IV. 


REVELATION. XI. 


part of the city fell, and in the earth- 1Gr. 
quake were slain 'of men seven thou- yam 





idiom, however, does not seem to have any 
special force. 

The number “seven thousand,” and the men- 
tion of “the tenth part,” contrasted with the 
fourth, and the third part of ch. vi. 8; viii. 7, 
lead many (Stuart, Liicke, Ewald, De Wette, 
Diisterd.) to understand “a comparatively 
small part” ;—Words., on the other hand, 
takes the 7000 to denote “‘a complete over- 
throw.” Ziilligand Ebrard argue that since, 
taken literally, the words mean the inhabitants 
of the destroyed “tenth part,” the population 
of the city amounts to 70,000; but, as 
Ebrard adds, “ since ‘ the city’ is not a geo= 
graphical locality, there is here no statistical 
notice,” and the Vision is symbolical :—the 
“tenth part” refers to the division into ten 
kingdoms of the (fourth) World-power, over 
which Antichrist is to extend his rule (Dan. 
vil. 243 ch. xvii. 12, 13). Ebrard sees in the 
7000 inhabitants of each of the tex kingdoms 
an antichristian imitation of the Church of 
God,—for seven is God’s sacred number. 

Mede identifies the events of this verse 
with what is described under the f/t4 Vial, 
ch. xvi. 10; and understands a great political 
commotion, when the entire City—for Rome 
Papal is in extent but the tenth part of 
Rome Pagan—is destroyed. Two destruc- 
tions of Babylon are thus foretold, (1) here, 
and in ch. xvi. 10, of the City of Rome; (2) in 
ch. xviii. and ch. xix. of the citizens and Roman 
state, a catastrophe reserved for the /ast Vial. 
“It is a great mistake in Mede,”’ notes 
I. Williams, “to suppose this fa// of the tentb 
part of the city to be the same as that de- 
scribed under the fifth Vial: under the Vials 
there is no repentance: this is corrective. ... 
The zenth is but a limited part; and that 
number (as well as the 7000) has about it 
secret intimations of good.” The symbolism 
here he considers to be founded upon the 
account in 2 Kings xxiv. 16 of the leading 
“ seven thousand men of might” captives to 
Babylon with Jehoiakin from Jerusalem, 
ten years before its destruction :—here, there- 
fore, he adds, ‘‘the prophetical account of 
the spiritual Israel is clothed in the history 
of the national and local;” consequently, 
this, “the Second Woe,” can never be the 
fulness of Woe:—“there is correction, and 
there is repentance” (p. 206). Ewald also 
sees in this “tenth” part a token of gracious 
mercy. 

Elliott explains the Chilias (= 1000) to mean 
a province ; and he takes the words to signify 
“the seven Dutch United Provinces,” which 
during Elizabeth’s reign separated from the 
Papal rule. Mr. Cunninghame explains the 


ss 


644 


Sf 


642 


sand ; and the remnant were affrighted, 
and gave glory to the God of heaven. 


death of the 7000 by the abolition of the 


Monastic Orders in England; and, like Mr. 
Faber, he places the full accomplishment of 
this prophecy in 1688, when England was 
finally lost to Rome. 


and the rest were affrighted,| The large 
remnant of the inhabitants of the City, in- 
cluding doubtless many of the heathen, are 
mercifully led to repentance. For an oppo- 
site effect, see ch. ix. 20, 21. 


and gave glory] The token of repentance 
—see ch. xiv. 7; xvi. 9; cf. Josh. vii. 19; Jer. 
xiii. 16. 

to the God of heaven.| A title found, in 
the New Test., only here and in ch. xvi. 11: 
in both places it is used in contrast to the 
gods of the heathen. De Wette notes that 
the expression is taken from the later books 
of the Old Test—kKzra i. 2; Neh. i. 4; 
Dan. ii. 18. 

Todd observes: “ No circumstance in the 
prophecy appears to have created more diffi- 
culty to the historical commentators than this 
that the remnant who had escaped the earth- 
quake ‘gave glory to the God of heaven.’ 
Bishop Newton considers it unfulfilled. Mr. 
Faber thinks that they who gave glory to 
God were the Protestants; Mr. Cunning- 
hame, the Papists.”—p. 190. Elliott explains 
that “the remnant, or Papists, whether 
in England, Holland, or Germany, were af- 
frighted ; and the Witnesses gave glory to 
the God of heaven.” 

The interpretation given by Godet rests 
on his belief that Antichrist will return from 
Rome, which he has destroyed (see on ch. 
xvii. 16), and will fix his residence at Jeru- 
salem: “ The remnant of the people [of Israel 
restored by Antichrist to their own land], and 
in particular they who have been specially 
reserved [see on ch. vii. 4] for these su- 
preme moments, give glory to God, and are 
converted to Him. ‘Thus we shall find in 
ch. xiv. the 144,000 surrounding the Lamb 
between the moment of the coming of Anti- 
christ,and that of his destruction” (/.c.,p.357)- 
it is thus assumed that a double Israel, carnal 
and spiritual, is to be re-established as a 
Nation; with “the Great City” (ver. 8), 
Jerusalem, as its capital. Bisping under- 
stands some future judgment which is to fall 
on Jerusalem ; and terrify to repentance the 
greater part of unbelieving Israel. 

According to Mr. Maurice, “when Ves- 
pasian ascended the throne, the world did 
again accept a righteous and orderly govern- 
ment;. did homage ‘to the God of heaven” 
(p. 201). “ The very restoration of order in 


REVELATION. XI. 


Tv. 14. 


14 The second woe is past; amd, 
behold, the third woe cometh quickly 








Rome was the signal for the doom of Jeru- 
salem.” This is what St. John means when 
he says “ The Second Woe is past—the Third 
Woe cometh quickly” (p. 281). 


14. The second Woe is past:| The respite 
promised in ch. x. 6, 7, is about to end. 
Ebrard (see the remarks introductory to 
ch. x.) considers the earthquake of ver. 13— 
a judgment which the event only will explain 
—to be the “‘ Second Woe,” and to be the second 
merciful trial given to bring men to re 
pentance: this feature of the present episode 
he sees in the symbolism, which leads us 
back to the destruction of Jerusalem by 
Titus; and this, as the penalty for rejecting 
Messiah, forms a parallel to the judgment 
of ver. 13 (which repeats Matt. xxviii. 2-4) 
for rejecting and slaying Christ’s “ Witnesses.” 
Bisping also places the judgment on unbeliev- 
ing Israel, under the “ Second Woe” described 
in ver. 13; and he places the Last Judgment 
on the whole Antichristian world, under the 
seventh Trumpet, or “Third Woe”—i.e., during 
the 42 months of ver. 2 or the second half 3° 
Daniel’s last Week (Dan. ix. 27). See on 
ver. 2, the interpretation of Burger. 

Bengel (see on ch. ix. 12—15) makes this 
Second Woe to begin A.D. 634; to end A.D. 
847; and to consist of the havoc produced 
by the rise of the Saracenic power. Elliot 
(see on ch. ix. 12), who makes the ‘‘ Secon- 
Woe” to be the Turkman power, considers 
that that power passed away in the wars ot 
1769-1774, and 1787, against Russia and 
Austria; and that Turkey ceased to be a 
Woe to Christendom, A.D. 1790, in the peace 
then concluded. Mr. Birks lays down, as 
the interpretation of the most learned and 
able commentators, that the two Woes relate 
to the Saracens and the Turks. 


THE THIRD WOE. 


behold, the third Woe cometh quickly.| (Omit 
“and”). Burger notes that according to the 
oath of the Angel, ch. x. 6,7, the seventh 
Trumpet which brings on the end, follows 
the sixth Trumpet without delay. 

Although some refer to ch. xii. 12, no 
further mention is made of this Woe:—it 
might fall under the sixth, or the seventh 
Trumpet. It may, with some, be considered as 
including the Vials in which “is finished the 
wrath of God” (ch. xv. 1, 7)—so Stern. Mede 
places it under the seventh Trumpet. If it 
fall under the sixth, we may compare Matt. 
xxiv. 21; Rev. iii. 10; vii. 14. According to 
Hengst., the seventh Trumpet or “ Third 
Woe” is included in ev. 15-19 s—in ch. vill, 











¥. 15.) 


15 #adtheseventh angel sounded ; 
and there were great voices in heaven, 


5, lightnings and an earthquake symbolically 
announced that the world’s judgment is ap- 
proaching; now, in ver. 19, this symbolical an- 
nouncement is fulfilled. Since great events, 
writes Ewald, are not fulfilled as speedily as 
hope may picture, new Visions are interposed 
before the end predicted in ch. x. 7:—thus 
the end of this “ T4ird Woe,” announced once 
more in ch. xil. 12, comes later; and this also 
in a threefold form, see ch. xvili. 10, 16, 19. 

On the “ Historical” scheme, Bengel makes 
a pause of ahundred years to intervene between 
the “Second Woe” and the “ Third” which, 
therefore, begins A.b. 947—see on ch. xii. 12. 
Mr. Faber, who makes the Second Woe to 
end in 1697 (see on ch. ix. 12, and note A 
at the end of ch. ix.), places 92 years between 
the end of the “ Second” and the beginning of 
the “ Third Woe,’ because the word “ guickly” 
describes any space of time not exceeding a 
century (/.c., vol. ili. p. 225—355): he thus 
makes the “ Tdird Woe” begin in 1789— with 
the French Revolution—when “the anger of 
the nations” (ver.18) began. Since 1789 men 
have lived in the times of the “ Third Woe.” 
This is to continue until “‘ the destruction of 
them that destroy the earth” (ver. 18) at the 
battle of Ar-Mageddon (ch. xvi. 16) in the 
year 186 s—“the exhaustion of the seventh 
Apocalyptic Vial "—“the commencement of 
St. John’s rooo years (Rev. xx. 2, 3).” 

On the “ Futurist” scheme—The subject of 
the “Third Woe,” writes De Burgh, is intimated 
in the words of ver. 15: “ Here we turn over 
a new page of this prophetic history. All that 
we have considered of it, with the exception of 
the general signs of the ‘Lord’s Coming given 
in the first six Seals, treats of God's judicial 
dealing with the Jewish nation: but from 
this place we have the judgment of the Gen- 
tiles °—p. 221 [see Vitringa’s remark quoted 
in note A on ver. 1]. Todd considers the 
“Third Woe” to be the Second Advent of 
Christ, and the establishment of His king- 
dom, in accordance with Matt. xxiv. 30, 
“Then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn.” 


THE SEVENTH TRUMPET. 


15. And the seventh angel sounded ;| Ch. ix. 
13-21 is continued here. A new series of 
Visions is interposed, as after the opening of the 
seventh Seal. The Third Woe which “ cometh 
quickly” is deferred for a short time until allis 
ready for the final consummation—the last 
conflict with Antichrist. -No circumstantial 
Narrative is given as to what now takes 
place:—see on ch. x. 4. Ebrard restricts 
the seventh Trumpet to vv. 15-18, which 
form, he considers, the complete close of 


REVELATION. XI. 


saying, The kingdoms of this world 
are become the kingdoms of our Lord, 


the “second Vision” of the Apocalypse :— 
see on ver. 18. De Wette also makes the 
Trumpet-Visions close at ver. 18. Liicke 
regards vv. 15-17 as satisfying the longing for 
the future consummation ; and vv. 18, 19 (see 
ch. x. 11) as leading on to further revelations 
of the future. Several writers, observes De 
Burgh (p. 437), contend that the seventh 
Trumpet was fulfilled by the Reformation ; 

others by the French Revolution; “ strange 
to say, by only a few is it referred to that 
with which it is so manifestly identical—the 
‘Last Trumpet’ mentioned, 1 Cor. xv. 52.” 
Todd sees here “ the final triumph and com- 
plete establishment of Christ’s kingdom,”— 
p. 220; and at p. 213 he sums up the opinion 
of “ the ancients,” who, “ reasoning from Dan. 
xii. Ir, £2, supposed that the interval between 
the destruction of Antichrist and the general 
judgment (foretold by the seventh Trumpet) 
would be 45 days only. This opinion sup- 
poses the three prophetic periods of 1260, 
1290, and 1335 days to have the same be- 
ginning. The witnesses are slain at the end 
of the 1260 days [wv. 3, 7], but ‘the abomi- 
nation that maketh desolate,’ i.c., Antichrist, 
continues for 30 days [Dan. xii. 7, 11] after 
they are s/ain, and consequently for 263 days 
after they Aave risen from the dead. Then 
Antichrist is slain at the end of the 1290 
days; but the conflict between the Church 
and her enemies is not finally determined in 
favour of the former for 45 days more” 

[265+ 35=30; and 1290+45=1335],—Dam. 
xii. 12; see St. Jerome ix /oc. 

Bisping thus introduces this section : “ Se- 
cond Act :—The second half of the last World- 
week, ch. Xi. I5—xx. to... . By way of 
introduction this Vision represents how that 
which the seventh Trumpet is to bring on 
the world is prepared in heaven.” 

That the fall of the Temple follows im- 
mediately the blast of the seventh Trumpet, 
Mr. Maurice infers from the words of ver. 19 
(/.¢., p. 241) :—“ ie., 1260 days, or about four 
years between the commencement of the 
Jewish rebellion, and the termination of the 
war by Titus.” 


and there followed great woices in beaven,] 
The voices here, and the song of the Elders 
(wv. 16-18) may be contrasted with the 
“* silence” at the opening of the last Seal. 
What we hear is not on earth, but sn Zeaven, 
as at the opening of the seventh Seal (ch. 
viii. t), and at the pouring out of the seventh 
Vial (ch. xvi. 17):—under the last Seal, too, 
and under the last Vial (ch. viii. 5; ch. NUL 
18) we have “the lighinings and woices,” &e. 
as in ver. 19. In ver. 18 we are told that the 


ss2 


644 
and of his Christ ; and he shall reign 


for ever and ever. 

16 And the four and twenty elders, 
which sat before God on their seats, 
fell upon their faces, and worshipped 
God, 

17 Saying, We give thee thanks, 


REVELATION. XI. 


[v. 15—18 


O Lord God Almighty, which art, 
and wast, and art to come; because 
thou hast taken to thee thy great 
power, and hast reigned. 

18 And the nations were angry, 
and thy wrath is come, and the time 
of the dead, that they should be 





judgment of the dead is come; in ch. xvi. 17 
the voice announces from the throne “ Jt is 
done ;” and from ch. vi. 17 we learn that the 
end follows the sixth Seal. Here we have an 
illustration of the principle of “ Recapitula- 
tion” (see the remarks introductory to ch. 
viii.): “The three Visions,” as Alf. notes, ‘‘are 
not continuous, but resumptive: not, indeed, 
going over the same ground with one another, 
either of time or of occurrence, but each 
evolving something which was not in the 
former, and putting the course of God’s 
providence in a different light.” It is to be 
observed that the Four Living Beings (ch. iv. 
6) do not appear in the seventh Trumpet 
as here described: they appear again, in ch. 
xiv. 3; xv. 7; xix. 4. The “great voices” 
are thought by some to proceed from them, 
as the four and twenty Elders (ch. iv. 4) 
are mentioned in ver. 16: so Ewald—but 
see on ver. 18. De Wette ascribes the 
“qoices” to the Angels;—Bengel to the 
dwellers in heaven, Angels and men ;-—Hengst. 
to the innumerable multitude of ch. vii. 9 ;— 
but to this Diisterd. objects, because in ch. vii. 
that multitude is seen in heaven by anticipa- 
tion ; it does not actually appear in heaven 
until ch. xv. 2, and ch. xix. 1: the course 
of the Vision here has not yet attained so 
far. 


The speakers, however, seem to be left 
undetermined (cf. ch. xii. 10-12; xiv. 2)— 
whether we regard the participle which fol- 
lows to be masc. (with A, B), or fem. (with 
&, C, P). 

saying,| If the participle be masc., this is a 
case of irregular apposition, as in ch. iv. 1; 
or we may render “in heaven, and they 
said,” | 

The kingdom of the world] See vv. //. 
Cf. ch. 1.6; xii. 10. The gez. of the object (cf. 
the gen. with eri in ch. xvii. 18)—the royal 
dominion (note the sing.) over the world. 


is become [the kingdom] of our Lord 
and of his Christ:| "The government of the 
world is become His, as King: hitherto 
“the Prince of this world” has ruled; see Psal. 
ii. 2. Ziillig, referring to ch. xii. 10, ren- 
ders: ‘“ The World-kingdom of our Lord, 
and of His Anointed hath appeared.” 

The last Trumpet has sounded; and the 
voices celebrate, by anticipation, what is re- 


ferred to in ch. x. 7; ch. xix. 1. The result 
of the enmity to God is told in ch. xix. 20. 


and be shall reign for ever and ever.| “He” 
denotes either God, as ver. 17; or Christ, 
“ Whose kingdom shall have no end.”— Nicene 
Creed. 


16. And the four and twenty elders, (See 
vv. Hl.). Representing the Church in heaven: 
—see on ch. iv. 4. 


which sit before God upon their 
thrones,| Cf. ch. iv. 4;—the Elders who 
offer to God the prayers of the saints (ch. 
v. 8). For the word “ thrones,” see on ch. ii 
13. 

Sell upon their faces,| Cf. ch. iv. 10; ¥ 14 
In ch. vii. rr the Angels similarly fall pros- 
trate. 


17. Saying, We give thee thanks,| This 
verb, of very frequent occurrence in the 
New Test., is found only here in the Apo- 
calypse; and, in St. John’s other writings, 
only in John vi. 11, 23; xi. 41. 

O Lord God, the Almighty,| Cf. ch. i. 8; 
iv. 8. God is also addressed by this title in 
ch. XV. 3.5 XVi. 7, 145 XIX. 6, 15.9 exoceeame 

which art and which wast;] Omit 
“and art te come” —see vv. /l., and the note 
on ch. i. 4: cf. also ch. xvi. 5. 

At this stage of the prophecy God is no 
longer “ He who is to come,” as in Matt. vi 
10. His coming is now past and over. 

and because thou Aast taken thy great 
power, ] See vv. //. (Omit “ to thee” which 
is not in the Greek). The perfect with 
aorists— see on ch. V. 7. 

God has ow assumed the “ power” which 
He was “ worthy” to take (ch. iv. 11); and 
of which the Trumpet judgments, in answer 
to the prayers of the saints (ch. vi. 10; viii 
3-6), are the manifestation :—see ch. xix. 6. 

and didst reign.] (The aorist, following 
the perfect). God had never ceased to rule 
over the world :—He always the 
“ power,” but hitherto had not exercised it. As 
in Ps. xcix.1 (LXX.), the Lord’s reigning, 
and the wrath of the nations (see next verse), 
are connected with each other. 


18. And the nations were wroth,] See Ps. 
xcix. 1 (LXX.) as in verse 17. The Elders 
now describe the character of the seventh 





judged, and that thou shouldest give and shovldest destroy them which 
reward unto thy servants the pro- ‘destroy the earth. pelea 


phets, and to the saints, and them 
that fear thy name, smal! and great ; 


I umpet. The wrath of the nations is called 


forth by the progress of the hated kingdom of 
God, as it began to take place after the Word 
was made flesh (Hengst.). How that wrath 
was instigated we are told in ch. xii. 17. 


and thy wrath came,| See ch. vi. 16, 
where we are brought to the eve of the great 
catastrophe which, in ch. x. 7, is placed under 
this Trumpet. The omission of the Four 
Living Beings also points (see on ver. 15) to 
the dissolution of Creation. They reappear in 
the Vision which introduces the Vials (ch. xv. 
7), and before the Last Judgment (ch. xix. 4 
—cf. ch. xiv. 3). Neither the description of 
the throne, in ch. iv., nor the other Visions 
of the blessed—except at the end of ch. xx.— 
seems final like this, which is all anticipatory. 


and the time of the dead to be judged, | 
Said by anticipation, and actually occurring 
at ch.xx.11-15. Vitringa understands by the 
judgment of the dead, the vindication of the 
cause of the martyrs by God (see ch. vi. 
9-11), as in Ps. Ixxil. 4 ; so also Stuart, who 
refers to Hebr. x. 30. 


and [the time] to give their reward 
to thy servants the prophets,| See ch. xviii. 
20; cf. Matt v.12; x. 41. 


and to the saints, and to them that fear thy 
name, the small and the great;| See vv. /1.; 
ele Ch SUNG se xix, 5.0 1S) XX, 12. | Crhe 
small and the great” are in the accus., while the 
previous nouns are in the dative,—a fact which 
sets aside the distinction into two classes by 
Hengst., viz. (1) the servants of God, compris- 
ing the prophets and saints; (2) those that 
fear His name, comprising “the small and 
the great” (Ps. cxv. 13). 


and to destroy them which destroy the 
earth.| Gr. “which corrupt the earth” 
(r. diapGeipovras), as in ch. xix. 2; Jer. li. 25 
(LXX.) :—cf. Isai. xiv. 20. We have here, 
wrath, judgment, destruction, and at the 
same time distribution of rewards: but it is 
the execution of judgment which brings re- 
demption; and the reward of tne faithful 
consists in this that the earth is freed from its 
oppressors (Hengst.). The Elders’ song, 
writes Todd, sums up the events connected 
with the Second Advent—chiefly the Millen- 
nial Reign (ch. xx. 6), the wrath of the nations 
(ch. xx.8), the wrath of God (ch. xx. 10), the 
judgment of the dead (ch. xx. 12), the reward 
of the faithful (ch. xxi.; xxii.). Elliott observes 
that before what is here described by anticipa- 
tion comes to pass, the Seer answers the ques- 


1g And the temple of God was er 
opened in heaven, and there was seen 


tions, ““ Who are the corruptors of the earth ?” 
—“t What is the history of the Beast ?”—“ Is 
he identical with Antichrist ?” In answer to 
them a new parenthetic series of Visions begins; 
and ver. 19 serves as a sign of connexion to 
show where the seventh Trumpet-Vision is 
resumed, viz. at ch. xv. 1. 

According to the scheme of Ebrard the 
second Vision of the Apocalypse, which began 
at ch. iv. 1, ends here:—the third Vision 
extends from ch. xi. 19 to ch. xiv. 20, and is 
introduced by the same natural phenomena as 
the second in ch. iv.5. In the first Vision St. 
John beheld the Son of Man in His judicial 
relation to the Churches:—in the second, 
which now ends, Almighty God in his judicial 
relation to the godless world ;—in the third 
Vision, beginning with ver. 19, the relation of 
the ungodly subjects of the Prince of this 
worid to the Church of God (s. 419). 

Burger makes the seventh Trumpet to end 
here ; and all that follows to belong to events 
which mark the last conflict. 


19. And the temple of God, that is in 
heaven, was opened;| (See vv.//.). The 
Sanctuary, Naos,—cf. ver. 1. We now see 
“the pattern ” of that earthly Sanctuary which 
supplied the symbolism in ver. 1 (Ex. xxv. 8, 
9, 40; Heb. vill. 5). The Sanctuary lier open 
(ch. xiv. 15, 173 xv. 5-8; xvi. 1, 17) until 
“The Word of God” comes to judge (ch. 
xix. 13), and the accomplishment is fully seen 
in ch. xxi. 22. 


and there was seen in his temple the ark 
of his covenant;] This verse is par llel 
to ch. iv. 1; xv. 5: like them, in anticipa ion 
of what is still future, it introduces a 1sw 
Vision. The pause at this point before ih« 
new series of Visions is accompanied by tls 
usual tokens. 

The Ark of the Covenant is now intro 
duced for the last time in Scripture. In thiv 
Stern sees a symbolical allusion to the fulfil 
ment of God’s dealings with Israel converted 
by the preaching of the “ Witnesses” —see Rom. 
ix. 25-33. Ewald and Bleek refer here to 
“the hidden manna” (ch. ii. 17), which, having 
been lost with the Ark of the Covenant, 
when the Temple was destroyed by the 
Chaldeans (2 Kings xxv. 9), was wanting it 
the second Temple. According to Jewish 
tradition, Jeremiah had taken the Ark and 
all that the Most Holy place contained, ane 
concealed them before the destruction of the 
Temple in a cave at Mount Sinai, whence they 
are to be restored to the Temple in the days 


646 


in his temple the ark of his testament : 
and there were lightnings, and voices, 


REVELATION XI. 


LV: 19. 


and thunderings, and an earthquake, 
and great hail. 





of Messiah (2 Macc. ii. 4-7): see also Wet- 
stein in Joc. NHengst. seems to indicate the 
true meaning of the symbol:—The Ark of 
the Covenant is made visible in order to 
signify that the Covenant has received its 
most signal accomplishment. God has now 
“remembered his Holy Covenant,” and his 
people may now “ serve Him without fear ”"— 
Luke i. 72-74. 


and there followed lightnings, and voices, 
and thunders,] Which are the only physical 
phenomena seen in ch. iv. 5. 


and an earthquake,| The earthquake is 
also specified in ch. viil. 5; xvi. 18. 

and great hail.) Which is again intro- 
duced in ch. xvi. 21 :—hail is also mentioned 
under the frst Trumpet (ch. viii. 7). The 
judgment-hour indicated by the symbolism 
of ver. 1 has now arrived; and from the 
Sanctuary where God is enthroned the judg- 
ments proceed—see ch. xiv. 15, 17; XV. 5; 
xvi. 17. 

This description of the sounding of the 
seventh Trumpet (vv. 15-19) runs strictly 
parallel to what we have read as to the 
opening of the seventh Seal (ch. vili. 1-5). 
Parallel to the “silence in heaven” (ch. Viii. 
1) we have here the “ great voices in heaven,” 
and the Elders’ hymn of thanksgiving (vv. 
15, 17, 18);—parallel to the offering of 
incense and prayer at the Altar (ch. viii. 3-5) 
we have here the worship of the Elders (ver. 
16), and the opened Temple, and the sight of 
the Ark of the Covenant ;—the same natural 
phenomena too (here increased in intensity) 
which announce coming judgments are mani- 
fested in both Visions (ch. viii. 5; xi. 19). 
These various details the Seer, instead of 
giving a continuous narrative, “ Recapitulates.” 
As the series of the Trumpets starts from the 
same point as the series of the Seals, and 
ends with the same consummation,—so now, 
beginning with ch. xii., we have once more a 
new “ Recapitulation ” of God’s dealings with 
the Church and with the world, during the 
same period. The description is now coloured 
by symbolism of a different character from 
what has hitherto been employed :—see the 
remarks introductory to this chapter. This 
verse, therefore, may be regarded as the pre- 


paration for the final judgment, but it does 
not describe the final judgment itself. 

Here the Third Division of the Revelation 
proper comes to an end. 

With other writers the connexion is dif- 
ferent. Hengst. regards this verse as describ- 
ing the last judgment; and he considers ch. 
xvi. 18-21 to be simply an extension of what 
is here revealed ;—According to Liicke (s. 
355) the chief series of Visions ends here. 
Such a close both satisfies the longing ex- 
pressed in vv. 15-17, and points to a further 
disclosure of the future, as suggested in ch. 
X. I1; it thus forms a prelude to the Visions 
which follow, and which constitute the cen- 
tents of the last Trumpet;—I. Williams 
considers that “the whole arrangement of the 
Seals and the Trumpets seems to cease with 
this chapter ; and it is better to consider the 
subsequent prophecies as supplemental and 
independent, without any reference to the 
previous division: all that follows might be 
considered as the ‘ Little Book’” (p. 209); 
—Burger makes this verse to be the transition 
between the seventh Trumpet, which came 
to an end in ver. 18, and the Visions that 
follow ;— Stuart, following Eichhorn and 
Heinrichs, makes the seventh Trumpet to 
signify “the triumph of Christianity over 
opposing and embittered Judaism:” even the 
Most Holy place is thrown open, “another 
symbol expressing that Judaism is now at its 
close ;”—Grotius refers the passage to the 
Jews in the days of Barchocab (ver. 13); 
adding on this verse: ‘‘Per hoc jubentur 
Christiani qui in Judza erant animos ad 
ccelum attollere, ubi Deus habitat, ubi arca 
foederis servatur;”—De Lyra refers all 
this passage to the victory of Narses (A.D. 
553) over the Arian Goths, the Angel of 
the seventh Trumpet being the Emperor 
Justin II.;—Elliott (see on ver. 14) enumerates 
a series of natural convulsions at the end of 
Cent. xviii—such as the reopening the fires of 
Vesuvius and the eruption of Shaptaa Jokul 
in Iceland; the earthquake in Calabria pro- 
tracted from 1783 to 1786; the hailstorm in 
France in 1788, followed within a month by 
the convocation of the States-General, which 
was the signal for the [First] French Revolu- 
tion, May 5, 1789: see on ch. xv. 1. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Chap. XI. 
NOTE A ON VER. 2—THE MEASURING THE TEMPLE. 


The following illustrations of the meanings 
assigned to this passage may be added. 
I (a) Ordinary “ Preterists” :— 


STUART, following EICHHORN and LANGB, 
considers that “the symbolic transaction” 
described in vv. 1, 2, prefigures “the pre- 


REVELATION. XI. 


servation of all which was fundamental and 
essential in the ancient religion, notwithstand- 
ing the destruction of all that was external 
ja respect to the Temple, the City, and 
he ancient people of God” (/c., p. 214). 
“Nothing can be more certain than that the 
destruction of the City and Temple of Jeru- 
salem is threatened, and not merely profana- 
tion by the presence of the heathen ” (p. 218). 

\b) Rationalistic “ Preterists” also refer 
this symbolism to the literal Temple, and the 
literal Jerusalem. The Holy City is Jerusalem 
not yet laid in ruins by the Roman army; and 
this result is taken to prove that the Apoca- 
lypse was written before the capture of the 
City, and the destruction of the Temple by 
Titus. This opinion has been already referred 
to in the Introduction (see § 4, b., i.), and is 
also considered in the note on the present verse. 
The Judaizing tendencies alleged by Ration- 
alists to characterize the writings of St. John, 
as opposed to St. Paul, have likewise been 
shewn (see Note A on ch. iii. 19) to have no 
existence. The notion, theretore, of the 
school of Tiibingen that the present passage 
expresses nothing more than the sentiments 
of a fervid Jewish patriot who could not 
bear to contemplate the destruction of the 
Temple, is a mere fiction of the imagination: 
—see Baur, Die kanon. Evang., s. 605. 

Il. “‘ Futurists” look forward to a restored 
Jerusalem, and to a Temple rebuilt in the 
Last Times :— 

DE BuRGH: The natural inference here 
is ‘that this commission concerns the Jewish 
nation” (/c., p. 205). “No doubt should 
remain that this commission and prophecy 
refer to the City Jerusalem, and the Jewish 
people. Notwithstanding this the chapter 
has been allegorized; and so allegorized by 
some of the most eminent expositors as to 
exclude all reference or allusion to either the 

ewish City or people! Thus, according to 

dede, whose authority ranks perhaps highest,” 
&c., &c. And Dr. De Burgh understands 
here by the “ Gentiles” the nations which shall 
hereafter be leagued with the Beast from the 
Abyss (ver. 7) who is described in ch. xiii., 
and who will realize the description of 2 
Thess. ii. 4, in “the time of the Lord’s last 
great controversy with the [Jewish] nation” 
(Ze., pp. 206-210). 

With reference to the principle on which 
the “Futurist ” system of interpretation is 
founded, it is well to bear in mind the words 
of Vitringa on Rev. vii. 1-8 (/c., p. 303) :— 

“I would particularly draw attention to 
this, that throughout the whole of the Revela- 
tion no separate mention is made of the 
Jewish as distinguished from the Gentile 
Christians; and this on the clear and obvious 
ground that, under the new economy, all 
distinction of nations in the matter of religion 


is abolished. ‘There is neither Jew nor 
Greek’ writes the Apostle (Gal. ili. 28); and 
he adds: ‘If ye be Christ’s then are ye 
Abraham’s seed’ (id. ver. 29). Nowhere, 
therefore, in the whole Apocalypse do pro- 
phecies occur with respect to the Jews, in so 
far as they are contradistinguished from the 
Gentiles in the matter of religion.” So, 
also, Stern, who belongs to a very different 
school, writes on ch. xii. 1: “Es ist kein 
Unterschied, wie tberhaupt in der ganzen 
Apokalypse nicht, zwischen Juden- und Hei- 
denchristen erkennbar gemacht ” (s. 301). 


NOTE B ON VER. 2—THE FORTY AND 
Two MonruHs. 


The “ Forty and two Months,” the “1260 
days” (ver. 3), the “ Three anda half years,” — 
otherwise the “Time, and times, and half a 
time” (ch, xii, 14),—assuming these three de- 
signations of time to denote the same length 
of duration, have been interpreted Spiritually, 
Chronologically, and Literally. 

I. The SPIRITUAL interpretation is thus 
defined by Auberlen (see on ver. 2) :— 

The three periods are identical, and have 
an accurate chronological meaning which 
however we cannot at present arrive at. We 
know the meaning of the 32 years from 
Daniel (vil. 25; xii. 6, 7; ix. 27). It is the 
time of the World-power in which the 
earthly Kingdoms rule over the heavenly (Rev 
xi. 2, 3)—i.e., the time from the Roman 
destruction of Jerusalem to the Second 
Coming of Christ (cf. Luke xxi. 24 with 
Rey. xi. 2). According to Luke xxi. 24 the 
treading down of the Holy City is to last till 
“* the times of the Gentiles ;” or, according to 
Rev. xi. 2, till 42 months (1260 days = 34 
years) are fulfilled. Add to this that in Rev. 
xiii. 5 the 42 months designate the period of 
the Beast—i.e., the World-power (/.c., p. 252). 

BossuET regards the “Forty avo months” as 
mystical; and as denoting that the persecu= 
tions of the Church have a fixed and limited 
period in the Divine counsels. 

. II. The CHRONOLOGICAL (or “ Year-day”) 
interpretation (see Introd. § 11, (b), II.) :— 

MEDE, resting on the distinction already 
noted between “the inner” and “the outer 
court ” of the Temple, assumes as the continue 
ance of the pure state of the Church, which is 
denoted by the ‘inner court,” the period of 
365, OF 393, OF 430, or 455 years ;1—the begin= 
ning being counted from Christ’s birth, or 


1 **Tt is demonstrated by Villalpandus out of 
Ezekiel’s measure, that the largeness of the outer 
court was such that it contained the ner court 
three times and a half in quantity.” Now as the 
time allotted to the outer court is xlii months, the 
time allotted to the izner court, or pure state of 
the church, is xii months, or 360 days,+5 (added 
by ‘‘ Chaldzean count”)—4#.¢., 365 prophetic years 


647 


648 


Passion (A.D. 33), or from the destruction of 
Jerusalem (A.D. 70), or from the reception of 
the Vision by St. John under Domitian (A.D. 
95). To the dates (365, 455) he adds 1260, 
counting “ days” as “ years,” and thus obtains 
for the continuance of the corrupt state of 
sae Church, or “ the outer Court,” the periods 
down to A.D. 1625, or A.D. 1715 (pp. 588, 600). 

CALOVIUS (1637) reckons from the time 
of Pope Leo the Great (A.D. 440) until 
A.D. 1700, when “a great event, leading to 
the fall of the degenerate Roman Church, 
must take place.” 

CoccEIvs, arguing that the duration “ of 
the antichristian power” terminated at the 
date of the “ Pacification of Passau,” 7.e., A.D. 
1552, by subtracting from this date 1260 
years, obtained a.D. 292—or the year in 
which “ Constantius Chlorus Casaream dig- 
mitatem e+ patrocinium Christianorum sus- 
cepit ”—as the “terminus a quo” whence to 
count the duration of the 42 months. 

VITRINGA: The “terminus a quo” may 
be placed in the ¢we/fth century (p. 465) :—he 
counts this Leginning from the date of the rise 
ot the “ Waldenses, Lugdunenses, and Albi- 
genses,” The whole period however of the 1260 
years has not as yet expired (“ hactenus non 
exiit, latetque in arcanis Dei consiliis”—p. 
463). Vitringa, at the same time, looks with 
favour on an interpretation suggested by Sca- 
liger, viz. that a “ time” denotes in Scripture 
Ioo years; and, therefore, that the 33 “‘ times” 
of the prophecy signify 350 common years. 
At all events counting from the persecution 
of the Albigenses we obtain exactly 350 years 
down to the preaching of Luther (see Introd. 
§ 11, (b), IIL.). 

ROBERT FLEMING:'’ His Dzscourses were 
published in 1701, and announced that in the 
-years 1794 and 1848 certain Apocalyptic pre- 
dictions were to be fulfilled. The historical 
coincidences are remarkable; and as the 
“ Year-day” theory receives more justice at 
Fleming’s hands than at the hands of writers 
who, either before or since his time, have 
taken “ days” to denote “ years,” it is desir- 
able to give a brief account of his system. 

Fleming sets forth ‘‘ Two preliminary con- 
siderations: ”—(1) “That the three grand 
Apocalyptical numbers of 1260 days, 42 
months, and ‘a Time, Times, and an half, 
are not only Synchronical, but must be inter- 
preted Prophetically, so as Years must be 
understood by Days;”—(2) “ That in order 
to understand the Prophetical years aright, 
we must reduce them to Julian years, or such 
as are in use with us now in Europe” (pp. 
19-24). The synchronism of the three periods 
determines that a month= 30 days; and 


1 Discourses .* the Rise and Fall of the 
Papacy, 1701. 


REVELATION, XI. 


that 12 such months=a year. Accordingly 
‘a year’ = 360 days, “without the additional 
five days and odd hours and minutes that are 
added, in the calculation of the Julian year :” 
and thus three and a half (prophetical) years = 
1260 (prophetical) days ; and three and a half 
Julian years = 1278 (common) days:—* Now, 
if according to this computation, we subtract 
1260 Apocalyptical years from 1278 Julian 
or Gregorian ones (I call them so ore rotunda, 
overlooking the smaller measures of time), 
there remain 18 years to be cut off.”.... “If 
we maysuppose that Antichrist began his reign 
in the year 606 [see Note D on ch. xiii.], the 
additional 1260 years of his duration, were 
they Julian or ordinary years, would lead us 
down to the year 1866, as the last period of 
the Seven-headed Monster [Rev. xiii. 1]. But 
seeing they are prophetical years only, we 
must cast away 18 years in order to brin 
them to the exact measure of the time. A 
thus the final period of Papal Usurpations 
(supposing that he did indeed rise in the 
year 606) must conclude with the year 1848” 
(p. 27). Again: Fleming places the “ Dona~ 
tion of Pipin,” “in or about the year 758, 
about the time that Pope Paul the First 
began to build the Church of St. Peter and 
St. Paul. Now if we make this the “ra of 
the Papal Kingdom, the 1260 years will not 
run out before the year 2018, according to 
the computation of Julian years; but re- 
ducing these to Prophetical ones, the «xpira- 
tion of the Papal Kingdom ends exactly in 
the year 2000 according to our vulgar 

ing” (Pp. 34). 

To complete this calculation the Vial-Visions 
must be included: — The fourth Vial (Rev. 
xvi. 8), Fleming believes, “ is poured out upon 
‘ the sun’ of the Papal Kingdom,” and “ must 
denote the humiliation of some eminent poten= 
tates of the Romish interest:” . . . “these, 
therefore, must be principally understood of 
the houses of Austria and Bourbon” (p. 65). 
As to the part of this Vial not fulfilled when 
Fleming wrote, he supposes “that it will 
come to its highest pitch in 1717, and that 
it will run out in 1794. In AD. 475 the 
Western Roman power was destroyed, and 
the power of the Papal Kingdom was in- 
creased.” Now 475 + 1260 = 1735; and, as 
before, subtracting 18, we get 1717. Again: 
—Justinian, on his conquest of Italy, A.D. 
551, “ left it in a great measure to the Pope’s 
management: ”—but 551 + 1260 “reaches 
down to the year 1811; which, according to 
prophetical account, is the year 1794. And 
then I do suppose the fourth Vial will end” 
(p. 69). The fifth Vial (Rev. xvi. ro) “will 
probably begin about the year 1794, and ex- 
pire about A.D. 1848” (p. 77); which is the 
date given above as to the weakening of the 
Papacy, counting from A.D. 606. “The sixth 











REVELATION. XI. 


Vial (Rev. xvi. 12) will be poured out on 
the Mahometan Antichrist ;” and the Eastern 
Kings and Kingdoms are now to renounce 
their heathenish and Mahometan errors. 
The sixth Vial runs into the seventh (Rev. 
xvi. 7);— “only you may observe that the 
first of these will probably take up most 
of the time between the year 1848 and the 
year 2000; because such long messages and 
intrigues (besides the time spent before in 
destroying the Turkish Empire) . . . . must 
needs take up a great many years” (p. 79). 
“Supposing, then, that the Turkish Mon- 
archy should be totally destroyed between 
1848 and i900, we may justly assign 70 or 80 
fer longer to the end of the sixth Vial, and 
ut twenty or thirty at most to the last.” 

Fleming (p. 98) computes the date of the 
Millennium :—Relying on Dan. viil. 7, 11, he 
fixes the year 135 as the epoch from which to 
count—that is to say, the date of the second 
or final destruction of Jerusalem by Hadrian. 
Now 135+ 12¢9 (Dan. xii. 11)=1425, “which 
in prophetical reckoning is the year 1407 ”— 
the date of the Hussites, Albigenses, Wick- 
lifites, Waldenses,&c. But 1407 +1335(Dan. 
Kil. 12) = 2742, “ze. 2722 of prophetical 
reckoning: which, therefore, includes the 
begun downfall of the Papacy under the Seven 
Vials, and the final accomplishment thereof 
afterwards, together with the greatest part of 
the Millennium. And perhaps the begun 
apostasy of Jewish and Gentile Christians 
which is to issue in an universal war against 
the Saints (upon the expiration of the Millen- 
nium) may be begun about the year 2722.” 

ELLIOTT, like Fleming, introduces here the 
interpretation of the Vials. The solution of 
the great question, “ When do the 1260 years 
of ch. xi. come to an end?” is involved, he 
thinks, in the meaning of the //t4 Vial:—see 
Note A on ch. xvi. 

BENGEL assumed that the 42 months denote 
the 666 years of the Beast (ch. xiii. 18) :— 
for his chronological system see Introd. § 11, 
(b), IV. 

Ill. The LITERAL interpretation :— 

BRIGHTMAN would understand the 32 years 
during which the Council of Trent was en- 
gaged in silencing the Old and New Testa- 
ments—the “Tao Witnesses” of ver. 3 (p.296). 

Two opposite schools of expositors—the 
“ Preterists” and the Futurists’—also take 
the 1260 days, the 42 months, the 33 years, 
to be literal days, months, years. 

1. (a) Ordinary “ Preterists :?— 

Grotius and HAMMOND count the 42 
“months ” as 1260 literal “days,” from A.D. 
50 to A.D. 54—‘ ex quo strui coepit Templum 
Jovis Capitolini ad motum usque Judaicum 
duce Barchocheba. 

Stuart lays down that, 34 being one half of 
the sacred number Seven, “‘ this is a convenient 


designation of a moderate length of time, 
whether the designation is quite exact or falls 
a little short of exactness, or exceeds it in a 
small measure” (Exc. v., ii., p. 465). As to 
Rey. xi. 2, Vespasian attacked Palestine in the 
spring of A.D. 67. On the roth of August, 
A.D. 70, Jerusalem was taken by Titus: 
“There can scarcely be a doubt, therefore,” 
that the 42 months, as well as the 1260 days 
of ver. 3, mark the time during which the 
conquest of Palestine was going on(p. 468). 

(b) Rationalistic “ Preterists.” 

Reuss (“ Theol. in the Apost. Age”) explains 
that, terrified by the Pagan persecution in 
Asia Minor, St. John now declares that the 
End of all things is at hand (ch. ii. 5; xi. 14; 
&c.). The Seer even “ventures to limit the 
delay by figures borrowed from the revelation 
of Daniel:” “In three years and a half, from 
the moment at which the author wrote, all 
would be accomplished.” During this period 
of three years and a half the Pagans will remain 
masters of Jerusalem, a place of safety being 
provided for the elect within the precincts of 
the Temple (pp. 373-376). 

Renan, also identifying the three periods, 
accepts the common interpretation of 3% years 
as the explanation of the 34 “times.” This 
is “a demi-schemitta or week of years,”— 
“Ca schemitia or period of seven years is often 
taken for a unit of time, the Jubilee period 
being composed of seven schemitta; see Neus 
bauer, Journal asiatique, Dec. 1869.” “ This 
mysterious cipher borrowed from the Book 
of Daniel is the space of time which still 
remains for the world to live” (/c., p. 401). 
And Renan describes the Apocalypse as “un 
écrit de circonstance qui borne lui-méme son 
horizon a trois ans et demi, le secret de l’avenir 
entier de ’humanité” (p. 462). 

2. “ Futurists :”— 

De Burgh: The Jewish people and their 
City shall be given up to “ the Beast” (ver. 7) 
for the period of 42 months, that is, 1260 
days, or three years and a half, in which three 
different ways this same period is named in 
prophecy” (p. 210). Fie takes Dan. ix. 27 
as referring to the time of Antichrist; and 
the duration of Antichrist’s power being 
seven years, he divides these seven years 
into two periods of 33 years, or 1260 days, 
each. During the former half Antichrist is 
in covenant with the Jews (Dan. xi, 23, 32), 
and during the latter half turns against them. 
De Burgh, accordingly, doubts whether the 
42 months and 1260 days in Rev. xi. “ be not 
different from the 42 months or 1260 days of 
the great power of the Beast in ch xiii., the 
former being the first, and the latter the 
second half of the week (p. 440): cf. the 
opinions of Bisping and Burger quoted above 
on ver. 3. De Burgh seems to differ here 
from Todd—see on ch. ix. 13, 15, § (6). 


649 


650 


Topp having expounded in a similar manner 
the measuring of the Temple as denoting “‘its 
restoration, after which the Holy City shall 
be encompassed with armies and trodden 
under foot of the Gentiles 42 months ;” adds: 
“The remainder of the prophecy goes on to 
describe the events which shall take place in 
the Holy City during the 1260 days of its 
profanation by the Gentiles” (p. 171):—see 
on ch. ix. 13, 15. 

See Note D on ch. xiii. 5. 


NoTE C ON VER. 7—THE “FOURTH” 
BEAST. 


Mention of “the Beast that cometh up out 
of the Abyss” is made only here and in 
ch. xvii 8. The reading of Codex A, ra 
réraptov Onpiov,* is adduced by Zullig in 
proof that the Beast from “the Abyss” is the 
fourth instance of this symbol in the Apoca- 
lypse, the other three being (1) the Dragon, 
ch. xii. 3;—(2) the Beast “out of the Sea,” 
ch, xiii. 1 ;—(3) the Beast “ out of the Earth,” 
ch, xiii. 11. These four are, (i.) the anti- 
Jehovah, Satan, who rules in the air, or in the 
heavenly regions ;—(ii.) the Beast whe rules 
over the Sea, the symbol of the peoples of the 
Earth, by the anti-Messias, Balaam (see Note 
E on ch. xiii. 18) ;—(iii.) the Beast who rules 
over the firm earth, the “‘Fa/se-Prophet ;” —(iv.) 
an apparition from the Abyss, false-Judaism, 
and especially its last ruler (ch. xvii.) spoken 
of in Dan. vii. 7, 19; viii. 10. St. John does 
not copy Daniel carefully, for he makes ¢4ree 
of the Beasts to have “‘ Seven Heads” and “Ten 
Horns,” and all are powerful; the third, or 
“ False Prophet,’ however, has not strength, 
but prevails by the seduction of his tongue. 
Owing to the three having each “Seven Heads” 
and “ Ten Horns,” they have been often iden- 
tified with one another: but this is an error. 
The frst has upon his “ Seven Heads” seven 
diadems (ch. xii. 3) ;—the second upon his “Ten 
Horns,” tex diadems (ch. xiii. 1) ;—the fourth 
has no diadem either on “ Heads” or “ Horns” 
(ss. 156, 191, 192). 

Ebrard argues to the same effect :—(1) 
In ch. xiv, 8 the Beast of ch. xiii. 1 is styled 
Babylon; but in ch. xvii. the Harlot, or 
Babylon, is distinguished from the Beast ;— 
(2) The Beast in ch. xvii. 3 has no diadems ; 
—(3) In ch. xvii. 3 the colour of the Beast 
is mentioned, not nis form as in ch. xiii. 2; 
—(4) In ch. xvii. 3, 8 (cf. ch. xi. 7) this 
Beast from the Abyss is full of “names of 
blasphemy,” while in ch. xiii. 1 the names 


1 In place of the 7) réraprov of A, Grotius 
suggests that we should read 7d repdati0v,—pro- 
@igiosa, strange, monstrous,—adding: ‘‘ Nisi 
forte prima fera est Draco, altera ex mari, tertia 
ex terra orta, hzec vero quarta.” 

& reads ire avaBaivoy, 


REVELATION. XI. 


are only on the Heads of the Beast 
455). On this subject cf. the note on 


xvii. 3. 

Disterdieck points out the following differ= 
ences:—(1) The conception of the Head 
“smitten unto death” and then “healed” 
(ch. xiii. 3) is not found in the description of 
the Dragon in ch. xii.;—(2) In ch. xvii. 11 
an “eighth” Head is mentioned, which is 
not spoken of in ch. xii. or ch. xiii. -—(3) The 
“Ten Horns” in ch. xvii. differ in many ways 
from the Horns indicated in ch. xii. and ch. 
xiii. ;— (4) The Head “smitten” and 
“healed” (ch. xiii.) is not referred to direct/y in 
ch. xvii. To these one may add, as above, 
(5) the position of the diadems on the “ Heads” 
in ch. xii.; on the “ Horns” in ch. xiii. ; and 
the absence of any mention of them in ch. xvii. 

Common, however, to all three chapters, 
are the two leading features of the “Seven 
Heads” and the “ Ten Horns,” borrowed from 
the symbolism of Daniel and indicating the 
identity of the Beast from the déyss, and the 
Beast from the Sea—one Beast—who is the 
reflexion and the instrument of the Dragon. 


NoTE D ON VER. 12—THE Two 
WITNESSES. 


Until the rise of the school of “ Historical * 
interpreters in Cent. xiv., the belief as to the 
signification of the “ Two Witnesses” —a belief 
which is now known as that of the “Fue 
turists””—was almost universal in the ancient 
Church: viz. ‘The “TIavo Witnesses” are to 
be two Prophets, who shall appear hereafter 
in the time of Antichrist for the confir- 
mation and support of the persecuted Church ; 
—they shall suffer martyrdom ;—their dead 
bodies shall lie in the street of the literal 
Jerusalem for three literal days and a half 
(or for three years and a half, see below); 
and their ascension to heaven shall be at 
once followed by the Second Coming of 
the Lord.’ On the further question “ Who 
the two Prophets are to be,” opinions were 
somewhat divided :— 

I. That one of the Witnesses is to be 
Elijah! (cf. 2 Kings ii. 11; Mal.iv.5; Matt, 
xvii. 4, 11) all early writers were agreed; 
‘ut there was not the same agreement as to 
the second Witness. 

II. By far the greater number of the Fa- 
thers considered that Enoch (Gen. v. 22, 243 
Heb. xi. 5; Ecclus. xliv. 16; xlix. 14) is to 


g. Justin. M. (Dial. ¢. Tryph. c. 49); 
rat (Un Foann., t. iv. p. 92); Lactantius 
(Znstitt. vii. 15, 16) ; Theodor. Mopsuest. (a o 
Mai, Script. Vet. Nova Coll, t. vi. pp. 27 
298) ; Sibyll. Orac. (B. ii., 187) ; Commodian, 
ee. Apel 832, ap. Spicil. Solesm. i. P. 44) — 

Chrysost., Hom. lit. in Matt, xvii. 





REVELATION. XI. 


be the second. Enoch and Elijah alone of 
mankind had not tasted death; and so St. 
Jerome writes in answer to a question re- 
specting those “ who shall be caught up in the 
clouds to meet the Lord in the air” (1 Thess. 
iv. 17): “ Visque nosse, utrum sic occurrant 
in corporibus et non ante moriantur; cum et 
Dominus noster et Enoch atque Elias secun- 
dum Apocalypsim Joannis morituri esse di- 
cantur: ne scilicet ullus sit, qui non gustaverit 
mortem” (Epist. 59, ad Marcellam, t. i. p. 
326). And to the same effect St. Augustine: 
“Quid enim dicunt? Si peccati est mors, 
quare non mortui sunt Enoch et Elias? . . , 
Et si non fallitur quedam ex Scriptura Dei 
conjectura fidei, moriturisunt. Commemorat 
Apocalypsis quosdam duos mirabiles pro- 
phetas, eosdemque morituros, et in conspectu 
hominum resurrecturos, et ascensuros ad 
Dominum: et intelliguntur ipsi Enoch et 
Elias ; quamvis illic nomina eorum taceantur ” 
(Serm. 299, ¢. Pelag. ber., Opp. ed. Migne, 
t. v. 13761). The reason here assigned for 
understanding Enoch and Elijah is most 
weighty. 

St. Hilary Pictav. mentions Enoch with 
doubt (see under III. below). Andreas 
writes: rovrous Tous dvo0 paprupas "Evy kai 
“HXlav roddot tev didacKddav évoncay x. Td. 
(4. c., p. 58) :—Arethas indeed states that this 
was the unanimous conclusion of the early 
writers. Cf. Ireneus (Her. v. 5); Tertull. 
(De Anima, 50); Hippolytus (De <Antichr. 
43); Ephrem. Syrus (Orat. in adv. Dom.; 
Opp. t. iii. p. 141); Chron. Pasch. (vol. i. p. 
36); Damascenus (De Orth. Fide, iv. 26). 
See also the elaborate list of writers given 
by Stern (i /Joc.), who quotes Cassiodor. 
(Complex in Apoc., in c. x. 1); Ambrosiaster 
(Comm. ad 1 Cor.); Alcuin. (Comm. in Apoc. 
v.); Aquinas (De adventu Antichr., Rome, 
1840, p. 41). 

Bellarmine brings the charge of heresy 
against any who deny that the “ Witnesses” 
are to be Enoch and Elijah? 

III. There were some, however, among the 
most eminent of the Fathers who felt that the 
reasons are strong for regarding Moses (see 
Matt. xvii. 3) as the second of the “ Wit- 
nesses” —for Moses, too, it was argued, like 
Enoch and Elijah, did not pass through 
death, see Deut. xxxiv. 6; Jude 9; and so 
Victorinus notes: ‘“ Many suppose that Elijah 
and Elisha, or Elijah and Moses, are the Tavo 
Witnesses” (J. c., p. 59). St. Hilary Pictav., 


1 On this discourse the editor notes: ‘‘ Ex 
vetere libro Corbeiensi nunc primum prodit. Ex- 
cerpta ex hoc sermone tria dedit Beda nondum 
vulgatus in Pauli Epistolas. Unum. . ad 2 Cor. 
v.; duo ad 2 Tim. iv.” 

4 Bellarmine pronounces ‘‘[sententiam] con- 
trariam vel esse hzresim, vel errorem hzresi 
proximum.”—/)+ Rom. Pont., iii. 6. 


having distinctly specified ‘ Moses and Elijah,’ 
adds: “Hos quidem piophetas duos pre- 
venientes adventum Ejus esse intelligimus, 
quos Apocalypsis Joannis ab Antichristo per= 
imendos esse dicit (Comm. in. Matt. c. xx. 10, 
ed. Ben., t. i. p. 769); and in this same work 
(c. xxvi. 5) St. Hilary, having expressed his 
doubt as to Enoch, again decides for Moses.” 
Compare St. Ambrose (De Cain et Abel, i. a, 
t. i. p. 186). 

IV. To Enoch and Elijah, the Apostle 
John himself (John xxi. 22) is added by 
Methodius (ap. Suicer. Thesaur. i. 393); see 
also “ Append. ad Opp. Hippolyti” (ed. Fabric. 
xxi. p. 14); Ephrem. Antioch. (af. Photium, 
Cod. 229). 

V. To Elijah some added the prophet 
Jeremiah. Thus Victorinus, in continuation 
of the words already quoted (see under III.), 
proceeds to say that Jeremiah is to be joined 
with Elijah, for it was predicted that he 
should be “a prophet unto the nations ” (Jer. 
i. 5); and in order that he should fulfil this 
prophecy, which was not fulfilled during his 
former life, he must rise from the dead, must 
bea precursor of Messiah, and preach hereafter 
to many nations. St. Hilary, to the same 
effect, adds to the words quoted above under 
III.: “Licet varie vel de Enoch, vel de 
Jeremia, plurimorum exstiterint opiniones, 
quod alterum eorum sicut Eliam mori opor- 
teat.” 

VI. Nor was the figurative interpretation 
omitted by the early writers:—e.g. [Ticho- 
nius], Primasius, Beda understood by the 
“Two Witnesses,” the “Two Testaments 
preached by the Christian Church to the 
world.” 


Coming to more modern times, C. a 
Lapide classified the opinions under three 
heads :— 

i. “Qui per hos duos testes non duos 
singulares vivos, sed duo genera testium acci- 
piunt :’"—E.g. Pannonius understood the 
Doctors of the Church who preach the Old 
and the New Test.;—Arias Montanus took 
them to be the Law and the Prophets ;—the 
Calvinists understand the Old and the New 
Test., or the Scriptures and the whole body 
of the faithful ;—Alcasar the wisdom and 
sanctity of the primitive Church; Moses and 
Elijah being also prefigured, [Still more re- 
cently Bishop Andrews (Contra Bellarmin., 
c. 11), and Bishop Wordsworth take the 
“ Witnesses” to be the Old and the New 
Testaments]. 

ii, “ Qui hec de temporibus non futuris, sed 
jam preteritis exponunt:”—E.g. Ubertinus 
and Eitsinger take the “ Witnesses” to be 
Christ and John the Baptist; and U5ertinus 
thinks that the prophecy may also apply to 
St. Dominic and St. Francis;—P. Aureolus, 


651 


652 


Ds Lyra,’ Antoninus suppose them to be 
Pop: Sylverius and the Patriarch Mennas, 
the great opponents of the Eutychian heresy. 

iii. “‘CCommunis sententia aliorum est, hec 
ad u/tima mundi et Antichristi tempora perti- 
nere ;” and C. 4 Lapide names, as the com- 
panion of Elijah—Enoch, or Moses, or Elisha, 
or Jeremiah. 

Coming to yet later times:—“ We can 
understand no others,” writes Stern, ‘“ than 
Enoch and Elijah.” Heinrichs, Ziillig, Bleek, 
repeat the reference to Moses and Elijah, 
while Ewald hesitates between Moses and 
Enoch. De Burgh concludes that “ God will 
raise up favo, of whom Joshua and Zerubbabel 
were but faint types ” (p. 213) ; and Todd con- 
siders “that in the latter times ¢2vo prophets 
will be raised up in the Jewish Church with 
miraculous powers similar to those once pos- 
sessed by Moses and Elijah ” (p. 194). 

Among “ Preterists” :— Grotius refers Rev. 


1 On this opinion of De Lyra, Diisterdieck 
asks, ‘‘ How can Sylverius and Mennas be more 
justly held to be ‘testes veritatis,’ than the 
Waldenses, whose testimony (as Vitringa and 
others maintain), delivered by John Huss and 
Jerome of Prague, came to life again in Luther 
and Melanchthon?” Bishop Newton arrives at 
the same result as Vitringa, with a slight varia- 
tion, —viz., the Waldenses and Albigenses ; Huss 
and Jerome of Prague; Luther and Calvin ; 
Cranmer and Ridley, and their followers. Ac- 
cording to Mr. Cunninghame, the ‘‘ Witnesses” 
are Luther and his followers ; and according to 
Mr. Faber the ‘‘ Vallenses and Albigenses” 
who, he maintains, were the only two churches 
of the West which were ‘‘ exempt from apostate 
idolatry during the whole term of the latter * three 
times and a half.’” Vitringa, however, candidly 
admits: ‘‘Inter Albigenses ... fuerunt zelote 
... qui liberi non fuerunt ab erroribus Mani- 
chzismi.’’—/. c., p. 466 ; see above on ver. 6. 


CHAPTER XII. 


1 A woman clothed with the sun travaileth. 
4 The great red dragon standeth before her, 
ready to deveur her child: 6 when she was 
delivered she fleeth into the wilderness. 7 


[Ver. 2 «at page. 
Ver. 7 Tov modepjoa pera. 
om. 1st oi.—om. Tois KaTotkovot. 
Ver. 18 xal éora6n.] 

THE WoMAN AND HER’ THREE 
ENEMIES (ch. xii. 1—xiii. 18). 

The Fourth chief Vision of the Revelation 
Proper now opens :—see Introd. §. 12. 

Tae Seer now beholds “ the Woman” by 
whom the Church of God is symbolized 
(rer. 1), and also her Three Enemies—the 

won Of ver. 3, and the two Beasts of 


REVELATION. XII. 


Ver. 5 apaev.—rnpos tov Op. 

Ver. 8 odd. Ver. 10 Ev 1a ovp. Aéyoucav.—eBAnOn. Ver. ta 
Ver. 13 apoeva. 
ordpatos aitov before omicw tis yuv.—adrnp. 


[v. 4. 


xi. to the destruction of Jerusalem by 
Hadrian; and he takes th. “Tavo Witnesses 
to be “duo conventus Christianorum”—a 
Hebrew-speaking and a Greek-speaking 
church at Jerusalem; “The Beast” of ver. 7 
being Barchochab, the destruction of whose 
party within the city is described in ver. 13, 
and whose destruction outside the city is re- 
ferred to in ver. 15. With Herder, Eich- 
horn, and others, the “ Witnesses” are the 
two High Priests Ananus and Jesus, who 
were put to death by the Zealots in Jerusalem 
(Joseph. B. J. iv. 2, &c.). Bossuet thinks that 
the “Tavo Witnesses” were meant to signify 
that in the early heathen persecutions martyrs 
would be taken from the clergy, represented 
by Jcshua, son of Josedech, in Zech. iii. 1; 
and from the laity, represented by Zerub- 
babel ;—the words “when they shall have 
finished their witness” (ver. 7), indicating the 
persecution of Diocletian, the last effort of 
Paganism to destroy the Church. Stuart 
(l.c., p. 226) takes the meaning to be that 
a competent number of faithful Christian wit- 
nesses should bear testimony against the 
corrupt Jews during the last days of their 
commonwealth. Following the same line 
Volkmar is quite certain that they can only be 
James “the greater” (Acts xii. 2) who was 
beheaded a.pD. 44; and James “the less ” who 
was stoned A.D. 61. Renan describes the 
“deux témoins comme deux personnages 
importants de |’Eglise de Jérusalem, deux 
.... comme Elie et Jésus;” and it is not im- 
possible that they may be the two Jameses 
(see Volkmar above) ;—“ peut-étre aussi Pun 
de ces prédicateurs de penitence est-il Jean- 
Baptiste, l'autre Jésus (Matt. xvii. 9-13).”— 
p. 405. On the other hand, Reuss decides: 
‘“‘ Ces deux prophetes sont, a n’en pas douter, 
Moise et Elie” (én /oc., p. 92). 


Michael and his angels fight with the dra- 
gon, and prevail. 13 The dragon being cast 
down into the earth, persecuteth the woman, 


Awop there appeared a great 


Ver. 6 exer Exet.—Tpéhacw. 


er. 14 ai Ovo. Ver. 15 Ex Tov 
Ver. 17 rHv papt. “Incot.—om. Xpiorod. 


ch. xiii. 1, 1x. The Dragon (Satan) had from 
the beginning proved himself to be the enemy 
of Christ, and had endeavoured to destroy 
Him at His Incarnation (ver. 4)—doubtless 
by the instrumentality of Herod. Not suc- 
ceeding in this (ver. 5), Satan seeks to destroy 
the Church (vv. 13-17) ; and for this purpose, 
he employs two instruments—the two Beasts 


: 


1Or,sign 


v. 1.] 


iwonder in heaven ; a woman clothed 
with the sun, and the moon under 





of ch. xiii. In the present chapter we are 
given the first of the pictures which represent 
the hostility of the Church’s three Enemies. 
Most writers are agreed that we are now re- 
ferred back to the origin of the Christian dis- 
pensation—in other words that St. John now 
“recapitulates.” Hitherto, inthe Apocalypse, 
“they that dwell on the earth” have been 
Christ’s foes; henceforward Satan and his 
instruments appear in active hostility. 
Auberlen divides this chapter into three 
parts :—the first two parts describe the con- 
dition, in St. John’s time, (1) of the Church 
or Kingdom of God (wv. 1-6), and (2) of 
the kingdom of darkness (7-12). Weare then 
shown (3) the relation of the two kingdoms 
from that time onwards (vv. 13-17)—p. 260. 
There is, as usual, much diversity of 
opinion as to the details. Liicke (s. 355) 
regards ch. xii. 1-xxli. 5, as forming the second 
chief series of Apocalyptic Visions—the Seer 
now returning to the past, and taking his stand 
in the drama of the world’s history. De Wette 
regards ch. xii.—xiv. as forming a new episode 
like ch. x.-xi. 13, and as introducing a new 
scene. Hengst. also connects as a distinct 
group chapters xil., xiii. and xiv.—ch. xiv. 
consoling the faithful oppressed by the Three 
great Enemies of God. Todd, in like manner, 
combines the same group of chapters :—these 
chapters contain, as he interprets, the first of 
the Visions “supplemental ” to the Seals and 
Trumpets ;—they “ fill up the outline which 
had been before revealed ” (p. 226). 
Dollinger (The first age of the Church, Engl. 
tr., vol. i. p. 173) considers that the Seer 
reverts to the birth of Christ—the Child born 
of “The Woman” (i.e., the Church in its earlier 
Jewish and present Christian form)—Whom 
Satan waits to devour through his instrument 
Herod (Matt. ii). Wordsworth under- 
stands a retrospect to the first age of 
Christianity ; he sees here a prophetic view of 
the future history of the Church; but still, he 
adds, “not in her universality but in her 
relation to a particular power—the power of 
Rome” Elliott makes the fourth and supple- 


Cuap. XII.—THE WoMAN (1-17). 


1. dnd a great sign] Seech.xv.1. “A 
sign ”’—cf. “ he signified,” ch.i.1. The Vision 
is thus declared to be figurative; it exhibits 
two tokens of a revelation—the Woman, and 
the Dragon. The figurative character of this 
Vision, being more remote from things actual 
tnan were the objects seen in the preceding 
Visions, suggests this term. 


REVELATION, XII. 


her feet, and upon her head a crown 
of twelve stars : 


mental part of the Apoc. which treats of *he 
“Beast from the Abyss,” or Popedom, 3:0 
begin here: it extends from ch. xii. 1 to ch. 
xiv. 8, ana was written “on the back” of the 
Roll, and forms a chronological retrogression 
(see on ch. v. 1);—a persecuting Beast had 
been spoken of in ch. xi. 7; and, as it was 
necessary to give the history of his rise and 
reign, hence this episode. On opposite prin- 
ciples Stuart takes ch. xii.—xix. to describe 
the “Second Catastrophe,” or destruction of 
the Roman persecuting power; as ch. vi—xi. 
describes the “ First Catastrophe,” or destruce 
tion of the Jeqish persecuting power :—Satan 
had done his utmost to destroy the Church in 
Judea, before he began to stir up active 
persecution abroad. Auberlen, developing his 
parallel between the Book of Daniel and the 
Apocalypse, observes that “ Woman and 
Beast” form the same contrast here as in 
Daniel “the Son of Man and the four beasts :” 
the Son of Man in Dan. vil. 13 is seen to 
come from heaven;—here (ver. 1) the Woman 
is seen in heaven. ‘The beasts rise from the 
sea in Dan. vii. 3 ;—and so in Rev. xiii. 1 the 
Beast. In both the Auman is opposed to the 
bestial; only with Daniel in male, with John 
in female shape. Herein the contrast between 
the kingdom of God and that of the world 
is symbolized. Daniel beholds the Man, the 
Bridegroom, the Messiah ;—John beholds the 
Woman, the Bride, the Church of God in 
the world.—/.c., p. 240. See below on ver. 1. 

Asa“ Futurist ” Bisping thus explains :— 
Ch. xii. 1-17 sets forth the state of things at the 
close of the first half of the last World-week, 
when the Jews shall have, almost all of them, 
embraced Christianity (ch. xi. 13); when the 
Church of Christ shall have awakened to new 
life ; when Christ shall have been, as it were, 
born anew within her. On this awakening of 
the Church, the rage of Satan is inflamed 
against her, and she must withdraw, in the 
face of persecution, from the world into 
concealment. But her triumph over all her 
foes has been already secured in heaven 
(Ss. 187). 


was seen] Compare ch. xi. ro. 

in heaven ;| Where the Seer beholds what 
is revealed, and whence the “ Dragon” is cast 
out, compare vv. 3, 7, 9, and the words 
“ the sign of the Sonof Man in heaven,” Matt. 
xxiv. 30: see also Luke ii. 34, “a sign which 
shall be spoken against.” Bengel explains: 
“The Woman, the Church, though on earth, 
is, nevertheless by virtue of her union with 
Christ, in heaven,"—see Eph. ii. 6; Phil. iii 


053 


654 


ao. According to Hengst., St. John is “in 
the Spirit ;” and to be “in the Spirit and to 
be in heaven are the same,”—see Ezek. i. 1; 
and cf. Rev. iv. 1, 2; x. 1. 


a woman| Scripture continually repre- 
sents the relation of God to His Church as 
that of a husband to his wife :—Isai. liv. 5; 
John iii. 29; 2 Cor. xi. 2; Eph. v. 25, 32. 

See Note A at the end of this chapter. 


clothed with the sun,| We have here an 
ideal picture of the Church of God, the true 
Israel, the Bride, the spiritual mother of Jesus 
Christ. As such she wears the crown of 
“Tavelve Stars.” Diisterdieck thus sums up the 
import of this figurative description: ‘“ The 
‘Woman’ who gives birth to the Messiah (ver. 
5), and has yet other ‘seed’ (ver. 17), can only 
be the Old Testament Church of God, the 
true Israel. John had already been taught by 
the representations of the ancient prophets to 
ascribe ‘ seed’ to this Church, and to regard 
her as Mother of her children, the faithful and 
godly (cf. Isai. liv. 1, 13; lxvi. 8): the descrip- 
tion, moreover, of vv. 2, 5, has not arisen 
without a reminiscence of Micah v. 1-3 ’"— 
(s. 420). St. John, in fact, definitely represents 
the Gentile Church (“the rest of her seed,” 
ver. 17) as belonging to the “seed of the 
woman ” (see John iv. 22; Gal. ili. 7, 16), and, 
so far forth, as brethren of the Messiah. 
Compare Micah v. 3,—‘ The remnant of his 
brethren,”—on which Dr. Pusey notes: *‘‘ His 
brethren’ are plainly the brethren of the 
Christ ; either because Jesus vouchsafed to be 
born ‘ of the seed of David’ (Rom. i. 3);.. 
or as such as He makes and accounts and 
‘is not ashamed to call, brethren’ (Heb. ii. rr), 
being sons of God by grace, as He is the Son 
of God by nature. .. . In the first sense, Micah 
foretells the continual inflow of the Jews to 
that true Israel who should first be called. ... 
But ... there is no reason to take the name 
‘brethren’ here in a narrower sense than so 
to comprehend all ‘the remnant whom the 
Lord shall call’ (Joel ii. 32), whether Jews 
or Gentiles.”—The Minor Prophets, p. 334. 
Hengst. expresses the same result: The 
“Woman” is not the community of Israel in 
contradistinction to the Christian Church 
(see vv. 6, 14-17); nor, on the other hand, 
the Christian Church in contradistinction to 
Israel ; but “ t4e Woman,” or Zion (cf. Micah 
iv. 10), is properly the one indivisible com- 
munity of the Old and New Covenant—the 
Israel perpetuated in the Christian Church 
out of which the false seed has been cast by 
its unbelief. Auberlen observes that the 
reference of the “ Tave/ve Stars” to both the 
Twelve Tribes, and the Twelve Apostles (see 
Note A at the end of this chapter), implies that 
“the Woman” represents not only the ancient 
Jewish Church, but likewise the Church of 


REVELATION. XII. 


[v. £. 


God in its New Testament form :—after the 
Ascension Israel ceased to be the congre sa- 
tion of God (Dan. ix.) ; and yet in Rev. xii. 6, 
13, “the Woman” is spoken of after the Ascen- 
sion (ver. 5). The reference of this symbol 
to the Church cannot therefore be limited 
to any particular period or epoch (p. 247). 

On the other hand, Ebrard excludes the 
Christian Church. After Hofmann, he refers 
to Isai. vii. 14; Micahiv. 10: and understands 
here the daughter of Zion, Israel—* gua re- 
ceiver of the promises” (Rom. ix. 3-5). “ He 
mulier,” wrote St. Augustine, “antiqua est 
Civitas Dei . . . . Utque de nato quodam in 
Zion psalmus dicit. (Ps. Ixxxvii. 3,5)... . et 
illa mulier, Civitas Dei, ejus luce protegebatur, 
cujus carne gravidabatur ” (Evarr. in Psalm. 
cxlii., Opp., iv. p. 2264). 

On the “ Futurist ” scheme, Stern, after St. 
Hippolytus (De <Antichr., c. 61), considers 
that the 1260 days (ver. 6) do not allow us 
to mistake the time of Antichrist; and hence 
“the Woman” denotes “ the Church-teaching 
of the Last Time.” To the same effect De 
Burgh relies on Isai. lxvi. 5-9; he con- 
siders that “the Woman” is not an emblem of 
the Christian Church at all; and he can “find 
no accurate correspondence to the emblem 
except in the Jewish nation .... pregnant 
with the expectation of the Coming of the 
Lord ” (pp. 228-235); and so Todd: “ The 
Woman ....is the nation of Israel at the 
period of her future promised glory ” (p. 243). 

In direct contrast to such interpretations is 
that, whether ancient or modern, which ex- 
plains (as Words.): “The Woman in this 
Vision is the Christian Church.” 

Asa“ Preterist”” Bossuet (and so Elliott who 
takes “ heaven” to mean “the heaven of the 
political world”) interprets this prophecy of 
the persecutions of the Church under Diocle= 
tian, Galerius, and Licinius, from A.D. 303 to 
A.D. 323. This opinion rests upon the three 
periods in the hostility of “t4e Dragon:” (1 
before he is cast out of heaven (ver. 9); (2 
after he is cast out (ver. 13); (3) the attack 
after the Woman’s flight (ver. 15). 

So early as Cent. iii, Methodius (ap. 
Cramer, Catena, p. 352), as subsequently 
Andreas (/.c., p. 62), rejected the opinion that 
the Woman was the Virgin Mary. St. Ber- 
nard, however, did not think the application 
to the Blessed Virgin unsuitable (“ Putasne 
ipsa [Maria] est sole amicta mulier? Esto 
siquidem, ut de presenti Ecclesia id intelli- 
gendum prophetice Visionis series ipsa de- 
monstret; sed id plane non inconvenienter 
Mariz videtur attribuendum.”—Sermo de XJ. 

rerog. B. V. Mariz, § 3. The statement of C. 
a Lapide and others that St. Augustine 
made this application, is unfounded :— the 
Benedictine editors of St. Augustine’s works 
point out that the sermons “ De Symbolo, ad 





' 


v. 3-3.) 


2 And she being with child cried, 
travailing in birth, and pained to be 
delivered. 


Catechumenos,” in which this opinion appears, 
are spurious (ap. S. August. Opp., t. vi., p. 
965; see Todd, p. 234). Hengst., neverthe- 
less, writes: ‘That the Church here was 
seen in the type of the Virgin Mary, or that 
the Seer perceived in the Virgin Mary an 
image of the Church, is rendered probable by 
ver. 4 ” (see also below on ver. 6). Stern (s. 
303) altogether rejects this interpretation. 

To apply the symbolism here exclusively to 
either the Jewish or the Christian Church 
fails to meet the requirements of the language 
used. Burger tries to meet this difficulty by 
understanding “the Woman” to be the Church 
of Christ in her final condition, and including 
converted Israel (Rom. ix. 27). 


and the moon under her feet,| See Cant. 
vi. 10. She appears in the glory of all the 
luminaries which adorn the heavens. The 
old writers understand by this description 
that the sun rules the day of the Gospel 
(Isai. lxi.). “The moon under her feet ” 
signifies what the Law, the Legal Israel, 
became to the Christian Church—not a yoke 
or a bondage, but a foundation. 


and on her head a crown of twelve stars ;| 
Bengel notes that the Stars are not “stars of 
beaven” (ver. 4). On the word “crown,” 
see onch. il. 10. The number of Stars in this 
place—the sacred number of the Tribes of 
Israel—represents, according to Victorinus, 
the Twelve Patriarchs—“the Fathers, of 
whom as concerning the flesh Christ came.” 
The “crown of twelve Stars,’ notes Reuss, 
“recalls the ideal totality of the true Israel.” 
This number, now- represented by the 
Twelve Apostles, has become a crown of 
Stars :—ct. ch. xxl. 12, 14. Ewald (see Note 
C on ver. 3) states that (the Arabic) Hippo- 
lytus understands by the Woman, the 
Church ;—by the su2 which radiated around 
her, the Messiah ;—by the Woon under her 
feet, John the Baptist ;—anu by the crown of 
Stars, the Twelve Apostles. 

“Twelve,” observes Stern, “ being the signa- 
ture of perfection, all Saints are symbolized 
here.” Many refer to Gen. xxxvil. 9 as the 
source of the symbolism ;— there, however, we 
read of but e/even stars. 

“The old world has often been called a 
male world,” writes Mr. Maurice (pp. 208- 
212): “ Thereverence for women was indeed 
cultivated in the Jew by all his institutions ; 
but the dread lest some other than a male 
standard of worth should creep in to the 
state, was a chief reason why the elder 
Romans dreaded the incursion of the art 


REVELATION. XII. 


3 And there appeared another 


‘wonder in heaven; and behold a!0™ = 


great red dragon, having seven heads 


and learning of Greece.” In Greece Pallas 
and Aphrodite had disputed the supremacy 
with Apollo ; and upon this subject of the »za/e 
and female ideals the present Vision may throw 
a light. The “wonder” which the Apostle 
saw—the mother and the child—is “the 
wonder which has accompanied Christendom 
through all the different stages of its life and 
growth.” It has “been present to all who 
have tried to satisfy themselves what the 
human is, and how itis related to the Divine.” 
The description of the Woman “here is a 
very striking symbol of humanity... . But 
though more perfect than anything that the 
world had yet seen, it is still imperfect. 
Something is needed to connect this female 
ideal with the male ideal of the former ages. 
That must be expanded as well as this. There 
must be a man-child.” 


2 and she was with child:] Gr. “and 
being with child”—these words are in 
concord with “a Woman.” 


and she crieth out, travailing in birth] 
(See vv. //.). For the application to the 
former Church of God, see Isai. lxvi. 7, 8, 
and the notes iz Joc. So likewise in a later 
age our Lord speaks of His Church in her 
early trials—see John xvi. 21. 


and in pain to be delivered.| (On the 
constr. of the infin. see Winer, § 44,s. 291 ff.). 
“In this world the Church, like Eve, brings 
forth children in sorrow ” (Words.). Ewald 
notes that the old prophets described under 
this image the “ Woes of Messiah” (e.g. Isai. 
xxvil. 17; Hos. xiii. 13); and so Christ Him- 
self, Matt. xxiv. 8. ‘‘ What more appropriate 
symbol,” writes Auberlen, “ of the Old Test. 
Church?” .  . “The most ardent longing 
of the ancient Patriarchs . . . was nothing 
else but what Isaiah expressed: ‘Unto us a 
Child is born,’ &c.—Isai. ix. 6” (p. 244). 


THE GREAT RED DRAGON (3-17). 


3. And there was seen Gnother sign in 
heaven ;| In addition to “the sign ” of ver. 1 
there is here another figurative description-— 
not the description of a person, but the symbol 
of Satan as representative and author of all 
that is evil on earth and opposed to God and 
Christ: see Ebrard, quoted on ch. ix. 2. “In 
heaven,” notes Words., because the Church, 
“the kingdom of heaven ” is assailed. 


and behold, a great red dragon,| The word 
“red” (see ch. vi. 4) denotes either “ flame- 
coloured” as the type of destruction (ch. 
ix. 17); or “blood-red” the type of murder, 


655 


656 


and ten horns, and seven crowns 
upon his heads. 
4 And his tail drew the third part 


REVELATION. XII. 


[¥- 4 


of the stars of heaven, and det cast 
them to the earth: and the dragoa 
stood before the woman which was 





John viii. 44-—cf. ch. xvii. 6. With this de- 
scription compare that of ch. xvii. 3. 

The word “Dragon” in the N. Test. 
appears only in this Book: the term is that 
employed in the LXX. to render the tannin of 
Ex. vil. 9 (“a serpent”), and of Jer. li. 34 (“a 
dragon’’—see the note in /oc.). It is also used 
for the /evtathan of Job xli. 1 :—see the note 
on Isai. xxvil. 1, and also Note B at the end of 
this chapter. In wv. 9, 13-16 we find the 
names Satanand Devi/, the Hebrew and Greek 
names; also Serpent and Dragon—the names 
Serpent and Dragon being interchanged in vv. 
13, 15. Weare thus referred to Gen. iii. 1. 
Isai. xxvii. 1 supplies the source, and explains 
the appropriateness of this symbol ; for “ Levia- 
than” (“the Dragon” in the LXX) is there 
the symbol of Babylon, the power hostile to 
the people of God. So in Ezek. xxix. 3, the 
“ Dragon” (LXX.; Heb., tannim, or tannin) 
is the emblem of Pharaoh, King of Egypt 
(doubtless the crocodile is referred to—see 
the note on Ezek. xxix. 3); and Egypt was 
ever the bitter enemy of the elder Church. 
This reference to Pharaoh illustrates that title 
of Satan which is found only in St. John, 
“Prince of this world” (John xii. 31; xiv. 
30; xvi. 11). Observe, “the Dragon” is not 
the emblem of Satan generally, but of Satan 
in the particular relation of “ Prince of this 
world.” 

Mr. Maurice notes: During the 1260 
days—the three or four years at the end of 
which Jerusalem fell—Rome was passing 
through a death-struggle: and this crisis sig- 
nified the struggle “whether humanity shall 
have its true and righteous King, or whether 
another power shall rule over it, and receive 
its homage. That power is represented as a 
bloody Dragon ” (p. 213). 

seven heads and ten horns,| Onthe numbers 
seven and ten, see on ch. xiii. 1. As to the 
import of this symbolism we must compare ch. 
xiii, and ch. xvii. The questions, as to how 
the “‘ Ten Horns” are to be divided among the 
“ Seven Heads ”—each of which bears a royal 
Diadem (see Note D on ch. il. 10), and what 
the proper meaning or reference of these Heads, 
Horns, and Diadems is, are not to be answered 
from ch. xii. alone. Satan, as the source of 
universal hostility to God, now appears in a 
‘orm similar to that of the Beast—the Anti- 
christ of the Christian era (see ch. xiii. 1 ; xvii. 
3). Of this St. John gives the explanation in 
sh. xvii. 9-12. The “Ten Horns” are taken 
vom the description of the fourth beast of 
Yaniel (vii. 7, 20). De Wette suggests that 

re “ Seven Heads” are a symbol of wisdom, 


and the “Ten Horns” a symbol of power,— 
the numbers seven and ten being the welle 
known symbolic numbers, and having here no 
more definite meaning than the number ‘‘one= 
third” in ver. 4. Similarly Stern (s. 305) 
regards the “Seven Heads” as types of the 
wisdom of the idolatrous powers of the 
world. Without any definite reference Beda 
explains: “ Diabolus potentia terreni regni 
armatur. In septem capitibus omnes reges 
tee et in decem cornibus omne regnum 

icit.” 

The “Seven Heads,” writes Auberlen, are 
a caricature of the Seven Spirits of God (ch, 
i. 4; lil. 1; iv. 5; v.6); while the “Ten Horns” 
represent the World-element (p. 267). See 
Introd. § 11, (a). 


and upon his heads seven diadems,] 
The “ diadem” (a word found in the N. T. 
only here, in ch. xiii. 1, and in ch. xix. 12) 
is the symbol of royalty—see, above, the title 
“Prince of this world.” In accordance with 
this title the “Seven Heads,” with their dia- 
dems, signify universality of earthly dominion, 

The Dragon has Seven diadems on his 
Heads; the Beast in ch. xiii. 1 has Ten 
diacems on his Horns, and in ch. xvii. 3 has no 
diadems. There is no ground in the text for 
any opinion as to the relation of the “Tes 
Horns” to the “Seven Heads”: and in a 
symbolical description of this nature it is 
generally as profitless to attempt an explana 
tion in words, as it is tasteless to represent 
pictorially (as Alcasar, Bengel, Zillig, Elliott, 
and others have done) the form of the Apo- 
calyptic emblems. In the present case, how= 
ever, the whole question of interpretation is 
involved. Thus Vitringa (p. 523), distin- 
guishing the symbolism here from that in ch. 
xiii. 1, and understanding by “ the Dragon” the 
persecuting Roman Empire on the eve of 
the accession of Constantine,—under the sway 
of Diocletian, Maximian, Galerius, Constantius 
Chlorus, Maximin, Severus, and Maxentius,— 
argues that the middle and greatest Head 
(viz. Diocletian) bears the “ Zen Horns,” i.e., 
rules over ten provinces. Bengel, Hengst., 
Ebrard, &c. infer (see on ch. xili. 1) that 
the “Zen Horns” are borne by the seventh 
Head ;—De Wette and Ziillig, think that four 
of the Heads have each one Horn, and each 
of the remaining three two Horns;—while 
Diisterd. concludes that, if St. John had 
any definite intuition here, he may have given 
one Horn to each Head, and placed the re= 
maining three Horns between the fifth and 
sixth Heads: see on ch. xvii. ro. 

Ebrard notes that because “ the Dragon” ig 


v. 5.] 


Yeady to be delivered, for to devour 
her child as soon as it was born. 


“the Prince of this world,’ he bears as his 
Heads and Horns the Seven successive 
World-monarchies, and the last Ten contem- 
porary kingdoms ; while according to Renan 
we here regard “Satan under the features of 
the most powerful of his incarnations, the 
Roman Empire” (p. 407). Medealso regards 
“the Dragon” as the symbol of the heathen 
Roman Empire. Perhaps the earliest attempt 
to explain the “ Seven Heads” as symbolizing 
the Seven World-kingdoms is that of St. 
Hippolytus in his commentary on the Apoca- 
lypse, some portions of which have been re- 
covered in an Arabic manuscript described by 
Ewald. Of this some account is given in 
Note C at the end of this chapter. 

The Horns are the symbols of power (see 
on ch. v. 6); and the numbers seven and ten 
signify completeness and extensive authority. 
See on ch. xiii. 1 as to the characteristics here 
described, which, as belonging to his chief 
representative and instrument, Satan now 
assumes; and compare Note C on ch. xi. 7. 


4, draweth the third part of the stars of 
beaven,| The present tense here points to 
the work which the spirit of evil is always 
doing inthe Church. “The Dragon” like the 
“ Woman” isinheaven, but the “stars of heaven” 
here are not those of her crown. I. Williams 
observes that as this particular is mentioned 
before the persecution of the “ Man Child,” it 
must contain some earlier reference; and he 
suggests (as Andr., Arethas, Victorinus, &c., 
had done) that the reference may be to the 
angels (see Jude 6) whom Satan drew down 
with himself to perdition. To the same effect 
Burger ;—who explains that “the Dragon” 
has subjected to himself, by means of these 
fallen spirits, this world and its kingdoms, and 
is thus able to use the words of Luke iv. 6. 
De Wette, Ewald, Bleek, understand some 
violence exercised on God’s kingdom of 
light. 

The “third part” seems to have the same 
meaning as under the Trumpets—see on ch. 
viii. 7. Mede accordingly explains these words 
to signify that the Roman Empire (see on 
ver. 3) has reduced to subjection “ the third 
part” of the princes and dynasties of the 
world (Pp. 459). 

On a different principle Elliott concludes 
that by the edict of Milan, a.p. 313, the 
Church gained toleration in Europe and 
Africa: in Asia, however, she was still per= 
secuted—the Pagan Roman power being now 
reduced to one-third of its former extent. And 
thus the Dragon’s tail drew down only a third 

of the stars of the political heaven. 

Vitringa, Bengel, and others understand 


Lew Test.—-Vou. 1V 


REVELATION. XII. 


5 And she brought forth a man 
child, who was to rule all nations 


here the persecution of the pastors of the 
Church ;—Hengst. the overthrow of earthly 
rulers, as in Dan. viii. 10;—Stern the seduc- 
tion by Satan of professing Christians who 
had once held high place in the Church. 

Reuss notes that the Dragon’s tail quench- 
ing the lights of heaven is the symbolical form 
of expressing the notion of the Prince of 
darkness. 


and did cast them to the earth:| The syme 
bolism here is plainly taken from Dan. viii, 
10; asthe “Ten Horns” are borrowed from 
Dan. vii. 7. Alf. sees in this description an 
emblem of “the magnitude and fury of the 
Dragon ;” — Stuart merely a token of his 
power ;—Ebrard notes that “the Dragon” isa 
power in heaven and on earth; this, he adds, 
agrees with his seduction of the angels. 


and the dragon stood before the woman] 
Or, standeth, Pliny (H. N., viii. 3) states 
that unlike other serpents, the dragon “ celsus 
et erectus in medio incedit.” 


which was about to be delivered, that 
when she was delivered, he might devour 
her child.] Words. notes: “His design is 
like those of his . . . instruments, Pharaoh in 
Egypt, and Herod in Jewry; the former 
against the male children of Israel who were 
to be cast into the river Nile (Ex. i. 22), the 
other seeking to destroy the Man Child, 
Christ Jesus” (Matt. ii. 13). 


5. And she was delivered of a son, @ 
man child,| (See vv. /l.). Gr. “a son, a 
male” (réxvoy being understood)—if indeed 
we should not read here, in place of the neuter, 
the masculine (dpoev’) as in ver.13. Diisterd. 
refers to Jer. xx. 15 (Hebr.), and explains the 
form by the design of the Seer to draw atten- 
tion to the sex of the Child. Beda thought 
that the design was to designate the Child as 
conqueror of “ tHe Dragon” (“ victorem diaboli 
qui fceminam vicerat ”). Bengel, Hengst., and 
others, adducing Isai. Ixvi. 7, see a reference, 
in the emphasis thus given, to the words 
which immediately follow. Bisping compares 
Gen. iv. 1, where Eve, when she “ bare Cain,” 
supposed that she “had gotten a man [voy] 
from the Lord ”—“ a Man Child” who was 
to bruise the Serpent’s head. 


who is to rule] Gr. “to tend as a 
shepherd.” See Ps. ii. 9 (LXX.), and the 
note on ch. ii. 27. 


all the nations with a rod of iron:] 
The reference to Christ, in ch. xix. 15, of 
these words from the Messianic Psalm, proves 
that what in Isai. Ixvi. 7 was, primarily, but a 
personification has at length found its pro= 


dag 


657 


658 


with a rod of iron: and her child 
was caught up unto God, and £0 his 
throne. 


REVELATION. XII. 


[v. 6. 


6 And the woman fled into the 
wilderness, where she hath a place 
prepared of God, that they should 





found realization in “the man Christ Jesus,” 
in and by Whom alone can the Church bring 
forth her children. As in Gen. iii. the Seed 
of the woman and the seed of the Serpent, so 
in the Apoc. the Son of Man and the Beast 
are parallel antitheses. “ At first sight,” notes 
Words., “these words appear applicable only 
to Christ ;” but what is true primarily of Him 
is transferred to the members of His body. 
What St. Paul says of himself (Gal. iv. 19) 
is true of the Church which ‘travails in birth 
again until Christ be formed’ in her children. 
What Ps. ii. 9 foretells of Christ, He himself 
applies to his faithful ones in ch. ii. 26, 27. And 
thus Christ Himself has interpreted the 
present Vision:— “ The rod of iron, is the 
Holy Scripture, and by it the male children, 
the masculine spirits of Christ’s Church rule 
the Nations, and overcome the World ”—see 
ch. ili. 21. In opposition to this view, Alf, 
following Diisterd., writes: ‘“‘ The Man Child 
is the Lord Jesus Christ, and none other.” 
Alf. rejects one half of the interpretation; 
while Ribera and Stern (s. 307), with equal 
certainty, reject the other half: “ Chapter xii. 
5, cannot be referred to Christ” (“nicht 
auf Christum bezogen werden diirfe”), 
because, after His Ascension he needed no 
more to be rescued from Satan whom He has 
conquered by his death and Cross; and Stern 
refers the whole passage to the zew/y con- 
verted, to those who are “ born again” in the 
persecution of Antichrist:—so Bisping also, 
as quoted above. According to Renan the 
“ Woman” is Israel, and the “ Man Child” the 
Messianic ideal (Micah iv. 10). For Auber- 
len’s explanation see Note A at the end of this 
chapter. 


and her child was caught up| Because 
tnis phrase “caught up” is not used else- 
where of the Ascension, Burger refuses to 
see in this passage a reference to “the birth 
of the Lord in Bethlehem.” In ch. vii. 9-14, 
he adds, the conquerors of “the Dragon” stand 
before the throne ; and so here “ the Woman” 
—the Church of Christ—is not destroyed, 
but her “men children” the conquerors of 
“the Dragon” are removed from the evil of 
earth by death, and “caught up” to the 
throne of God, and to the Lamb. 

According to Sir I. Newton, after Constan- 
tine’s victory over Maxentius (A.D. 312) the 
Church brought forth “a Man Child”—a 
Christian Empire, which (A.D. 323) by the 
victory over Licinius was “caught up unto 
God” (J.c., p. 466). 


unto God, and unto bis throne.| (See vv. 


H.). As in ch. xi, 12, where the Ascension is 
referred @s, so here the primary sense is the 
session of Christ at the right hand of God: 

“Christ our King and Priest ‘has made us 
Kings and Priests to God.’ By His Ascension 
into heaven we are even made ‘to sit together 
with Him in heavenly places’ (Eph. 1. 205 
ii. 6), and our ‘citizenship is in heaven’— 
Phil. ili. 20” (Words.). The interpretation 
that from the first the Church, always in pain, 
is bringing forth Christ in His ’members, while 
“the Dragon” is always seeking to devour 
the new birth—Alford does not notice. He 
merely opposes to his own literal application 
to our Lord (and he pronounces every inter- 
pretation which oversteps this measure to be 
“convicted of error’) the opinion of Elliott 
that the words are fulfilled by the “ mighty 
issue of the consummated birth of a son of the 
Church, a baptized Emperor, to political supre- 
macy in the Roman Empire, . . . united with 
the solemn public profession of the divinity 
of the Son of Man” (vol. iii. p. 24). Elliott 
indeed, merely follows Mede, who sees in the 
words a prediction of the triumph of Chris- 
tianity in the Roman Empire; not only its 
spiritual triumph, but also the victories of 
Constantine and Theodosius over the enemies 
of the Church: and so, for the most part, 
Brightman, Vitr., Bishop Newton, &c. Ac- 
cording to De Burgh the words are “simply 
intended to convey the entire failure of Satan 
to prevent the kingdom of Christ ;’ ’ though 
that kingdom be delayed during the ‘Woman's 
flight to the wilderness (p. 236). “The pro- 
phecy,” writes Todd, “presents difficulties 
which I know not how to solve” (p. 243). 


6. And the woman fled) It is gerige! 
allowed that this verse is interposed here in 

anticipation of ver. 14. The further hostility of 
“ the Dragon” to the “Child” (ver. 7, &c.) can= 
not be detailed until the fate of the “ Woman” 
has been recorded. Her flight (ver. 14) follows 
the victory of the Archangel, when “‘the 
Dragon,” discomfited in his attack upon Christ, 
turns against her (ver. 13). In ch. xiii. are 
set forth the means which he employs for the 
purpose of uprooting the Christian faith. 

Hengst. and Auberlen regard the flight of 
the Virgin Mary and the child Jesus through 
the wilderness to Egypt (Matt. ii. 13) as a 
type of the flight of the ideal mother of Jesus 
here and in ver. 14. 


a the wilderness, I.e.,to the scene ot 
Puce of ber o as it was of Christ’s of God and 
conflict “ prepared of 
be is mourished” (ver. 14). 





v. 7.] 


feed her there a thousand two hun- 
dred and threescore days. 


“ Woman” has no city on earth, because she 
seeks the City which is to come (Heb. xiii. 
14)—she has only a place in the wilderness. 
See Deut. viii. 2-5 ; Hos. ii. 14—texts which 
recall the flight of the ancient Church when 
persecuted by “te Dragon” through Pharaoh. 

Déllinger refers to the days of Antiochus 
when the faithful fled from Jerusalem, 
1 Macc. ii. 29. 


where she hath a place prepared of God,] 
(See vv. //.). Gr. “where she hath there;” 
the ‘relative adverb” (exe?) is redundant, as 
occurs in relative sentences: see the note on 
ch. vi. 4, and cf. below ver. 14. On the prep. 
(dro) see ch. ix. 18. 

The Harlot is afterwards found in a wil- 
derness (ch. xvii. 3), but not in “a place 
prepared of God.” 

The “place prepared of God” in “the 
wilderness” corresponds, according to Burger, 
to the land of Canaan; and to this land of 
its fathers converted Israel is to return 
shortly before the great ascendancy of Anti- 
christ :—see on ch. xi. 2. 


that there they may nourish her] 
(Sand C read the indic, after iva). The subject 
of the verb is indefinite ; the passzve is used in 
ver, 14:—see Auberlen’s remark on the third 
person plural, quoted on ch. x. 11. 


Compare Mark i. 13— “The Angels 
ministered unto Him.” 


a thousand two hundred and threescore days. | 
See ver. 14, and the remarks on ch. xi. 2, 3 
where the same, or an equivalent space of 
time, is referred to; see also Note B on ch. 
xi. 2. This period of the woman’s sojourn in 
“ the wilderness” (1260 days = the 33 years or 
“times” of ver. 14) represents in the Apoc., 
according to Daniel’s predictions, the duration 
of the conflict between the world and the 
Church,—“ the time of the World-power, 
in which the earthly kingdoms rule over the 
heavenly ” (Auberlen, p. 252),—the broken 
week of Dan. ix. 27. This period, we have 
seen, is described symbolically in ch. xi. 2, 
as that during which “the Holy City” is 
trodden down by the Gentiles. The “ wil- 
derness” is in prophetic language the type of 
Israel’s exile (see Isai. xli. 17-19; Jer. ii. 2; 
Ezek. xx. 13; Hos. ii. 14-15). The Child 
being “‘ caught up unto God” and the flight of 
the Woman—the Ascension of Christ and 
the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus—are 
parallel events; and this period of 1260 days 
embraces the whole duration of the Church’s 
exile, from the date of that destruction to the 
End of all things. Ebrard understands here 
(see on ver. 1) that the “‘ Woman,” being the 


REVELATION, XII. 


* Jews to the heathen.” 


7 And there was war in heaven: 
Michael and his angels fought against 


representative of Israel “gua the object of the 
promises,” must be preserved; and accord- 
ingly that Israel is not extirpated by the 
fourth World-power, the Roman Empire, 
but preserved by God in its national separa- 
tion from other peoples (s. 363). Bisping, 
as above, refers to converted Israel, but 
“ during the last anti-Christian persecution, 

.. during the whole of the last world-week ” 
(see on ch. ix. 12; Xi. 2). 

Cocceius, Vitr., Bengel understand by the 
Jlight the passage of Christianity from the 
Jews to the Gentiles; and so Auber‘en (p. 
247),—‘‘ Whither does the Woman fly after 
Christ’s Ascension? Undoubtedly from the 
Hence it is said in 
ver. 5 of “the Man Child” that He is to 
rule the heathen with an iron sceptre. ‘“‘ The 
wilderness” and the land of the heathen mean 
the same thing: there the demons, rulers and 
princes of the heathen world, dwell (Isai. 
xxxiv. 14; Matt. xii. 43; Mark i. 13). See 
especially Isai. xxi. 1-10, “‘ The burden of the _ 
desert of the sea,”—the burden of Babylon,— 
of which passage ver. 9 is quoted in Rev. xiv. 
8; and in Rev. xviii. 2. The flight of the 
“ Woman” into “ the wilderness” is thus the 
passage of the Gospel to the Gentiles, as 
announced in Matt. viii. 11, 123 xxi. 43; 
Acts xiii. 46, 475 xxvili. 28. 

According to Sir I. Newton (iéid.) the 
“ Woman,” by the division of the Roman Em- 
pire into the Greek and Latin Empires, fled 
from the “ First Temple” (see on ch. xi. 2) 
into “the wilderness,” or spiritually barren 
Empire of the Latins, where she is found 
afterwards sitting upon the Beast (ch. xvii.). 

Ziillig, arguing that all here is historical 
(which he infers from the use of the present 
in ver. 14), refers to the early persecutions 
such as that of Saul (Acts viii. 3), and the 
escape of the Christians to Lydian Asia ;— 
Herder and Ewald refer to the flight of the 
Christians from Jerusalem to Pella ;—Renan, 
too, on the theory that the Apoc. was written 
at the end of a.D. 68, or beginning of A.D. 69, 
considers that vv. 6, 13-17, prove decisively 
(“ce qui est décisif”) that the flight to 
Pella (Matt. xxiv. 15; Eus. ili. 5; Epiphan. 
De Mens. et Pond., 15) had already taken place, 
and therefore must have occurred in the early 
part of A.D. 68 (/.c., p. 296). 


THE WAR IN HEAVEN (7-12). 


7. And there was war in heaven:| The de 
scription here is in the strictest sense symbo- 
lical; the imagery and action being founded 
on other statements of Scripture. The primary 


De 2 


659 


660 


the dragon; and the dragon fought 
and his angels, 





object of the present Vision is to foreshadow 
the conflict and the triumph of the Christian 
Church: and, in order to indicate at the 
same time how the Church of the elder and the 
Church of the later Covenant are but one, the 
description is founded on the historical events 
of the past, and is expressed in the language of 
earlier prophecy. St. John, as Bishop Words- 
worth notes, “now reverts to an earlier period, 
in order to recite the antecedent history of the 
Dragon, and to explain the circumstances 
under which he was led on to persecute the 
Woman; and he traces that history till it is 
brought down, in ver. 14, to the same point 


as in ver. 6, namely, to the escape of the Woman . 


in the wilderness.” The old conflict of Satan 
with the powers of heaven was renewed at the 
Incarnation, and with the same result; and 
now, in language reflecting the past, the victory 
of the Cross is the theme. “The passage 
Rev. xii. 7-11 is referred,” writes Archbishop 
Trench (Studies in the Gospels, p. 229), “ by all 
zood expositors to that destroying of the works 
of the devil which was the consequence of the 
triumphant life, and death, and Ascension of 
the Son of God. T4ereis described in its full 
consummation that which the Lord, (St. Luke 
x 18) with prophetic eye, has already beheld.” 
To these words of the Lord, “I beheld Satan 
as lightning fall from heaven,” may be added 
John xii. 31: ‘“ Now shall the Prince of this 
world be cast out.” Here (as in ver. 3), “the 
Dragon” is seen in heaven ; and we read to the 
same effect in Jobi., ii.; Zech. iii. That Satan 
ard his angels are now represented as being 
“in heaven,” Stuart explains by the notion of 
the Jews that evil spirits inhabit the air,—Eph. 
ii. 2; vi.12. “The dominion of Satan,” writes 
Godet (/. c., p. 358), “over the mind of the 
nations by the fascination of idolatry is a 
phenomenon which results from the elevated 
position which still, at the present day, he 
occupies in the supersensible domain, ‘in the 
heavenly places’ (Eph. vi. 12):” and Godet 
regards St. Luke x. 18 as being “the text 
of the Vision in ch. xii. of the Apocalypse.” 
Auberlen makes the event here described 
*the turning-point in the history of the 
Prince and the Kingdom of darkness” :—That 
history has four periods, (1) To the first 
coming of Christ; (2) From Christ to the 
beginning of the Millennium; (3) The Mil- 
lennium itself; (4) Satan is judged. He also 
sees three 'stages in the personal conflict of 
Christ and Satan—(1) The ‘Temptation ; 
(2) The casting out of devils (Luke x. 18); 
(3) The triumph of the Resurrection and 
Ascension (cf. Luke xxii. 53)—pp. 253-257. 
The “ war in heaven,” with Ebrard, comes 


REVELATION. XII. 


[v. 8. 


8 And prevailed not; neither was 
their place found any more in heaven, 


after the 1260 days of ver. 6:—Satan, per- 
mitted to accuse Israel during the 1260 days, 
is cast out (vv. 9, 10); and, for so long, the 
promises to Israel are not fulfilled: at the 
end of the days he is conquered by Israel's 
guardian Angel, Michael (Dan. x. 13, 21; xii. 
1), and Israel is by this victory reconciled 
(Zech. iii.). To the same effect De Burgh 
(“I take this war in heaven to be literal,” 
p. 236); and so Stern, who sees here a pre- 
diction that Satan will once more collect his 
powers before Christ’s Second Advent :—he 
suggests too that Satan’s presence in heaven 
foreshows a daring attempt to annihilate the 
Church in glory. Eichhorn, Herder, Stuart, 
De Wette, in like manner, suggest that “ the 
Dragon” had pursued the “ Chi/d” even to 
God’s throne, and that this was the cause of 
the war. For these assumptions the context 
gives no ground. 

The war in heaven and the victory signify, 
notes Mr. Maurice (p. 222), that the “ Zan 
Child” presented men to God as redeemed 
and justified. 

Michael] On this name see the note on 
Dan. x. 13. Michael is styled “the Arche 
angel,” in Jude 9. He is not to be identified 
with the “ Child” (ver. 5), é.e., with Christ, 
as Vitr. and Hengst. allege, any more than 
the other chief Angels in this Book. As 
Gabriel (“the man of God”) represents the 
ministry of Angels towards men (Dan. viii. 16; 
Luke i. 19, 26), so Michael is the type of their 
strife with Satan, and especially maintains the 
cause of Israel (Dan. x. 13, 21; xii. 15 
Jude 9)—as of old the cause of Israel after 
the flesh, so now of the true Israel, the 
Church. 

Words. compares the meaning of the word 
Michael (“ Who is like unto God?”) with 
the words “ Who is like unto the Beast?” ch. 
xiii. 4. 

and his angels [going forth] to war with 
the dragon;| See vv. /l—a constr. which is 
without a parallel in the New Test. or the 
LXX., no verb expressing a design preceding 
the infin. Words. supplies “go forth,” that 
is, “to fight with;”—I. Williams translates 
“were to fight with;”—Alf,, in his com- 
mentary, simply “to fight with,” and, in his 
revised translation, “fighting with” De 
Wette adheres to the Textus Receptvs -— see 
Note D at the end of this chapter. 


and the dragon warred, and his angels ;] 
I. Williams explains vv. 7-12 as a parenthe- 
tic introduction,—“ as the Epinikion or Ee 
rious Hymn of the Martyrs,”—as opening the 
eyes to the mountain filled with the armies of 


¥. g—I0.] 


g And the great dragon was cast 
out, that old serpent, called the Devil, 
and Satan, which deceiveth the whole 
world: he was cast out into the 





heaveu (2 Kings vi. 17): “‘ As the foregoing 
account had gone back to the Incarnation, and 
took the analogy from the earlier fall of Satan, 
so is this expressed in words that might relate 
to the same” (p. 226). 

Elliott sees here the conflict between pagan- 
ism and Christianity in “the heaven” to which 
the Christian body politic is exalted :—a war 
between “the Captain of the Lord’s host” 
and the apostate Emperor Licinius. Sir I. 
Newton’s conclusion is to the same effect. 

The comment of Réville (/. c., p. 87) is, 
“The Devil, before being conquered in our 
world, must first be conquered in the heavenly 
world. Singular parallel to the Platonic theory 
of ideas !” 


8. And they prevailed not:] See Jude 6, 
where we find another reference to the facts 
on which the symbolism here is founded. 


not even was their place found any 
more in heaven.| See vv. /l.,—the true read- 
ing (ovdé), “not even,” presents a climax: 
“The Dragon and his angels not only 
failed to conquer, but they could not even 
maintain their place in heaven.” The power 
of Satan is now broken, and ver. 11 tells 
by what means. Hofmann, Auberlen, Ebrard 
interpret that “until the Ascension of 
Christ, the demons were in heaven like the 
other Angels.” This notion is based on the 
words “any more” in this verse; and re- 
ference is also made to Jobi. 6; ii. 1; while 
both in 1 Kings xxii. 19-22, and Zech. iii. 1, 2, 
Satan is represented, as in ver. 10, as “the 
Accuser.” Ebrard further holds that Satan 
remains “in Aeaven” even after the Ascen- 
sion, until the end of the 1260 days—i.e., 
until the end of the world. 

Burger rejects all reference to the past— 
either to the fall of the Angels, or to what is 
me#)t in John xii. 31; Luke x. 18: Satan’s 
enmity to Israel is intended, which comes to an 
end when Israel is hereafter converted, and 
Michael, Israel's guardian Angel, has over- 
come its Accuser. 

Paganism, notes Elliott, met with its third 
and final defeat A.D. 324. 


9. And the great dragon was cast down,] 
Compare ch. xx. 2; and also the reference to 
this passage by Papias, quoted in Introd., § 2, 
No. (3). Bishop Lightfoot points out that 
Arethas and Anastasius of Sinai illustrate the 
fact here referred to by Ezek. xxviii. 16,— 
Contemp. Rev., Oct. 1875, p. 845. 


the o/d serpent,| Cf. Gen. iii.; 2 Cor. xi. 


REVELATION. XII. 


earth, and his angels were cast out 
with him. 

1o And I heard a loud voice say- 
ing in heaven, Now is come salvation, 


3; and the words “ from the beginning,” Jokn 
Vill. 44. 

he that is called the Devil] See on ch. 
ii. 10; and cf. ch. xx. 2, 10, for the absence and 
for the presence of the article which is absent 
here. 


and Satan,| Seech. ii.9; John xiii. 27—in 
Hebrzo-Aramaic, “the Adversary:” it is 
usually rendered by the LXX. “the Devil,” 
e.g. Job i. 6; to which titles is further added 
here— 


the deceiver of the whole world;] Cf 
ch. xx. 3, 8, 10. The Dragon appears now 
as the animating principle of the ungodly 
power of the world. 


he was cast down] (Cf. Isai. xiv. 12; 
Luke x. 17, 18—Babylon, the symbol of the 
evil World-power, being the subject of the 
former text, and the victory of Christ’s minis- 
ters over the power of spiritual malignity being 
the subject of the latter. 

to the earth, and his angels were cast down 
with him.| The being cast down from heaven 
to earth naturally denotes, under the figure of 
his original expulsion from heaven, the down- 
fall of Satan’s power :—see John xii. 31; 1 John 
iii. 8. The words of St. Paul in Col. i. 15 
are the key to the meaning of this verse. 

The sea, Auberlen observes (p. 245), “is the 
mighty, troubled ocean of nations (ch. xvii. 
15).” “*The earth means the consolidated, 
ordered world of nations ; with their civilizae 
tion and learning; they produce the False 
Prophet” (ch. xiii. 11). , Sea and Earth both 
stand opposed to heaven (ver. 12). 

Elliott quotes the words of Constantine say=- 
ing that he regarded Licinius as “‘ tHe Dragon” 
deposed by God (Vita Constant., ii. 46; iii. 3). 

10. And Ihearda great voice in heaven 
saying,|] See vv. //.; cf. ch. xi.12,15. The 
heavenly host celebrate the triumph of the 
Cross (see on ver. 17):—the speaker, as else= 
where (cf. ch. x. 4), is not specified. The 
voice describes the import of what the Seer 
has just written—the victory of believers over 
the enemies of Christ's kingdom (vv. 10, 11); 
and denounces woe to the earth and the sea. 

The “ great voice,” notes Reuss, according 
to the usage of this Book, signities the voice 
of Angels; who now call men persecuted by 
Satan “ drethren,”and thus add to the consola- 
tion proclaimed in this heavenly song. The 
yoice proceeds, notes Ewald, neither from the 
Angels, nor from the Twenty-four Elders 
(ch. xi. 16), but, as the term “ 4rethren.” proves, 


661 


662 


and strength, and the kingdom of our 
God, and the power of his Christ: 
for the accuser of our brethren is cast 
down, which accused them before our 
God day and night. 

11 And they overcame him by the 


from the glorified Martyrs of ch. vi. 9-11; 
xix. 1-3. As the song here harmonizes with, 
and, as it were, completes that in ch. xi. 16- 
18, Hengst. refers the voice to “the saints of 
the Old Test.” Ebrard considers it to come 
from all the Israelites converted down to the 
end of the 1260 days; or else those converted 
from all nations, as in ch. vii. 9. 


Now is come] Or, Nowis the salvation 
..» become our God’s,| The verb in the 
aorist is joined toa particle of present time :-— 
in English this is represented by the perfect. 


the salvation, and the power, and the 
kingdom of our God, and the authority of 
His Christ:] “The Dragon” having been cast 
down, “the salvation of God” (in the specifi- 
cally Christian sense, Luke ili. 6), His power, 
&c., have come. De Wette, combining what 
is said in ch. vii. 10, and in ch. xix. 1, explains, 
“ now. it is seen that salvation is of God.” 


Sor the accuser} See Note E on the form, 
“ Kategor,” given in the Cod. Alex. Cf. the 
titles “Satan,” “the Devil,” “Serpent,” “ the 
Deceiver ” (ver. 9; ch. xx. 2, 3). 

ts cast down,| See vv. //.:—the verb is 
the same as in ver. 9. 


which accuseth them] ‘The present 
expresses the habitual character. Auberlen 
(pp. 255-257) takes the participle here to be 
an imperfect—which accused them; and 
he explains that Satan can no longer accuse 
men 4efore God, because men are brethren 
of Christ, and, in Him, of the Angels. Christ, 
our ‘“ Advocate” in heaven, overcomes our 
“ accuser.” 

According to Burger, Satan continues to 
the end “the accuser” of the apostate and 
perverse, although he can do no more to 
injure converted Israel: he is not cast out of 
God’s Creation until ch. xx. ro. 


11. overcame him| See on ch. ii. 7 for this 
verb; and as to this expression of victory (the 
verb having am object) cf. 1 John il. 13, 14. 
The victory is celebrated as past and over, the 
speaker being transported, as it were, to the 
End of all things—hence the aorist twice in 
this verse: see on ver. 17. The victors are, 
not the combatants of ver. 7, but the accused 
of ver. 10. Note here, in the middle of the 
ftook, the mention once more of those who 
“ svercome :” the verb occurs again in ch. xxi. 7. 


because of the Liood of the Lamb,| Notas 


REVELATION. XII. 


[v. 11—12, 


blood of the Lamb, and by the word 
of their testimony; and they loved 
not their lives unto the death. 

12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, 
and ye that dwellin them. Woe tc 
the inhabiters of the earth and of the 


the means, but as the ground or cause. As to 
the prep. (d:d) with the accus., cf. ch. i. 9; vi 
9; John vi. 57; and see on ch. iv. 11. Winer 
however prefers the former sense, referring to 
ch. vii. 14 (8. 356). 

and because of the word of their testimony; | 
I.e., because they have borne faithful testimony 
—see on ch. i. 9; vi. 9; their “word,” like 
“ the blood of the Lamb,” being the objective 
ground of their victory. 


and they loved not their life even unto 
death.| J.c., disregarded their life (Wuxny). 
The rendering of A.V., “unto the death,’— 
there being no art. in the Greek,—has come 
down to us from Tyndale, 1534: in Acts 
xxii. 4 this phrase has come down to us from 
Wiclif, 1380: see Bishop Chas. Wordsworth, 
Shakspeare and the Bible, p. 10 (cf. ch. ii. 
10). In John xii. 25 the verb (giAew) denotes 
the love springing from natural inclination (cf. 
John xxi. 17); the verb used here (dyamao), 
rather signifies love as the direction of the qwill, 
in the sense of John iii. 19; xii. 43—a sense 
predominant with “the disciple whom Jesus 
loved” (John xiii. 23; see also 1 John ii. 15). 

This verse, as the conclusion of ver. 10, 
commemorates by anticipation the victory of 
believers, throughout successive generations, 
over “ the Dragon”—a victory founded on the 
heavenly triumph over him: see ver. 12. 


12. Therefore rejoice, 0 heavens,] See 
vu. ll. 


and ye that dwellin them.| Gr.“have your 
tabernacle in them:”—-see ch. xiii. 6, where 
this phrase is repeated: cf. also ch. vii. 153 
xxi. 3. (The reference to “ the inhabiters of 
the earth”—see below, and on ch. iii. 10; VL 
1o—is to be omitted). These words refer to 
those whose actual abode is in Aeaver, and 
who there enjoy a rest troubled by neither 
“ qoe” nor conflict; but Hengst. refers them 
to the members of the Church on earth who, 
asthe Old Test. expresses it, dwell spiritually 
in God’s tabernacle. Auberlen also refers the 
words to the members of Christ on earth, as 
included among the inhabitants of heaven, 
1 Cor. xv. 48; Phil. iii. 20. 


Woe for the earth and for the see ] 
Omit “‘ to the inhabiters of ”—see vv.il. (For 
the constr. cf. ch. viii. 13). In wv. 1-5 Satan 
has attempted in “ seaven” to frustrate Christ 
by opposing his Incarnation * he now transfers 








¥. 13—14.] 


for the devil is come down 
unto you, having great wrath, be- 
cause he knoweth that he hath but a 
short time. 

13 And when the dragon saw that 


sea ! 


REVELATION. XII. 


he was cast unto the earth, he per- 
secuted the woman which brought 
forth the man child. 

14 And to the woman were given 
two wings of a great eagle, that she 





Mis opposition to “the earth and the sea;” 
and, these three regions being exhausted, the 
fourth, te Adyss, alone remains—ch. xvii. 8; 
see on ch. xi. 7. Hengstenberg understands 
by “the sea,’ the restless world (see ch. 
xvii. 15). Vitr. interprets “the earth” to mean 
the Roman Empire; “ the sea” the barbarous 
nations. Auberlen explains, “ Woe to them 
who still belong to the world, and trust to 
its power and culture”—see on ver. 9. 

Many expositors look upon these words as 
the infliction of the ‘‘ Third Woe,” ch. xi. 14, 
—e.g. Bengel, who makes “ the earth and the 
sea” to signify Asia and Europe. 

because the devil is gone down unto 
you,| Not the passive, “was cast down” 
(ver. 9), denoting an involuntary fall; but the 
active, denoting the voluntary efforts of Satan. 

having great wrath,| Kindled anew as the 
consequence of ver. 8: see 1 Pet. v. 8. He 
is still, writes Auberlen, as he was before, god 
of this world (2 Cor. iv. 4);—cf. Matt. xiii. 
25, 39; Eph. vi. 11. 

knowing that he hath but a short time.]| 
Not the word rendered by A. V. ‘‘ season” 
(chronos) in ch. xx. 3, but £airos:—see on ch. i.3, 
and cf. ch. xvii. 10. Wordsworth aptly quotes 
Matt. viii. 29. Ebrard refers to ch. xi. 11, 
identifying the “ short time” here with the 332 
days of Antichrist after the close of the 1260 
days of ver. 6,—ie., the 33 years or times of 
ver. 14. Bengel assumes that the “ s4ort 
time” is not much longer than the “time, 
times,and half a time” of ver. 14, and there- 
fore=four times “a time” (or 4 x 2222 
years), and therefore = 8888 years; thus 
making the duration of the “ Third Woe” (see 
above) extend from A.D. 947 to A.D. 1836, or 
the date of the Millennium: see on ch. xi. 14; 
and Introd., § 11 (b), IV. Bengel regards this 
casting down to the earth as the second stage 
in Satan’s punishment (see for the ¢4ird and 
Sourth, ch. xx. 2, 10); in the frst stage Satan 
had lost his principality :—cf. John xii, 31. 

The just inference surely is that the short- 
ness of the “time” allowed for Satan’s Anti- 
christian work is founded simply on the prin- 
ciple which pervades the Apocalypse, that 
“ the time is at hand” —that the Lord “ cometh 
quickly” (ch. i. 3; xxii. 20). 


THE FLIGHT OF THE WOMAN (13-16). 


13. The narrative of vv. 4-6 is now re= 
sumed. The reason of the Woman’s flight is 


here told, and the manner of her flight is des 
scribed in ver. 14. 


that he was cast down to the earth,| The 
meaning is—‘ The “ Dragon” seeing that he 
was without power to injure the “ Céild” 
now proceeds to persecute the “ Woman.” 


which brought forth the man [child].| See 
ver.5. Note the use of the reJative, as in ch, 
TieeaatsXe yal XIX. 2 ieXKs) 4c 

Ellictt explains that Christianity was now 
assailed by Arianism and the temptations to 
superstition. Ebrard (s. 405) considers that the 
“ Dragon” makes two attacks upon the “ Wo- 
man” or converted Israel,—here, and in ver. 15. 
This, the first attack, he holds to be “ relatively 
identical with the ji/t+ Trumpet,” see on ch. 
ix. 2, At the end of the five mystical months 
(ch. ix. 5)—#. e. the beginning of the 33 days of 
Antichrist—Satan finds Israel converted (ch. 
xii. 7-11), and then turns against her the plague 
hitherto directed against “the unsealed” (ch. 
ix. 4): but now Israel is sealed, see ver. 14. 


14, And to the woman were given| Given 
by God, and for the purpose specified. 

the two wings] See vv. il. 

of the great eagle,| ‘This symbol, expres- 
sive of the flight of the Church, is taken from 
the language applied to the flight of Israel 
from Egypt (Ex. xix. 4; Deut. xxxii. 11,12), 
and hence the definite article— the great 
Eagle :” cf. Isai. xl. 31. 

Hengst., after Ziillig, presses the language 
of Ex. xix. 4, and concludes that the Lord 
Himself is meant, “I (Jehovah) bare you on 
Eagles’ wings” (and so Words., who quotes 
Mal. iv. 2,—“ the ‘ Wings of Christ.’”) Ebrard 
explains the article by referring to the Eagle 
of ch. viii. 13 which announced the “ Woes;” 
thus fixing the flight in the time preceding 
the 7th and sixth Trumpets. The flight here 
is not, Ebrard argues, that which is described 
in ver. 6, and which was from the “Dragon” who 
persecuted the “ Woman” in heaven; here she 
flies from the “Dragon” who persecutes her on 
earth. In order to draw this inference, Ebrard 
is compelled to understand the word heaven 
typically—the Woman’s flight to the wilder- 
ness in 4eaven being a figure to express the 
dispersion of Israel on eart/—and the earth 
literally (S. 369). 

Bishop Wordsworth takes “‘the swo wings” 
to be emblems of the Twe Testaments ;—St. 
Hippolytus (“Ancolitus,” ap. Lagarde, /.¢, 
p- 25) interprets the “wings” to be Hope (or 


663 


664 


might fly into the wilderness, into 
her place, where she is nourished for 
a time, and times, and half a time, 
fro.n the face of the serpent. 


Prayer) and Love, see Note C on ver. 3 ;— 
Ribera notes that the Church receives not “ the 
wings of adove” (Ps. lv. 6), but of an “ Eag/e,” 
because she flies not out of fear, but out of 
love to God, in order to soar to the Divine 
Sun ;—Stuart sees here merely an image of 
rapid flight, St. John thus expressing what the 
Lord had said in Matt. xxiv. 16, &c. 

Mede (followed by Bengel and Auberlen) 
understands by the “wings” the two divi- 
sions of the Roman Empire, and the protec- 
tion which the Eastern and Western Czsars 
afforded to the Church; and Auberlen refers 
to the “ great Eagle” of Ezek. xvii. 3, 7 where 
the Kings of Babylon and Egypt are thus 
designated, of whom the former again appears 
in Dan. vii. 4 with “ Eagle’s wings” (p. 260). 
Elliott points to the union of the “ two wings” 
of the Roman Empire under Theodosius, 
and the help given to the Church during the 
eighteen years of his reign. 

As a “Futurist” De Burgh, who explains 
that the “ Woman” is an emblem, interprets the 
wilderness Jiterally as in Ezek. xx. 35-38—a 
passage which intimates that the former dis- 
cipline of Israel in the wilderness “ will be 
reacted precisely ” (p. 242). 


into her place,| See ver. 6—the “place 
gi of God.” “Futurists” understand 

y this the place of refuge of converted Israel 
during the persecution of the second half of 
the last World-week. 


where she is nourished| Gr. “nourished 
there :”—on the redundant “‘ there,” see ver. 6, 
and cf. ch. xvii. 9. We have here another fea- 
ture of Israel's history—see Deut. viii. 3, 16. 


for a time, and times, and half a time,] 
For the word rendered “ time,” as in ver. 12, 
gee on ch.i. 3. This designation of the period 
known already as 1260 days, or 42 months 
(see ch. xi. 2, 3, and ch. xii. 6; see also 
Note B at the end of ch. xi.) is taken from 
Dan. vii. 25; xii. 7. This verse proves the 
identity of the 35 years, or mystic “half- 
week” of Dan. ix. 27, with the 1260 days of 
ver. 6:—we may compare too the allusion 
to this mystic “half-week” by our Lord in 
Matt. xxiv. 15. There is no duva/ number in 
the Greek of the New Test., nor, regu- 
larly, in the Chaldee; and hence, both here 
and in Daniel (vii. 25; xii. 7, LXX.), “two 
times” or “two vears” is expressed simply 
by “times :”’—see Winer, s. 160. For Bengel’s 
calculation see Note A at the end of this 
chapter. Ebrard here also refuses to identify 
wer. 6 and ver. 14: he denies that a “ time” 


REVELATION. 


XII. [v. 15. 


15 And the serpent cast out of his 
mouth water as a flood after the 
woman, that he might cause her to 
be carried away of the flood. 


=a year, no definite measure of duration 
being expressed. He sees here merely 34 
mystic periods which, like the 34 days of ch. 
xi. 9, 11, denote a period of duration dif- 
ferent from the 1260 days or 42 months—the 
half week of years; with him the 34 years 
symbolize the interval between the destruction 
of Jerusalem by Titus and the rise of Anti- 
christ ; and the 33 days, or 34 “times,” express 
the duration of the rule of Antichrist ;—he 
refers in proof to Dan. vii. 25. Ebrard seem: 
to stand alone in this opinion. Bleek regard: 
the 35 “times” to mean the same amount o 
duration as that spoken of in ch. xi. 2, 3; bul 
he places the 35 “times” immediately afte 

the Ascension, already past; while he refer 
ch. xi. 2, 3, to the days before our Loru 

future Coming. 

On the rationalistic theory that a prophe 
can only describe past events, Krenkei sug 
gests the notion that “a time” signifies tev 
years :—he thus gets 35 years from the da< 
of the Crucifixion, and consequently the year 
68, or the year in which he places the com 
position of the Apocalypse.—/.c., s. 42. 

Srom the face of the serpent.| A Hebrew 
idiom, cf. Judg. ix. 21 (LXX.): “nourished... 
from,’—i.e., “safe from,’ “far from.” The 
prep. is not to be joined to the remote verb, 
“ might fly.” 

Here and in ver. 15 “ the Dragon” seems not 
to have the special form as described in ver. 
3, but his original form of Serpent. Iu ver. 
16 he appears again as “ the Dragon.” 


15. cast out of bis mouth after the once 
See vv. //. The “Serpent” having failed to 

the “‘ Woman,” employs other means for her 
destruction. 


water as a river, that be might cause ber 
to be carried away by the stream.] St. John 
here uses the imagery of the Old Test., where 
imminent danger is expressed by the figure of 
a water-flood—cf. Ps. xviii. 4, 16; xxxil. 6; 
Isai. viii. 7; Jer. xlvii. 2; Dan. ix. 26; xi. 22. 
Hengst. taxes the words to mean “the hos- 
tile overtiowing of the Church, the beginning 
of which gave rise to this Book,—the Roman 
persecution.” 

Understanding “the river” here, and the 
“ many waters” in ch. xvii. 1, to be explained 
by ch. xvii. 15, many see in these words “the 
deluge of barbarous nations, the Goths and 
Huns,”— so Wordsworth; and Auberlen 
notes: “The streams of the migrations of 
nations. The Germanic tribes were to destroy 


the Roman Empire, and thereby, according to 





v. 16—17.] 


16 And the earth helped the 
woman, and the earth opened her 
mouth, and swallowed up the flood 


Satan’s plans, Christianity also” (p. 261). More 
specially still:—Wetstein, as a “Preterist,” 
applies the words to the armies of Cestius and 
Vespasian ; and Mr. Maurice understands by 
the waters cast after the Woman, the sects or 
heresies of which Jerusalem had been a hot- 
bed. As to the “Historical” interpreters, 
Calovius sees here the Arian heretics ;—Vi- 
tringa, the Saracens ;—Cocceius, the hosts of 
Licinius and Maxentius at war with Constan- 
tine ;—Bengel, the Turks checked in the 
Asiatic “ earth” by the Crusades, and checked 
still further from 1725 to 1836;—Alford is 
disposed to see in “ the stream” “ the irruption 
of the Mohammedan armies.” On the “ Fu- 
turist ” theory, De Burgh (again allegorizing) 
writes: “ Probably an host of armies, just as 
Pharaoh sent forth his armies and pursued the 
Israelites, which armies God destroyed by 
bringing the waters to the help of his people ” 
(p. 243);—C. a Lapide explains : ‘ The hosts of 
Antichrist ’;—Stern: ‘A deluge of godless 
peoples, and infernal spirits, as Satan’s instru- 
ments.’ This verse Ebrard (see on ver. 13) 
regards as describing the second attempt of the 
“ Dragon” against converted Israel. This 
attempt he connects with the sixt4 Trumpet, or 
(for he identifies them) the sixt/ Vial; and he 
makes it to follow the 33 days of Antichrist :-— 
see on ch. xix. 19. Bisping also understands a 
vain attempt of Satan hereafter to destroy the 
Church, the nature of which assault the fulfil- 
ment of this prediction alone can explain. 


16. And the earth helped the woman, | “‘ The 
earth, when it occurs in this manner, is ever 
used in a bad sense. . . . The stream which 
the Dragon sends after her is evidently that of 
the early persecutions ; the earth helping her 
is the world becoming Christian; thence 
Antichrist arises [see ch. xiii. 11], and this is 
the ensuing history.”—I. Williams (p. 231). 

The imagery of this verse Burger regards as 
borrowed from the deliverance of Israel from 
Egypt through the Red Sea; and he relies on 
the language of Ex. xv. 12. Similarly, Bleek 
(after Ewald)sees a reference to the deliverance 
of Israel through the Red Sea. 


opened her mouth, and swallowed up the 
river] As, in the history of Israel, Korah’s 
company perished (Num. xvi. 30-33). So 
Hippolytus (“ Ancolitus,” /.c.), who however 
prefers the sense that the agents of the Dragon 
wandered to and fro on the earth in despair. 
Hengstenberg notes: Another earthly power 
rises against those who persecuted the 
Church; as the kingdom of the Medes 
and Persians brought that of Babylon to an 


REVELATION, XII. 


which the dragon cast out of his 
mouth. 
17 And the dragon was wroth with 


end, so (as we read in ch. xvii.) Rome was 
to be destroyed by the “Ten Kings.” Auber= 
len understands that “the cultured Roman 
world received the wild Germanic masses, 
and reconciled them to Christianity ” :— 
Rome is thus regarded “as a power of 
civilization,” and he quotes Lange: ‘“ The 
earth, i.e, consolidated ecclesiastical and 
political order, devoured the stream [of the 
German nations], and amalgamated with itself 
the wild tribes” (p. 261). 

Mede sees here the triumph of the ortho- 
dox faith, in the early Councils, over heresy: 
“ Multitudo Christianorum in Conciliis ortho- 
doxa fide prevalentium inundationem Diabo- 
licam exhausit, quemadmodum Terra aquam 
solet, cum siccitate prevaluerit” (p. 498). 

Sir I. Newton understands the “‘ flood” to be 
the Latin, and the“ earth” the Greek Empire. 

Renan (p. 297) considers it likely that 
we have here described an attempt of the 
zealots, or sicarii of Jerusalem, to drown in 
the Jordan the holy band (“la troupe sainte ”) 
of Christians flying from the siege to Pella. 


which the dragon cast out of his mouth] 
The Athiopic version adds here: “and knew 
not that Wings had been given to her.” 

The narrative given in vv. 6, 13-16, now 
comes to an end; ver. 17 taking up the narra- 
tive at the end of ver. 5. 


17. And the dragon waxed wroth with the 
woman,| It is important to fix the connexion 
of this verse with what precedes. Verses 1-5 
tell us of the “ Woman” and the “ Dragon” ; of 
the Dragon’s hostility to her ; and of her “ Man 
Child,” Christ, being caught up unto God. 
Verse 6 (anticipating ver. 14) tells of the flight 
of the “ Woman,’ now become the Church of 
Christ, to the wilderness where she is pre- 
served till the End. In wv. 7-9 is given the 
previous history of the “Dragon,” which is 
brought down to the victory over him by the 
Cross of Christ (Col. ii. 15; 1 John ili. 8; 
Jude 6). The result is expressed in the 
hymn of triumph (vv. 10-12) which celebrates, 
as if the conflict were past and over, the suc- 
cessive victories, until the End of all things, of 
the Church of the Redeemed. Verses 13-16 
resume and describe more fully what was told 
in ver. 6,—ver. 15 recording the never-ceasing 
efforts of Satan during the “‘ time, times, ana 
half a time;? and ver. 1€ recording their 
failure. The course of the narrative ends here. 
Verse 17 now reverts once more to the point 
where the “ Man Child” had been “ caught 
up unto God,’ and proceeds in cyntinuation 
of ver. 5—vv. 6-16 forming, as it were, ap 


665 


666 


the woman, and went to make war 
with the remnant of her seed, which 


episode. “The Woman,” in ver. 5, was still the 
Church of the Elder Covenant; but after the 
Ascension she has become the Church of the 
New—which is now represented as “ the rest 
of ber seed” (see on ver. 1). With the 
Christian Church, therefore, the “‘ Dragon,” 
baffled in his attempt to destroy Christ, turns 
to make war; and in ch. xiii. we have an ac- 
count of the agents by whose intervention he 
carries on the warfare. 

The “ Dragon,” writes Sir I. Newton, was 
wroth with the “ Woman” under the Emperor 
Julian. Such a result as this illustrates the 
defects of the “‘ Historical” school. However 
true this application may be, it clearly does 
not exhaust the meaning of the prophecy. 


and went away to make war with the 
rest of her seed,| (Cf. ch. xi. 7). Te, the 
“ Dragon,” after his fruitless effort to “ devour 
ber Child,” went away to assail “the rest of her 
seed” —the “brethren” of Christ (see on ver. 
1; Micah v. 3; Heb. ii. 11)—the Church of 
God. The assault is described in ch. xiii. 7. 
This war with the “ Dragon” is the same as 
that in which the faithful are ever, in the end, vic- 
torious (see ver. 11), and also the same as that 
described in wv. 15, 16,—the repetition of the 
fact being a warning that the Church is never, 
while in “the wilderness,” to enjoy external 
peace. 

The words, “the rest of her seed” have 
been variously interpreted. Mede under- 
stands, “ Those to whom the Woman was to 
give birth in the wilderness” ;—Hengst., 
“Those who survived the hostile overflowing 
in ver. 15, or were not affected by it ”;—I. 
Williams, “ The Dragon makes war,—not with 
the Woman, who had fled in retirement of spirit 
to be with God, nor with the Man Child of 
her first born, but with her seed that remained 
in the world, and this by raising up Antichrist.” 
On the other hand, Auberlen: “ Having failed 
to destroy Christianity, the true Christians are 
always the objects of the Dragon’s enmity, 
John xv. 18” ;—Ebrard and Bisping explain 
the “ Woman” in vv. 1-6, as Israel destined to 
be converted, and after ver. 7 as actually con- 
verted ; “the rest of her seed” are the Gentile 
Christians (Rom. iv. 12; Gal. ili. 7) ;—With 
De Wette and Bleek, the “‘ Woman” is the 
whole Church; “the rest” are the individual 
members (so Burger, who refers to Rom. ix. 
6) ;— Brightman: “Te rest of ber seed” are 
the Eastern Church; —Vitr.: They are the 
Western Church, viz. the Waldenses, Wic- 
lyfites, &. Elliott, They are the faithful wit- 
nesses, Vigilantius, Augustine, &c. ;—Stuart: 
Christians had for some thirty years after the 
Ascension been persecuted in Judza, and then 


REVELATION. XII. 


[v. 17. 


keep the commandments of God, and 
have the testimony of Jesus Christ. 


Nero’s persecution broke out elsewhere against 
them, under Satan's instigation. 

De Burgh, who sees in the “ Woman” only 
the Jewish Church (see on ver. 1), under- 
stands here the ‘third left in the land’ (Zech. 
xiii. 8, 9), exclusive of the general restoration 
of Israel: “This remnant is none other than 
the :44,000 sealed :”—see ch. xiv. 1 (p. 245). 

P.enan regards “ the rest of ber seed” as the 
churches of the Dispersion “ which keep the 
commandments of God,”—a feature added in 
order to exclude the churches founded by St. 
Paul, which “selon les judéo-chrétiens, man- 
quaient aux préceptes noachiques et aux cone- 
ventions de Jérusalem.”—p. 410. 


and have the testimony of Jesus:] (Omit 
“ Christ””—see vv. /l.). Or hold:—cf. ch. 
xix. 10; 1 John v. 10; and see on ch. i. 2, 9. 


18. [xiii. 1]. and he stood upon the sand 
of the sea.) See vv. /J.; and for the verb ch 
ch. viii. 3. 

The “Dragon” now takes his stand amid the 
scene described in Dan. vii—a chapter which 
supplies the imagery that follows—where “the 
four winds of the heaven strove upon the great 
sea.” It is“ from the sea” the Beast comes up 
in ch. xiii. 1. “Te sea” is the symbol of 
hordes of peoples—see ch. xvii. 15; xx. 8; 
and, in accordance with this idea, the Beast— 
the emblem of the World-power symbolized 
in the Book of Daniel by four beasts—rises 
from “ the sea.” 

Diisterd. understands the /itera/ sea ;—V olk- 
mar and others, the sea which covers the 
Abyss, z.e.. Hell (cf. ch. xi. 7 ; xvii. 8);—others, 
the sea “‘at Cesarea” (see H. Gebhardt, 
l.c., S. 237);—and Rationalists generally ex- 
plain: ‘The Roman “Dragon” has persecuted 
the true Church which has escaped through 
the desert beyond Jordan to Pella where she 
is to be preserved for three and a half years 
until Messiah comes. The “Dragon,” enraged 
at her escape, turns to persecute the other 
Christians who do not dwell in Jerusalem. 
But even before this, the Beast with the “Seven 
Heads” and the “Ten Horns” has placed himself 
on the coast of Palestine,—the Roman army 
standing not far from the Holy City’ (see 
Schenkel’s ‘ Bibel-Lexicon,’ s. 158). 

Elliott expounds: The flood of invading 
Goths is now absorbed in the Roman Empire. 
The Pagan Roman rule (“ He who now let- 
teth,” 2 Thess. ii. 7) has to give place to Papal 
Rome. Out of this flood of Gothic nations 
rises the Beast of ch. xiii. 1, the substitute and 
successor of the “ Dragon.” 

The reading of the Textus Receptus, “I 
stood,” and the joining on of this verse to 
ch, xiii., render the description far less effective. 





= REVELATION. XII. 


As thus read, moreover, the opening of the 
new Vision in ch. xiii. is out of all analogy 
with the usual manner of the Seer who 
begins his new scenes simply with the words 
“I saw, wie CDE lve Tee oe Vine nee Vile} 
Vili. 2; xX. 

Hengst., ee the usual reading, renders 


“T was placed :”’—“ John did not take up his 
own position, but he was set there,” cf. 
ch. xvii. 3; iv. 1; and so he would render ch. 
viii. 3. Vitringa says: “An Draco spectator 
esset notabilis hujus eventus; num potius 
Joannes? . . . Joannes spectator fuit . . . ex 
ccelo subito veluti delatus in terram ” (p. 567). 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Chap. XII. 


NoTeE A ON VER. I—THE STAR-CROWNED 
Woman. 


That “the Woman” signifies the Church, 
Jewish or Christian, is the opinion of the 
ancient interpreters : = 

St. IRENZUS in his interpretation of ch. 
xvii. 12 seems to identify the ‘‘ Woman” with 
the Christian Church. Antichrist and the 
Ten Kings, he writes, “effugabunt Ecclesiam ” 
—Cont. Haer. x. 26, p. 323 :—see ver. 14. 

St. HIPPOLYTUs in his treatise De Anti- 
christo (J. c., p. 30) repeats the interpretation 
already quoted (see on ver. 1) from the Arabic 
version of his lost work on the Apoc. (see 
below, Note C). ‘The Church,” he adds, 
“will never cease bringing forth, from her 
heart, the Word, which, when it is in the 
world, is persecuted . . . that male and per- 
fect offspring Christ.” The Child being 
caught up to God (ver. 5), denotes that He 
is no earthly king, as David wrote in Ps. cx. 
1. The 1260 days of the “ Woman’s” flight 
(ver. 6) are the half-week of Antichrist (ver. 
14); and the “Iwo Wings” of the Eagle 
which shelter her denote the faith of Jesus 
Christ. 

VICTORINUS combines the two concep- 
tions :—“ Mulier antiqua Ecclesia est patrum 
et prophetarum et sanctorum Apostolorum, 
quz gemitus et tormenta habuit desiderii sui, 
usque quo fructum ex plebe sua secundum 
carnem olim promissum sibi videret Christum 
ex ipsa gente corpus sumpsisse” (7 /oc.). 
And so Methodius, Primasius, Andreas, Beda. 
Beda writes: “Semper Ecclesia, Dracone 
licet adversante, Christum parit. Masculum 
autem dicit, victorem diaboli qui foeminam 
(Evam) vicerat.... Nam et Ecclesia quo- 
tidié gignit Ecclesiam mundum in Christo 
vincentem ” (iz /oc.). 

Turning to more modern comments :— 

According to MEDE:—“ The “ Woman” is 
the primitive Church, clothed with the faith 
of Christ “the Sxz of Righteousness ;’—the 
“ Moon” denotes the Jewish Law and ritual of 
Moses which she treads beneath her feet; 
—she suffers the pangs of labour in bringing 
forth her children, owing to the persecution of 
the Pagan Roman Empire which worships the 
“Dragon” ;—the “Man Child” is Christ 


formed in His members;—and the “ Child” 
caught up to the throne of God means the 
elevation of Constantine to the throne of the 
Cesars. As Israel wandered in the wilderness 
during forty-two journeys (Num. xxxiii.), so 
the Church, having passed from heathen per- 
secution, wanders in the wilderness of the 
world until the second Coming of Christ, and 
this during “forty-two months.” “The Great 
Eagle” is the Roman Empire; and “ the Two 
Wings” are the Emperors of the East and 
West, by whose aid the Church, like Israel 
(Ex. xix. 4), has reached the wilderness (“in 
Eremeticum statum concessit”). The “flood” 
from the Dragon’s mouth signifies the Arian 
heresy, and the “ earth” the Councils of the 
Church by which heresy was suppressed. 
The “‘ Dragon” thus defeated, proceeds to set 
up a vicarious kingdom—the secular and the 
ecclesiastical, in his stead (ch. xiii. 1, 11). 
VITRINGA writes: “ Visum hoc signum in 
eelo tum quia ad Religionem pertinet, cujus 
objectum est in Cxlo; tum precipué quia 
subjectum hujus Visi, Ecclesia Novi Foederis 
est in celo (Eph. ii, 6). . “In em= 
blemate nihil obscurum... . "Est augustum 
representamen Ecclesiz Novi Foederis ... . 
quod miror .... non vidisse Launzum et 
Cocceium, qui in hac Muliere vident imagi- 
nem Ecclesie fidelium Veteris Testamenti, 
que erat in spe parturiendi Christum.” The 
“Woman” is clothed with the “ Sun,” “ for she 
has Christ, the Sun of righteousness” (Mal 
iv. 2) as her teacher ; the “ Moon” is beneath 
her feet, for, what is. changeable in religion 
being now abolished, she has “a kingdom 
which cannot be moved” (Heb. xii. 28). 
[The interpretation which makes the “ Moon” 
the emblem of change, seems to have been 
suggested by Gregory the Great (who also 
takes the “Woman” to be “the Holy Church,” 
“quia superni luminis splendore prote- 
gitur”):—“In /una, que menstruis supple- 
tionibus deficit, mutabilitas _temporalitatis 
accipitur.”— Moral. in Job., XXxiv. 7. 
BENGEL sees in the “Woman” the Church 
of God, at first of Israel, now of the Gentiles ; 
—in the “ Sun” the Christian Empire ;—in the 
“ Moon” the Mohammedan power of which 
the emblem is the Crescent ;—in the “ Twelve 
Stars” the Tribes of Israel. ‘The “ Man Child” 


667 


668 


is Christ’s kingly dominion, and His being 
caught up unto God implies that this dominion, 
under the seventh Trumpet, is at present 
hidden from the world. The 1260 prophetic 
days of ver. 6 = 677 common years (Introd. 
§ 11, (b), IV. note *)—viz. from the introduc- 
tion of vital Christianity into Bohemia by 
Boleslaus, A.D. 940, to its extinction there, at 
the era of the Reformation, A.D. 1617. From 
940 to 1058 “ the Woman” was most helpless. 
She was nourished there, however, for 3% 
“times ”=777% common years, and this again 
gives us from A.D. 1058, to A.D. 1836. On 
ver. 16 Bengel notes that the Turkish power 
is now checked in the Asiatic “earth” by the 
Crusades and subsequent events; and it is 
further checked between 1725 and 1836. The 
naming the “avo Wings” of the “ Eagle” 
imports that the W oman’s flight was to happen 
while the Eastern Roman Empire still existed. 
BIsHoP NEWTON takes the travail of “the 
Woman” to denote the early trials of the 
Church, “until she brought forth a Man 
Child,” i.e., Constantine, as her deliverer. The 
“Dragon,” i.e., the Roman Empire, from the 
first was jealous of the Church; and Galerius 
especially laid snares for the life of Con- 
stantine, who, nevertheless, was “ caught 
up” to the Imperial throne (ver. 5). The 
“quar in heaven” (ver.7) signifies the struggle 
of the heathen against a Christian ruler,—a 
war which ended in the destruction of pagan- 
ism, or the “casting out” of ver. 9. Then 
follow the Arian persecutions, and the hos- 
tility of Julian. The “food” from the Ser- 
pent’s mouth (ver. 15) denotes the Barbarian 
invasion; and the “flood” swallowed up denotes 
the conversion of the Barbarians to Chris- 
tianity. “The rest of her seed” (ver. 17), 
signifies that there shall then be left only 2 
remnant of worshippers in the Church. 
CUNNINGHAME, however, considers that 
the “Man Child” is Christ, formed mys- 
tically in His members; and he regards the 
prophecy as fulfilled by the Empire becom- 
ing Christian. The “ Man Child” caught up to 
God signifies the preservation of the Church 
in every age. The “ Dragon,” “ Satan,” acts 
through the instrumentality of the Roman 
Empire. The “Woman's” flight denotes the 
corruptions of the Church; and she has dwelt 
in “ the wilderness” since Justinian acknow- 
ledged the Pope to be her head. As to the rest, 
Cunninghame agrees with Bishop Newton. 
G. S. FABER: “Heaven” is the visible 
Western Church, limited to the Roman 
Empire; and the “Woman” is a portion of 
that Church, namely the faithful worshippers : 
the “ Dragon” represents the unfaithful wor- 
shippers, or secular powers of the Western 
Empire. The third part of the “Stars” (ver. 
4) signifies the clergy of the West, who were 
caused to apostatize about A.D. 604. The 


REVELATION. XII. 





birth of the “ Man Child” denotes the separas 
tion of the “ Vallensico-Albigensic Church * 
the “ Man Child” is therefore identical with the 
“Tavo Witnesses” (see Note D on ch. xi. i2— 
the last note ') and his being caught up to God 
denotes the protection of the Waldenses from 
their enemies. ‘“ The Wilderness” is the 
“ heaven,” or visible Western Church trans 
formed by apostasy. The “ War in heaven” 
(ver. 7) is a struggle between a faithful and 
an apostate priesthood ;—i.e., it means the 
persecution of the Albigenses and other re= 
puted heretics down to the English Revo- 
lution of 1688. After the Devil is cast 
out (ver. 9) he persecutes the “ Woman” no 
longer by accusing her of heresy, but by the 
principles of infidelity in Cent. xviii, and 
by the French Revolution which is the “flood” 
from the Serpent’s mouth. The “ earth,” 
or Roman Empire, helps the “ Woman” ; i.e., 
resists the spread of atheism; and the war 
with “the rest of her seed” is still going on, 
and will continue till the end of the 1260 
days, z.e., until A.D. 1864 [604 +1260 ].—Saer 
Calend., vol. iii. p. 111, &c. 

Auberlen considers that the Apoc. sums — 
up in the one word “Woman” the usus 
loguendi of the Old and New Testaments, 
whereby the apostasy of Israel from God to 
idols is represented as fornication—an ex- 
pression which, together with the jealousy 
ascribed to God, is founded on the idea of 
the marriage relation between God and 
Israel (Ex. xxxiv. 14,15; Lev. xx. 5,6; Deut 
XXXi. 163 xxxii, 16, 21; Isai. i. 213 1 1; Jer. 
iii. 1; Ezek. xvi.; xxiii , Hos. i; &c.). In 
the New Test. the figurative use of “the 
Bridegroom,” “the Bride,” “the Virgin,” is 
frequent,—e.g. Matt. ix. 15; xxii; xxv.j; 
John iii. 29; 2 Cor. xi. 2; Eph. v. 23-32. 
Humanity, in so far as it belongs to God, is 
“ the Woman ;” therefore it is said emphati- 
cally of Christ—the Son of the Woman 
(ver. 5)—that He is a “ Man Child,” a Son. 
He is the true result of the Old Test. Church 
(Gal. iv. 4), but, as Son of God, His relation 
to the Church is that of husband to wife 
(1 Cor. xi. 7). The emblems connected with 
“the Woman” recall the Old Test. Church: 
—She is clothed with the “‘ Suz” as bearer of 
divine light in the world; and she has under 
her feet the false religion of the world repre- 
sented by the “ Mcon,” which is an earthly 
light, not capable of overcoming the darkness, 
but shining through it. The “ Twelve Stars” 
are the Twelve Tribes of Israel, with which the 
Apostles, who form the foundation of the New 
Test. Church, are placed in connexion by 
Christ (Matt. xix. 28; cf. Rev. xxi. 12, 14). 
And thus “the Woman” here signifies the 
same as the New Jerusalem, which ‘s also a 
Woman (ch. xxi. 2, 9, 10), the latter being the 
Church exalted, the former the Church mili- 


REVELATION. XII. 


tant. In ch. xi. 8 Jerusalem is called Egypt; 
and now there is once more the flight of the 
true Church from Egypt to “the Wilderness” 
as Israel fled of old:—and Auberlen regards 
the flight of Mary and the Child Jesus into 
Egypt (Matt. ii. 13) as a type of the Church’s 
“ fight” ; while the giving her “ the Ivo Wings 
of the great Eagle” (ver. 14) refers to the de- 
livery of Israel from Egypt, in accordance with 
Ex. xix. 1-4. Thusthe Apocalypse gives an 
outline of the history of the Prince and King- 
dom of darkness—(1) To the first coming of 
Christ, when Satan, whose power is not yet 
broken, is still in heaven (see on ver. 7);—(2) 
From Christ to the beginning of the Millen- 
nium: then Satan 1s cast out from heaven to 
earth, and this is the period which this chapter 
records ;—(3) The Millennium, when Satan is 
bound (ch. xx. 1-3) ;—(4) Having been let 
loose, he is judged and cast into the lake of 
fire (ch. xx. 7-10) :—/.c., pp. 240-257. 


Nore B ON VER. 3—THE DRAGON. 


On the words translated “ Dragon,” dpaxar, 
Gesenius notes thus :— 

On pon, tannin:—“(1) bellua marina, 
piscis ingens, Gr. xnros, Gen. i. 21; Job. vii. 
12; Isai. xxvii. 1. (2) serpens Ex. vii. 9, 
seqq., Deut. xxxii. 33; Ps. xci. 13;—draco, Jer. 
li. 34 ;—crocodilus, Ezek. xxix. 3 (ubi 0°N 
pro }')n), qui AXgypti imaginem refert. Isai. 
li. 9 (Ps. Ixxiv. 13, 14).” And on inn, 
leviathan :—“ pr. (animal) flexum, in spiras 
convolutum, (1) serpens, isque major, Job. iii. 8 
[kjros]; Isai. xxvii. 1 (ubi Babyloniz regni 
hostilis symbolum est) ;—(2) spec. crocodilus, 
Job. xl. 25 [LXX., ver. 20, dpaxor] ;—(3) 
quevis Zellua magna aquatilis, Ps. civ. 26, 
eaque pro hoste atroce, Ps. lxxiv. 14.” 


NoTe C ON VER. 3—THE Lost COMMEN- 
TARY OF ST. HIPPOLYTUS ON THE APOCA- 
LYPSE. 


When examining, in the year 1829, the 
Oriental MSS. in the Royal Library at Paris, 
Ewald discovered an Arabic commentary on 
the Apocalypse, of which he has given some 
account in his “ Abhandlungen zur oriental- 
ischen u. biblischen Literatur” (Gottingen, 
1832). Lagarde has printed the Arabic text 
in an Appendix to his “ Analecta Syriaca” 
(Leipzig, 1858); and he places the date of 
this Arabic manuscript in the fourteenth 
century. The title of the commentary 
is given by Ewald as follows: “Book of 
the Apocalypse and its interpretation: that 
is, the Vision beheld by John, son of Zebe- 
dee, one of the Twelve, the Evangelist, 
the chaste (der Keusche), according to 
the interpretation of the holy Hippolytus, 
Pope of Rome, and the holy Paulus Albuschi 
(or Elbuschi), bishop of Oschmunain (in 


Upper Egypt).”? The author, according to 
Ewald, is not a mere copyist from Hippolytus 
and the later Coptic theologian, for he often 
opposes the interpretation of the former. 
The author’s date may also be inferred from 
his own words, at Rev. xi. 2; xvii. 9, as 
well as from his references to the Chronicle 
of Said Ebn-Batrich (Annales Eutychii)2 
Ewald concludes that this commentary “ was 
written in the year 1271 of the Incarnation.” 

The interpretation of St. Hippolytus, how- 
ever, is all that we are concerned with here. 
and that Hippolytus wrote on the Apocas 
lypse we learn from the list of his works 
inscribed on his statue’ which was dis- 


1 On the back, written in a different hand, 
occur the words, —‘‘ Explained by the holy John 
Chrysostom.” This title Ewald at once rejects, 
and proves not to be genuine. In the genuine 
title the name Hippolytus is presented by the 
scribe under the forms Adolitas, or lbobitus, or 
L£bolitus—which occur five times; or as Anco- 
4tus—which occurs fifteen times. Ewald merely 
mentions this fact which does not cause him to 
doubt that Hippolytus is intended. Indeed we 
have here rather a confirmation that Aippolytus 
is meant ; for Déllinger (Aippolytus und Kallistus, 
1853, s. 41) tells us that the name was written 
correctly only by those who spoke Greek ; and 
among the forms used by the common Romans he 
gives, what is substantially one of those found in 
the Arabic MS., Zfolitus, or sometimes Poltus. 

The title ‘‘ Pope of Rome” puzzled Ewald :— 
**Mit welchem Recht hier Hippolytus ré- 
mischer Pabst genannt wird, mag ich nicht 
entscheiden.” Here again Dollinger comes to 
our aid :—In MS. 128 in the Nani collection at 
Venice is found a Adyos tov “ImmoAvTov taxa 
‘Péuns (/. ¢., s. 93); nay, in the Coptic (Mono- 
physite )Martyrology, translated from the Arabic 
by Assemani, at ‘‘ February 5,” we read: ‘‘ Ree 
quies S. Patris Hippolyti Pape Rome ;” and at 
‘‘February 6”: ‘‘ Manifestatio corporis S. 
Hippolyti Pape Rome” (s. 94). For the 
frequent references to St. Hippolytus as ‘‘ bishop 
of Rome,” bishop of ‘‘ Portus Romanus,” &c., 
see the well-known controversy between Bunsen, 
Déllinger, Bishop Wordsworth, and others. 

apa was originally a special title of all bishops 
(Tertull. De Pudic. 13; Gregor. Thaum. ZZ, 
Canon. 1): it appears to have been applied for 
the first time to mark out a bishop of Rome in 
the Roman Synod under Symmachus (A.D. 502), 
and then by Ennodius, bishop of Ticinum (A.D, 
510) :—see Gieseler, /.¢., i. ss. 297, 670. 

2 “ Eutychius Aégyptius, Arabice Said Ebn- 
Batrich, Patriarcha Alexandrinus. Ecclesiz suze 
origines. Ex ejd. Arabico typis edidit ac ver 
sione auxit Joannes Seldenus,” Lond. 1642, 
“© Contextio gemmarum, sive Annales, Interprete 
Edwardio Pocockio,” Oxon. 1658. 

3 Winckelmann (quoted by Déllinger, s. 25) 
says that this statue is without doubt the oldest 
selene es So ane ame = date, as 
Dr. Salmon (ermai. , 1873, p. 83) proves, 
‘© cannot be much later than a.D. ae : 


669 


670 


covered at Rome in 1551—[T]A YDOEP TOY 
KATA I#mANHN EYAITEAIOY KAI ATLOKA- 
AYVEoC; and also from the testimony of 
Andreas—see Introd. § 2, (a), No. (1). 

The most important interpretations of 
Hippolytus, as given in the Arabic account of 
his commentary, will be found quoted under 
their respective texts: the following properly 
come here :— 

Rev. xii. 3 (ap. Lagarde, /. c., p. 25) :— 
“Ebolitus, understanding by the Heads of 
this Dragon, kings, adherents, and servants 
of Satan, interprets the Seven Heads to mean 
Seven Kings: (1) Bochtnasser [Nebuchad- 
nezzar, B.C. 604] of Chaldea;—(2) Tadar- 
yush-el-Mahi [Darius the Mede, Dan. v. 31; 
ix. I; xi. 1];?—(3) Darius the Persian 3— 
(4) Alexander of Greece;—(s5) he also counted 
the four lieutenants of Alexander as one 
kingdom ;—(6) the Empire of Rome;—(7) 
and the kingdom of Dajjal [Antichrist] ; 
and he interpreted the Ten Horns thus, that 
they were Ten Kings who will perish with 
Dajjal [Antichrist]. As for the Diadems he did 
not explain in detail the meaning of them.” 

Ch. xvii. 8-10 (see Lagarde, /. ¢., p. 27) is 
expounded on a similar principle :—“ Anco- 
litus ” takes the Beast to be the same as that 
first seen by the prophet upon the sand of 
the sea, rising from the depths (ch. xiii. 1) ; 
and “ Ancolitus ” is of the opinion that this 
Beast is a symbol of the worship of idols.” 
His five Heads which “are fallen” (ver. 10) are 
the same as the first five in the interpretation 
of ch. xii. 3, with this exception that for 
“Darius the Mede” we find “Corsch al 
Maah,” ze, “Cyrus the Mede.” This 
variation does not seem to be noticed by 
the Arabic commentator ; but may, perhaps, 
be accounted for by the fact that in Dan. 
xi. 1 the LXX. and also Theodotion read 


1 My attention was called to this Arabic ac- 
count of the commentary of St. Hippolytus by 
Dr. Salmon, who also kindly placed in my hands 
some materials respecting it which he had col- 
lected. Mir Aulad Ali, Professor of Arabic in 
the University of Dublin, has been so good as 
to supply the translation of the Arabic text 
printed by Lagarde. 

? See the Excursus on Dan. v. 31. ‘‘ Darius 
the Mede” was made King of Babylon by Cyrus 
(Dan. vi. 28), where he reigned from B.c. 538 to 
B.C. 536 (Dan. xi. I). 

* If the ‘Darius king of Persia” of Ezra 
(iv. 5) is signified, we are to understand Darius 
Hystaspis, B.c. 521, the father of Xerxes ;—if 
the Darius of Nehemiah (xii. 22), ‘‘ modern 
commentators are generally agreed that Darius 
Codomannus, the antagonist of Alexander the 
Great, is intended. This prince ascended the 
throne B.C. 336 ””—see the note iz foc. On the 
other hand, Keil makes the Darius of Nehemiah 
to be Darius Nothus, the second Persian monarch 
of that name, B.C. 425,—see é# Joc. 


REVELATION. XII. 


“ Cyrus” (ev éree mpdr@ Kipov,—cef. Dan & 
1). The Arabic text proceeds: “ And in- 
deed these kings perished; but as to the 
one (6) which is found [6 eis éorw—“ the 
one is” —Ewald explains, “das jetzt seiende 
Haupt ”], it is the Roman Empire;—(7) as 
to the last one, it never came. Therefore 
by general consent it is Dajjal [Antichrist] : 
but this passage is the most difficult in 
Vision.” 


Note D ON VER. 7.—THE READING 
TOU TONEUO a pera. 


“A. Buttman (p. 231),” notes Professor 
Moulton (/.c., p. 412), “takes rod aod. as 
depending upon éyévero, x, rT. X., the subject 
of this infin. being 6 Mty. x. of ayy. air.: the 
use of the nominative for the accus. he re- 
gards as a constructio ad synesin, the infin. 
clause being equivalent to a subordinate 
sentence with a finite verb.” 

Alf. observes that the construction “ may 
easily be explained as one compounded of 
[rod| Tov M. kai rods ayy. avrov moepijoas 
(in which case the rod depends on the éyévero, 
as in Acts x. 25), and 6 M. kai oi ayy. avrov 
evodéunoay. In the next clause it passes 
into this latter.” To this statement that 
Acts x. 25 (as d€ éyevero tod eioehGeiv rov 
Ilérpov) is parallel, Winer demurs—for we 
should have here, in order to render the 
words parallel, eyévero rod modepnoa. He 
also objects to the explanation of Ewald and 
Zillig that the idiom is an imitation of the 
(later) Hebr. form onbnd, pugnandum eis 
erat), for the LXX. nowhere give such a 
translation. Winer (so also Liicke) is un- 
able to explain the constr. (see § 44, S. 293)3 
and he pronounces Fritzsche’s suggestion 
“ artificial” (viz. “that 6 Mey. x. of ayy. avr. 
form a parenthesis (the subject to a verb 
émo\éunoav mentally supplied), so that rov 
mon. is the gen. after 6 oA. understood ”— 
see Moulton’s ed., p. 411]. Bleek takes up 
the opinion of Ewald, and regards the idiom as 
a Hebraism ; the “ Hebrew gerund ” without 
m7 often standing for the finite verb <a 
waren) zu kampfen” = “hatten zu 
mussten) kimpfen.” Heinrichs supplies jcav, 
rendering “intenti erant in pugnam.” Stuart 
suggests the supplying o@6n, “on the intro- 
duction of a third party,” as in ver. r. Con- 
jectural emendations of the text need not be 
referred to—e.g. that of Diisterd., who con- 
jectures that the words rédepos ev ro otpavg 
were a marginal note originally intended to 
call attention to the passage, but subsequently 
inserted in the text: the constr. would then 
be as in os xX. 25,—the eb ea 
genitive” (cf. Acts iil 2, 12 ing re- 
gularly on the conception of motion latent 
in the é¢yévero—cf John vi. 19, 25. 





REVELATION. XIIL 671 


description of Michael, as the ownyop = 
“WIND, ze, cuvyyopos, or “advocate” of the 
godly :—Schéttgen (i. 119) gives references. 
We find in later Greek the similar form 
Sudkov for Sidcoyos—see Wetstein iz /o.. 


Nore E ON VER. 10.—THE FORM carnyop. 


The Codex Alex. (A) gives, in place of 
xariyyopos, the Rabbinical form xarjyop = 
™)32'Op—a form analogous to the Rabbinical 


his power. 11 Another beast cometh up out 
of the earth: 14 causeth an image to be 
made of the former beast, 15 and that men 
should worship it, 16 and receive his mark. 


CHAPTER XIII. 


u A beast riseth out of the sea with seven heads 
and ten horns, to whom the dragon giveth 





[Ver. 1. xépara déxa kai ke. érd.—éovopuara, Ver. 3.0m. eidov.—ék TaV Kep.—ebatpacev.— 
om. év. —An 7) Sy. Ver. 4. [1 omits cai mpocexvy. down to déyovres, and Er. supplied the 
omitted words after the Vulg.]. 1@ dpak. dru edwxe tiv €£.—mpovexiy. TO Onp.—kai ris dvv. 
Ver. 5. [1 reads merely kai 666) avr e€ovcia, and Er. supplied the omitted words from the 
Vulg.].—[s reads roujoa 6 Ocha}. Ver. 6. BAaopnuias.—om. kui bef. rovs. Ver. 7. [A,C, P 
om. kai 666n . .. - vikijoat avtovs, by Homeotel.|.—dudnyv cai Xadv. Ver. 8. airdv.—ot ov.—rd 
évoya avrov.—rov copay. Ver. to. ei tis eis aixpadwotay, cis aixpahwotay timdye: [8,C,B,P, 
om. the 2nd eis aixpad.]. Ver. 14. os éxe. Ver. 15.[A,C,P read uvr7].—[ reads roujoer)|.— 
fva éc01.—om. iva bef. dmoxr. Ver. 16. SG@0w.—T0 pérwmov. Ver. 17. om. kai.—om. 2nd 7. 
Ver. 18. om. 1st rév.—[A reads é£axdouor €Enxovra €€,—®N reads é£axdova €€nx. €£,—P, Andreas 
read é€axdo.a é&x. €&,—B, 1 read yé¢,— C reads é£axdov déka €&,—see Note G at the end 


of this chapter.] 


CuHap. XIII—THE Two BEASTS. 


The theme of ch. xii. was the enmity of the 
Dragon to the Woman. In ch. xii. 17, the 
wrath of the Dragon, and his resolve to make 
war against “the rest of her seed,” i.e., the 
Church of Christ, are described ; and verse 18 
(or ch. xili. 1) represents the Dragon placing 
himself for this purpose “upon the sand of 
the sea’””—in other words, beside the confused 
mass and turmoil of the nations. St. John 
next proceeds to foreshow the history of the 
Church in the world. In ch. xii, 12 is con- 
tained the denunciation of “ Woe for the 
earth and for the sea”; and now two Beasts 
“ccme up,’—the one from “ the sea” (ver. 1), 
and tae other from “the earth” (ver. 11),— 
representing the instruments by which the 
Sragisn carries on his work. 

The symbolic image, or the ““Seven-Headed 
Beast,” which the Seer now beholds is the 
chief point of connexion between the Apo- 
calypse and the Book of Daniel. Here the 
Beast “comes up” from “the sea,” as do the 
forr beasts in Dan. vii. 3;—here, the Beast 
nas “Ten Horns,” like the fourth beast in 
Dan. vii. 7;—the Beast here is composed of 
the /eopard, bear, and lion (ver. 2), i.e., of the 
first three beasts in Dan. vii. 4-6, the fourth 
beast being indicated both now and in Daniel 
by the “Zen Horns.” In Daniel, “the Vision 
represents the development of the World- 
power generil in four successive phases” 
(see the note on Dan. vii. 17); but here we 
have a comprehensive representation, under 
ene form, of the universal World-power 


which in Daniel is symbolized by four 
beasts. 

The other chief subject of Daniel’s prophecy 
was the “ Little Horn,” ‘little’ in its beginning 
but soon increasing in power (see the note on 
Dan. vii. 8; and cf. Dan. viii. 9, 10), which 
had ‘‘eyes like the eyes of a man”—sym- 
bolizing craft, knowledge, intellectual culture, 
unceasing activity (see on ch. iv. 6, 8, and cf. 
Ezek.i. 18; x. 12), and which is usually taken 
to refer primarily to Antiochus Epiphanes, 
the Old Test. type of Antichrist. Correspond- 
ing to this symbol in Daniel’s Vision is the 
second Beast of this chapter, the Beast from 
“the earth” (ver. 11) or “ False Prophet” 
(for this title see ch. xvi. 13; xx. 10: cf. ch, 
xix. 20 with ch. xiii. 13, 14). The first Beast 
is a material, political, World-power; the 
second Beast isa spiritual W orld-power—the 
power of learning and knowledge, of ideas, | 
of intellectual cultivation. Both are from | 
below, both are éeasts, and therefore they | 
are in close alliance. The worldly anti- | 
christian wisdom stands in the service of the/ 
worldly antichristian power. 

As to the Beast of vv. 1-8, the following 
are the chief interpretations :— 

I. This Beast is a symbol of Rome, either 
(a) The Roman Empire, Pagan—so Victori- 
nus, Bossuet, Hammond, Ewald, De Wette, 
Stuart, Liicke, Bleek, &c.; or (4) The Roman 
Empire, Papal—so Mede, Vitringa, Bengel, 
Elliott, &c. 

Many Protestant commentators see in this 
whole chapter Rome Papal under two aspects 
—the Beast of vv. 1-8 signifying the political, 


672 


REVELATION. XIII. 


[ve & 


Anp I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up | 





and the Beast of ver. 11 the ecclesiastical cha- 
racter of the Papacy. Thus, the early Re- 
formers usually understood by the new form 
of the Roman World-power (or Babylon), 
which they held to be described in this chap- 
ter, a prophecy of that visible rule which 
the Roman See exercised over men in the 
Middle Ages, after the old form of the Roman 
World-power had revived as “the Holy Ro- 
man Empire.” Later writers of this school 
introduce a distinction at this point. The 
Papal power, they observe, which is here 
symbolized, does not yet appear as the Harlot 
(ch. xvii. 1) or Church become apostate from 
Christ, but as a “ Beast” or World-power— 
not as a Church but as a power ruling over 
the Church, seemingly in Christ’s name; in 
fact, as being purely “of the earth, earthy,” and 
at first exhibiting its action not as a corrupt 
Church, or Harlot, but as a false Mediator, 
and false theocracy (the Pseudo-Lamb of ver. 
11). Not until ch. xvii., they add, does 
Babylon acquire the character, and present 
the “signature,” of the Apostate Church. See 
Herzog’s Real Encycl., art. Apokalypse. 

Il. The Beast denotes the God-opposing 
power of this world. Of this power, with 
some writers (e.g. Hengst., Ebrard, Au- 
berlen), (1) Pagan Rome 1s the emblem: 
and these writers hold that there is a further 
reference, by means of one of the “ Seven 
Heads,” to Rome Papal ;—(2) Other interpre- 
ters seek to exclude any reference to Rome. 

III. These interpretations have been to 
some extent combined by Gebhardt (/.c., s. 
235), who regards the Beast as the symbol of 
a single World-kingdom combining in itself 
all former World-kingdoms: and he con- 
cludes that the World-kingdom is personified 
by a single “ King,” viz. the ‘Head smitten 
unto death ” of ver. 3,—a result supported by 
the gender of the pronouns in vv. 8,14. The 
single World-kingdom Gebhardt identifies 
with the Roman Empire; and the single 
“ King” with Nero. 

IV. According to his system, Ebrard (s. 
406) discerns in this chapter an exhibition of 
the power which is to persecute the Gentile- 
Christian Church during “the three and a 
half years” before Israel’s conversion. 


THE BEAST FROM THE SEA (1-8). 


1. AndI saw a beast] (In the Greek, and 
in all Versions except the “ Authorized,” ch. 
xiii. begins with these words:—see on ch. 
xii. 18.) For the word rendered “beast” 
(the term used in Dan. vii, LXX.) see 
op ch. iv. 6; xi. 7. We have to note 
in the Apoc. the contrast between “the 
Lamo of God” (John i. 36) and the ‘ wild 


beast” or chief instrument by which the 
Dragon works :—the name “ Beast” of itself 
has an evil signification, see on ver. 11. 


coming up out of the sea,| By the shore 
of which the Dragon had taken his stand (ch. 
xii. 18) in order to summon his agent from its 
depths. The Beast here is the same as that 
referred to by anticipation in ch. xi. 7, and 
more fully described in ch. xvii. Ebrard (and 
likewise Zillig, see Note C on ch. xi. 7) 
denies this identity, because it is said in ch. 
xi. 7; xvii. 8, that the Beast comes up out of 
“the Abyss,” whence demons only proceed; 
while the Beast here is not a demon, but a 
World-power. De Wette also contrasts “the 
sea” with “the Abyss;” as if this Beast were 
born from the realm of darkness merely, or 
were one returning from the kingdom of death 
—i.e., aS he explains, Nero—see on ch. xvii, 
It seems plain, however, even without referring 
to the relation between the “sea” and the 
“ Abyss” (cf. Luke viii. 31; Rom. x. 7), that, 
as in ver. 11 “the earth,” so here “the sea 
belongs to the special imagery employed— 
imagery, too, which is confessedly taken from 
Dan. vii. where, at ver. 3,the four beasts “come 
up from the sea.” The identity with Daniel’s 
Vision depends on the similarity of the sym- 
bols, as pointed out in the introductory re- 
marks above. In the symbolism of the Apoc. 
“the sea” denotes the troubled ocean of 
worldly affairs—“ peoples, and multitudes, and 
nations, and tongues” (ch. xvii. 15; cf. Ps. 
xlvi. 3, 4; lxv. 7; xciii. 3, 4; Isai. vill. 7-9, 
lvii. 20)—out of which arises this ideal 
sentation of the antichristian World-power. 

On the subject of Antichrist see Note A at 
the end of this chapter. 


having ten horns and seven heads,] 
See vv. /j.:—note the different order of the 
“Heads” and “Horns” in the description of the 
“ Dragon” (ch. xii. 3) where Satan assumes a 
form similar to that of his instrument the 
Beast in this place. The “Horns” here appear 
first, because the Beast is seen “ coming up” 
from the sea;—after he has risen (ch. xvii. 3, 7), 
the “‘ Heads” are mentioned first. The “ Sever 
Heads” are those of Daniel’s four beasts, the 
feopard having four heads in Dan. vii. 6. 
As in Dan. vii. 7, 20 the “ Ten Horns” belong 
to the fourth or /ast beast; so here they seem 
naturally to belong to the seventh or last 
“ Head.” 


and on bis horas ten diadems,|] Not now 
on the “Heads” as in ch. xii. 3. Stern, under= 
standing the “Tes Horns” to be the lesser 
powers which will hereafter unite with Ant- 
christ for “the ruin of the seventh New Test. 
World-power” (ch. xvii. 12, 13), concludes 


REVELATION. XIII. 673 


v. I.) 


ten crowns, and upon his heads the 


out of the sea, having seven heads 
‘name of blasphemy. 


and ten horns, and upon his horns = 


A988, 


that, because Antichrist will then for the 
first time personally reveal his own authority, 
—having until then resisted Christianity by 
means of his demonic influence,—he wears 
the “diadems” on his Horzs not, like Satan in 
ch. xii. 3, on his Heads (s. 321). And Words. 
similarly concludes:—The “diadems” are 
not now on the Heads, the Beast acting not 
directly as the Dragon but mediately by other 
siege (ch. xvii. 12). Ebrard explains :— 

ecause the Beast here represents both the 
Roman Empire and the Ten kingdoms (ch. 
xvii. 12) which arise out of it. According to 
Auberlen (p. 268), the fact denotes that both 
“ Heaas” and “ Horns” refer to kingdoms; 
because both are said (ch. xvii. 10, 12) to be 
“ Rings” —i.e. as with Daniel, the Aingdoms 
whose personal heads they are. This seems 
to be the true explanation. 

The variations here from ch. xii. 3 are 
urged by Diisterdieck in proof of his inter- 
pretation of the symbolism :—In ch. xii. 3, 
where the internal and essential relation of the 
“ Heads” and “ Horns” is pointed out, the 
“ Heads” are seen before the “ Horns,” and the 
“ Heads” bear the “diadems.”” In ch. xiii. 1, the 
“ Horns” appear before the “ Heads,” and the 
“ Horns,” not the “ Heads,” bear the “ diadems.” 
In this way the concrete form of the Roman 
Empire as it actually existed is presented, and 
thus the order of appearance is explained: 
Ten actual Rulers first appear—Ten persons 
who are symbolized, as the actual possessors 
of the Empire, by the “ Ten Horns” each pro- 
vided with a “ diadem” :—(1) Augustus, (2) 
Tiberius, (3) Caligula, (4) Claudius, (5) Nero, 
(6) Galba, (7) Otho, (8) Vitellius, (9) Ves- 
pasian, (10) Titus. The Beast, like the 
Dragon, has “Seven Heads”; and each now 
bears one crowned “ Horn” (see on ch. xii. 3), 
because only seven of these ten princes had 
full rule over the’ Empire—Galba, Otho, and 
Vitellius being merely usurpers, see Introduc- 
tion, § 4 (b); and the three crowned “ Horns” 
corresponding to them are probably placed 
between the //t/ and sixth “ Heads,” .e., on this 
theory, between Nero and Vespasian. In fact 
‘—quite irrespectively of Daniel’s having typi- 
fied a fourth World-empire by a beast with ten 
horns (Dan. vii. 7)—the Ten crowned “Horns” 
and the Seven “ Heads” in .ch. xiii, 1 serve 
only for the purpose of designating a special 
characteristic of the Roman Empire which is 
symbolized by the form of the Beast regarded 
as a whole: and Diisterd. takes the ideas 
represented by the “ /eopard,” and “ion” and 
“bear,” to indicate the savage force of that 
which the Beast symbolized,—namely, the 
existing Roman World-Empire (cf. Jer. v. 6; 


New Test.—Vou. IV. 


Hos. xiii. 7, 8; Ecclus. xxviii. 23). A conclu- 
sion so arbitrary supplies its own refutation. 

The military despotism of Rome, writes 
Mr. Maurice, was established after the 
battle cf Actium, and nearly synchronizes 
with the birth of Christ. That “ despotism, 
after passing through its different stages of 
development in Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, 
Claudius, Nero, was subjected to its great 
trial-day in the three turbulent reigns that 
followed, and came forth in its form of con- 
summate brutality in the person of Vitellius; 
I take this to be the Wild-Beast in which 
the ‘ Dragon’ saw his own image reflected” 
(2. ¢., p. 233). In common with many others, 
Mr. Maurice takes the “Ten Horns” to be 
the Legions in the different Provinces. 

For the interpretation of the “ Heads” and 
“ Horns” as not denoting persons, or personal 
rulers, but the 4ingdoms over which they rule, 
see on ch. xvii. 10, 12. For the influence of 
the word “diadem” on the meaning of the 
imagery here, proving that, in consequence of 
its use, Roman Emperors cannot be intended, 
—see Note D on ch. ii. 10, and the notes 
generally on ch. xvii. 


and upon bis beads names of blasphemy.] 
See vv. //.; and cf. ch. xvii. 3. By this addie 
tion of the zames, Hengst. understands the 
assumption of the titles of Christ, “ King of 
kings, and Lord of lords,” ch. xix. 12, 16. 
De Wette and others (following Beda, “reges 
enim suos Deos appellant”) understand the 
titles (e.g. “ Divus”) by which Divine honours 
were wont to be ascribed to the Em- 
perors: compare 2 Thess. ii. 4; and see below, 
ver. 4. If we believe Renan (p. 413), ‘the 
name Sebastos or Augustus assumed by the 
Emperors (who are denoted by the “ Seven 
Heads”) was regarded as blasphemous by the 
Jews. The title Sebastos is, indeed, used by 
Festus (Acts xxv. 21, 25); but—in opposition 
to Renan’s remark—it is also used by 
St. Luke in Acts xxvii. 1. (Were we to 
read the singular, “ a name,” the sense would 
be that each “ Heaa” bore this name; and 
then Bengel, with otners, would give as the 
“name” the Pope, Papa). 

The correct interpretation of this symbolism 
depends on the signification of the “ Heads” ; 
and for an account of the interpretations of the 
“Ten Horns” ana ‘* Seven Heads,” see the notes 
on ch. xvii. :—meanwhile it is to be observed 
that the “Seven Heads” do not represent the 
kingdoms which were to arise out of the 
fourth World-empire; for tat element of 
the symbol is represented by the “ Ten Horns” 
bearing “‘ diadems ” (cf. ch. xvii. 12), and theat, 


UU 


674 


2 And the beast which I saw was 
like unto a leopard, and his feet were 


REVELATION. XIII. 


(% 2. 


as the feet ot a bear, and his mouth 
as the mouth of a lion: and the 





according to Dan. (vii. 7, 24), arise out of his 
fourth Monarchy. The symbol “ Head” 
itself (explained in ch. xvii. 9 to be a “ moun- 
tain”) denotes a World-monarchy :—Babylon 
is thus spoken of in Jer. li. 25 ; cf. Isai. xiii. 2 ; 
Zech. iv. 7; and Daniel (ii. 38) writes: 
“Thou” [the personification of all this glory, 
the mightiest of the monarchs of Babylonia, 
the Babylonian kingdom itself] “art this Aead 
of gold,’-—see the note on Dan. ii. 38. The 
“ Horns” denote “kings” or “ kingdoms,” but 
not “kingdoms in the same extensive sense as 
the ‘beast’ symbolizes a ‘ kingdom,’”—see 
the note on Dan. vii. 24. The mystic number 
Seven is the signature of what is absolute and 
complete, as Zen is the signature of worldly 
power—see Introd., § 11 (a): the “Seven 
Heads,” accordingly, without any special iden- 
tification, combined with the “ Ten Horns,” re- 
present, in its different phases, the historical 
concentration of absolute worldly rule and 
power ; and this is what the Beast is designed 
to signify. 

A more special identification of the “ Heads” 
is, however, required by the additional revela- 
tion of ch. xvii. to. As St. Jobn looks farther 
into the future than Daniel, so he looks 
farther into the past. He comprehends, in his 
picture of the conflict between the Kingdom 
of God and the kingdoms of the world, not 
merely the period which the words of Daniel 
(see on ver. 2) embrace, but the earliest time 
whence the conflict dates (see on ch. xii. 7),— 
The first World-power in conflict with the 
Theocracy was Egypt; after Egypt, came As- 
syria as predecessor of Babylon ( Jer. 1. 17),— 
Assyria and Egypt are coupled together in 
prophecy as pre-eminently God’s enemies 
(e.g. Isai. xxvii. 13; Jer. i 18, 36; Zech. x. 
Io, 11). And thus we get (1) Egypt, (2) 
Assyria, (3) Babylon, (4) Medo-Persia, (5) 
Greece, (6) Rome, (7) that aspect of the 
world which the “‘ Zen Horns” symbolize, and 
under which we live:—so Hengst., Auberlen, 
Burger represent the “seven successive 
World-monarchies ” (Bisping, see on ver. 2, 
makes the seventh still future). Hofmann, 
Fuller, and Ebrard omit Egypt, and insert in 
its stead, between Greece and Rome, Syria 
under Antiochus Epiphanes. According to 
Words. the “‘ Seven Heads” denote, (1) The 
Seven Hills of Rome (ch. xvii. 9), which in ch. 
Mii. is the seat of the Beast still in “his Imperial 
heathen form, as the Fourth Great Monarchy 
of the World;” (2) Seven successive powers 
ending in the Beast (ch. xvii. 7-10). Godet 
takes the first four Heads to be, (1) Egypt, 
@) Assyria (with Babylonia), (3) Persia, (4) 

reece (with Antiochus Epiphanes). ‘These 


four World-powers were the persecutors of 
Israel under the O/d Covenant: then come 
three—to which is to be added “the 
eighth” of ch. xvii. 11, making four—“ Heads” 
hostile to God under the Gentile period: 
viz. (5) Israel itself now reckoned among 
“the nations of the earth,” and having 
“no king but Cesar” (John xix. 15), (6) 
Rome, (7) a new Power to last but for “a 
little while” (ch. xvii. 10), and which is 
to sweep away like a torrent the European 
states into which Rome had been divided, 
—when “he who now letteth,” or Rome, 
shall “de taken out of the way” (2 Thess. ii. 7). 
(8) Antichrist, not, as here, the Beast from 
the sea, but the Beast from the ddyss (ch. xi. 
7); in other words, Israel,—the “ Head” 
which had received the “ death-stroke” from 
the Roman sword in the year 70,—which 
is to return as the eighth “Head,” or entire 
Beast, as announced in ch. xvii. 11 (p. 366). 

For the “Ten Horns” which mean “ Ten 
kings,” or kingdoms, see on ch. xvii. 12. 

With reference to the following interpreta- 
tion of the symbolism in the second verse, the 
authority on which it is founded must be borne 
in mind. We should have no right to apply 
Daniel’s Vision of the four beasts to four 
Empires, or to understand fen kings or king- 
doms by the Zen Horns, had not the Angel— 
“one of them that stood by” the Ancient of 
days—supplied the interpretation; see Dan. 
NiLUIG ay aghia4s 

2. aleopard,| The third of the four beasts 
in Dan. vii. 6, whose “four heads,” looking 
towards the four quarters of the earth, sym- 
bolically asserted that the same universal rule 
as that of the “kingdom of brass” (Dan. 
ii. 39) was guided by human intelligence. 
This was the Greco-Macedonian kingdom, 
“which with the swiftness of a leopard ex- 
tended its power over those four mighty dis- 
tricts—Greece, Asia Minor, Egypt, and Persia, 
or under such generals as Ptolemy, Seleucus, 
Philip, and Antigonus ruled ‘over the whole 
earth :’”—see the note on Dan. vii. 6. 

a bear.| The second beast in Daniel vii 
5; identified with the symbol of the “in- 
ferior” kingdom, of which the “breast and 
arms” were of silver (Dan. ii. 32, 39), and 
signifying Medo Persia, which in the history 
of the world’s Empires was “inferior” to 
Babylonia :—see the note on Dan. vii. 5. 

a lion :| The first of the four beasts in Dan. 
vii. 4; identified with that kingdom which 
ranked as “golden” (Dan. ii. 32, 38), and 
which signified the Babylonian kin = 
see the note on Dan. vii. 4. 


' 


v. 3] 


dragon gave him his power, and his 
seat, and great authority. 
3 And I saw one of his heads as it 


The fourth of Daniel’s beasts (see ch. vii. 
7) is identified with the “fourth kingdom” 
in Dan. ii. 40. To this kingdom no form is 
assigned ; it is too terrible; its power is too 
vast to be represented by any known beast: 
see Dan. vii. 19, 23“ The fourth beast shall 
be the fourth kingdom” (cf. “four kings,” 
ver. 17). St. John does not specify Daniel’s 
fourth beast in his description here, but indi- 
cates it by introducing its characteristic token, 
“Ten Horns,” in ver. 1. As to the import of 
Daniel’s fourth Kingdom there are three 
opinions :—(1) that it symbolizes the Roman 
Empire; (2) that it is the Kingdom of the 
successors of Alexander in Syria and Egypt; 
(3) that the fourth Kingdom is yet to come :— 
see the note on Dan. ii. 40. According to the 
second interpretation, the “four kingdoms” 
are Babylonia, Media, Persia, and Macedonia 
or Greece. In support of the jist, or, as it 
is styled the “traditional,” interpretation, 
there is “the sanction of the majority of the 
Fathers, of the Jonathan-Targum, Josephus, 
the Talmud, R. Albo, and other Hebrew 
writers of weight.” It is also supported by 
Wordsworth and Pusey, by Caspari and Keil: 
—see the “ Excursus on the Four Kingdoms” 
at the end of Dan. vii. Orosius (A.D. 450, 
Histor. lib. ii., c. 1) makes the third Empire 
to be the Punic instead of the Greek;— 
the fourth, as usual, he makes to be the 
Roman. The decision, however, as to this 
controversy does not belong to this place: 
suffice it to say that the four forms of worldly 
dominion which Daniel had symbolized sepa- 
rately (whether all four Kingdoms had passed 
away, or whether ove of them, the Roman 
Empire, still existed when St. John wrote), 
are here combined into one form representing 
the universal World-power ; and of that one 
form, as ch. xvii. will show more clearly, the 
Empire of Pagan Rome, as the Seer beheld it, 
supplied the outlines. 

According to I. Williams, the Beast “from 
the sea” is not the fourth beast of Daniel, or 
the Roman power; “it will rather be found 
to grow out of that, the last of the four. For 
it corresponds with the “ Little Horn ” (Dan. 
vii. 8), which arises among the ten horns”; 
and these signify universal dominion: “St. 
John has a nearer and fuller view of the 
Little Horn of Daniel, which he sees as this 
great Beast of universal dominion” (pp. 233-5). 
According to Bisping, this Beast represents 
the World-power (the seventh king of ch. xvii. 
To, still future for St. John) in that last form 
which Daniel describes, and at the moment 
in which Antichrist comes forth from it. 


REVELATION. XIII. 


deadly wound was healed: and all 
the world wondered after the beast. 





und the dragon| He who stood on “tbe 
sand of the sea,’ ch. xii. 18 (or ch. xiii. 1), ia 
order thence to summon the Beast. 


gave him his power, and his throne] 
See ch. xvi. 10; and on ch. ii. 13. 


and great authority.| And therefore rule 
as Satan’s instrument over the kingdoms of 
this world—cf. Luke iv. 6: “The world,” 
writes Archbp. Trench, “is not Satan’s own ; 
nor his at all except in so far as it has been 
‘ delivered’ to him; ... he is now, in Christ’s 
own words, ‘ the Prince of this world’ (John 
xii. 31); in the words of His Apostle, ‘the 
god of this world, 2 Cor. iv. 4” (Studies 
in the Gospels, p. 46); and it is thus that the 
“Dragon” is spoken of in this verse. We have 
here, in this antichristian power, a counter- 
part to one of the “ Izvo Witnesses” for Christ 
—see on ch. xi. 3. 

Elliott interprets that the Dragon who 
had ruled over Rome Pagan, gave authority 
to the Beast to rule over Rome Papal. 


8. And [I saw] one of his heads| “I saw” 
is omitted (see vv. //.), and is to be supplied 
from ver. 1 :—see below. 

In general, ch. xvii. is to be consulted as to 
the meaning of this passage. 


as though it had been smitten unto 
death;| Or as though it had been slain 
unto death;] Since he bore the scar of a 
mortal wound: the words which follow ex- 
press how he could still exhibit vitality. The 
“ Head” of the Beast which was “as though it 
had been smitten unto death,” is placed in 
significant contrast to the “‘ Lamb standing, as 
though it had been slain” in ch. v. 6: and 
thus—to apply in a different sense the ex- 
planation of Victorinus (“Christum qualem 
meruerunt Judzi”)—the Beast becomes an 
object of worship (vv. 4, 12) to the godless 
world. Inthe choice of words in this verse 
Auberlen (p. 297) sees indicated “an owt- 
ward resemblance between the Beast and the 
Lamb.” 

Mr. G. S. Faber, following the “ Historic ” 
method, concludes that on June 18, 1815, the 
seventh Head received its predicted deadly 
wound by the sword, when Napoleon’s Em- 
pire fell (/. c., vol. iii. p. 281). 

and his death-stroke was healed:| Cf. 
VU, 12, 14. 

and the whole earth wondered after the 
beast ;| (See vv.il.). Ie. “ wondered at, and 
followed after”—cf. John xii. 19. The godless 
world will wonder and worship (cf. ch. xvii. 
8) :—Christian faith had seemed to triumph in 


U U 2 


675 


were 'wounded to death; and his 'Gr. seem 


676 


the victory . the Cross, but now the world 
triumphs. The ‘rue believer can never cease, 
on his side, to marvel at this, even as St. John 
himself marvelled (ch. xvii. 6, 7). The world 
wondered, notes Hengst., at the revival and 
continuance of the earthly power of heathen- 
dom, the success that attended its persecu- 
tions, the prostrate condition of the Church; 
—and this after the report of Christ’s victory, 
and the consciousness of its truth. The fact 
is so important that it is twice reverted to, viz. 
in vv. 12, 14: the subject is also resumed at 
ch. xvii. 8. 

The dependence of the first clause of this 
verse on the verb “J saw” imports, notes 
Hengst.,that the “Head” had already been re- 
stored when it appeared to St. John;—and that 
St. John did not see first the wounding and 
then the healing: ‘‘ What is meant is the 
stroke of his death, which Michael gave him 
with his sharp sword (ch. xii. 7) ;” so also 
Mede (p. 500). It may perhaps be the blow 
which was inflicted on Satan by the Cross of 
Christ (Col. ii. 14,15), of which this trace is 
now exhibited by the Beast as Satan’s repre- 
sentative. “Dead yet living; the false sem- 
blance, says Bede, of Christ and His resur- 
rection” (I. Williams). If this verse be 
compared with our Lord’s words in ch. i. 18, 
“T am the Living one, and I was dead, and 
behold I am alive for evermore,”—who can 
avoid seeing that a contrast is here designed 
between Antichrist, and Christ? (Bisping). 
Burger notes that this description points to a 
person, not to an institution, or a kingdom, or 
a people ; he suggests that ch. ix. 1-21 may 
be connected with the rise of Antichrist ; and 
that Apollyon (ch. ix. 11), the king of the 
locusts which issue from the Abyss (ch. ix. 2, 
3), may be the Beast from the Abyss (ch. xi. 
7), or Antichrist as described here. Antichrist 
Burger makes to be the /ast World-ruler 
after the previous seven have fallen ; and to 
him “a something” is to happen which is symn- 
bolized by “ the stroke of the sword” (ver. 
14), his recovery from which coincides with 
his attaining the height of his authority as 
the last, or eighth World-power (ch. xvii. 
11):—and thus is explained the ‘ wondering 
of the whole earth.’ As to the interpreta- 
tions :-— 

i, The revival of the World-power, after 
a grievous blow has been received, seems to 
be what is intended by St. John in the present 
passage ;—it is especially noted in ver. 14 
that after his wound the Beast still ‘‘ ived.” 
The deadly wound is always mentioned in 
connexion with its being healed—the non- 
existence of the Beast in connexion with 
its re-appearance: see ch. xvii. 8-11. The 
diffvculty of the passage arises from this refer- 
ence to one “ Head;” and C. a Lapide sug- 
gests that one “ Head” may embrace all. It 


REVELATION. XIII. 


[v. 3 


seems, indeed, that each “ Head” designates the 
entire existence of the Beast at some parti- 
culartime. Thus it is that here and in vv. 12, 
14 the wound of one “‘Head” is ascribed to the 
whole Beast; and so too in ch. xvii. 8, 11 the 
fact that the Beast “zs not,” is identical with its 
being ‘“‘ smitten unto death,” as stated in this 
verse. All this appears to be gener: lly ad- 
mitted,—see on ch. xvii. 8; and cf. Auberlen, 
/.c., p. 298. It maybe that the overthrow of the 
Beast’s power is meant, especially as repre- 
sented here by Pagan Rome which was 
equivalent to the whole World-power. So 
Hengst., who refers to ch. xvii. 10 for proof 
that the “‘ Head” which the Beast bore in the 
time of St. John, was the séxth (see on ver. 
2), or the Roman Empire. The victory of 
Christ was the one event in the world’s his- 
tory by which the whole Beast was smitten in 
the one “ Head” ; but yet the earthly power of 
heathenism continued—“the death-stroke,” 
contrary to Christian hopes, “ was healed,” as 
shown, e.g., in the persecution of the Church. 

ii. Ebrard does not allow (and Stern in like 
manner refuses to admit it) that the wound of 
one ‘‘ Head” (the “ sixth,” or Rome) is here to 
be ascribed to the whole Beast from “ the 
sea.” Ebrard also distinguishes this Beast 
from that of ch. xvii., or the “ Beast from the 
Abyss” (see Note C on ch. xi. 7) :—St. John, 
he argues, here beholds in prophetic symbol 
this wounding of the sixth Head as an event 
still future, and as regarding one form only 
of the World-power, namely the overthrow 
of the Roman Empire by the Germanic and 
Slavonic Tribes :—consequently “the healing 
of the wound” does not denote the reappeare 
ance of the Beast from the Abyss (ch. xvii. 8). 

iii. Differently Auberlen :—Comparing the 
imagery of Daniel (see the note on Dan. vii. 
4), he concludes that the Head “smitten unto 
death” was the seventh, or “Germano-Scla- 
vonic” kingdom. The first six World-king- 
doms had been heathen; it is only the seventh 
kingdom (or the German Tribes) which be- 
came a Christian W orld-kingdom, and this is 
meant by the “deadly wound.” Christianity, 
however, has become worldly; a new hea- 
thenism breaks in upon the Christian world; 
and so the Beast’s “ wound” is healed. Mede 
also (p. 421) understands here the seventh or 
last “ Head,” to which, he considers, the “ Ten 
Horns’ belong ; and he further considers that 
ch. xiii. is wholly occupied with that state of 
the Ten-horned Beast which is represented 
by the healing of the seventh Head (see 
on vv.14,15). Elliott’s interpretation is t 
the seventh diademed Headship, that of Dio- 
cletian, was struck down by Constantine; 
that the Popes, especially Gregory the Great, 
began to be a new “Head” of Empire to Rome; 
and that thus the deadly wound of its last 
Pagan “ Head” was healed. 


v. 4.] 


REVELATION. XIII. 


4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast> 





iv. According to his system (see on ver. 1), 
Godet makes the wounded “ Head,” or the fifth 
of the Seven, to be Israel which had received 
the blow (apparently) mortal from the Ro- 
man sword in the year 70, see ver. 14 (p. 
367). With this conclusion of Godet, viz. 
that the wounded Head was the 7/#+—that is 
to say, on their system, Nero,—the rationalistic 
school is in agreement: see below, and on 
ch, xvii. 8-10. 

v. Alford understands the Roman Pagan 
Empire, apparently exterminated, but re- 
stored in the establishment of the Christian 
Empire. And Words. notes: “The Beast 
now appears in another stage of his history,” 
the Christian (see on ver. 1) :—‘‘ The Imperial 
power of Rome was succeeded by the Papal ;” 
the wounded Head was the Imperial Head 
of Rome, wounded in A.D. 476, when, on 
the abdication of Augustulus, the Roman 
Empire ceased to be. The wound was healed 
when the Papacy succeeded to the Empire. 

Nowhere is it more important for the cor- 
rect interpretation of the Apocalypse to adhere 
to historical facts than here. Bishop Words- 
worth, with other high authorities, regards 
the resignation of the purple by Augustulus as 
the extinction of the Roman Empire. As to 
this notion, Sir F. Palgrave writes: “Strange 
that historians should have encouraged each 
other in the error that the Empire extin- 
guished, as they say, in Augustulus, was now 
[i.e.. under Charles the Great, A.D. 800] re- 
stored.—Restored! never had it been sus- 
pended, either in principle, maxims, or feelings. 
The shattered, pillaged, dilapidated Empire 
was still one state, one community ” (Hist. of 
Normandy, i., p. 29). “There was legally no 
extinction,” writes Dr. Bryce, “‘of the Western 
Empire at all, but only a reunion of East and 
West” (The Holy Roman Empire, 31d ed., p. 26). 
Again: on August 6, 1806, Francis II. resigned 
to the Emperor Napoleon the imperial dig- 
nity: “ One thousand and six years after Leo 
the Pope had crowned the Frankish king,— 
1858 years after Czsar had conquered at 
Pharsalia,—the Holy Roman Empire came to 
its end” (Ibid., p. 363). See Note B at the 
end of this chapter. 

vi. Dr. Bryce has here justly placed Julius 
Cesar—from whom the name of “ Czsar” 
passed on to his successors—as first of the 
rulers of Imperial Rome. As such Julius is 
spoken of by Suetonius, by Dion Cassius, by 
Josephus. This fact—see Introd., § 4, b.—of 
itself refutes the rationalistic interpretation of 
this passage. According to the whole school 
of Rationalists, St. John now repeats the 

pular fable (Tac., Hist., i. 2; ii. 8) that Nero 

the sixth of the Czsars] is really the 7/t/, or 


the “ Head” “smitten unto death”; and that, 
being the /// or last of the jive “ Kings” in 
ch. xvii. 10, he was to be restored to life after 
his suicide, and to become Antichrist. It was 
thus the “death-stroke” of the Beast was 
healed. It is true that even Christian litera- 
ture refers to “the Nero-fable”:— e.g.Sulpitius 
Severus, A.D. 400 (Céroz., il. c. 29), expressly 
applies this verse to Nero, with the preface: 
“ Secundum illud quod de eo scriptum est.” 

In reply to this entire system of inter- 
pretation, see Note C at the end of this 
chapter; and also, the argument founded on 
the use of the word “ diadem,” as explained 
on ch. xvii. 10, and in Note D on ch. ii. ro. 

vii. The interpretation of St. Hippolvtus 
(“ Ancolitus ”’) is interesting :—The wounded 
“ Head” means Antichrist’s kingdom, and the 
“ qwound” signifies the world’s contempt for 
Antichrist when he first appears. The healing 
of the ‘‘qvound” denotes the return of the world 
to obedience to Antichrist as soon as he 
exhibits his deceiving signs, vv. 13-15 :—see 
Note C on ch. xii. 3. 

If the “‘ Head” which received the “wound” 
is the symbol of the Roman Empire, “the 
stroke ot the. sword” (ver. 14) may signify 
the blow which the Empire received from 
“the sword” of the Barbarian invaders; 
while the healing of the “‘ wound” may signify 
the continuance of the Empire, secular and 
political, in the sense expressed above by 
Sir F. Palgrave. The Spirit of Prophecy 
would thus indicate, by the element of evil 
adhering to every form of World-power, the 
permanence of the antichristian spirit through- 
out the future. This consideration supplies 
an answer to Diisterdieck’s objection to the 
idea of “an abstract W orld-power ” as symbo- 
lized by the Beast. In the Beast he sees no 
more than the 4eathen Empire of Rome, and 
in the ‘“‘ Heads” seven literal Emperors ; and he 
pronounces it “impossible to regard as a Head 
of the Dragon-Beast an historical develop- 
ment which rests on Christian elements, and 
which (notwithstanding all un-Christian and 
anti-Christian degeneracy) has remained 
Christian, and has brought forth truly good 
fruits.”—s. 435. It is this “degeneracy,” 
however, which manifests the presence of 
Antichrist. 


4. And they worshipped the dragon,| (On 
the text of this verse see vv. //.). Some (e.g. 
Stuart) compare 1 Cor. x. 20; and also refer 
to the practice of Emperor-worship:—see 
below, and cf. Suetonius, Caligula, 22, &c. 

because he gave his authority unio the 
beast;| See ver. 2; cf. Luke iv. 6: “Men 
worship Satan on account of the wealth and 


677 


678 


REVELATION. XIII. 


and tney worshipped the beast, say- 
ing, Who is like unto the beast? 
who is able to make war with 
him? 

5 And there was given unto him 


power of the world which he bestows, under 
this sway of Antichrist” (I. Williams). As 
the Roman adored his Rome and its World- 
power, and offered sacrifice to the statues of 
his Emperors, so will men do at the end of all 
things in the kingdom of Antichrist (Bisping). 

Who is like unto the beast?| Cf. the same 
form in ch. xviii. 18. See on ch. xii. 7 the 
reference to the meaning of the name 
“ Michael.” 

and who is able to war with him?) (“and” 
is added—see vv. //.). Compare ch. xii. 17: 
these words seem to refer to the great battle 
for which all things in the Apoc. are preparing 
—see ver. 7; ch. xix. 19. Itis generally noted 
that this passage presents a blasphemous 
parody of the praise which is given in Scrip- 
ture to the Living God:— Who is like unto 
Thee, O Lord, among the gods,” Ex. xv. 11; 
cf, Ps. cxiii. 5; Isai. xl. 18, 25 ; Micah vii. 18. 
The sense seems to be that the Devil, cast 
down from his kingdom in the idolatries of 
the heathen, still exercises his power revived 
and restored in Antichrist ; that is, ‘“ by means 
of some spiritual idolatry equally extensive 
but of a more subtle kind, operating univer- 
sally against Christ, through all time and place 
unto the end.”—I. Williams, p. 241. 

Mr. Maurice sees in vv. 3, 4, a description 
of the Empire after the death of Nero. The 
Beast then seemed to be “ wounded to death” ; 
but the wound was healed; “the Beast was 
not really gone, only one of the forms in 
which its nature had been for a while exhi- 
bited”; another more complete incarnation 
of the devilish was ready to take the place of 
the old (/. ¢., p. 237). 


5. And there was given to him] Ie., to 
the Beast, in the form now seen, and by God’s 
permission—cf. ch. vi. 4, 8 5 vii. 23 ix. 5. 

These words, “there was given,” notes 
Hengst., are very consolatory; and the 
phrase occurs in this chapter in three pairs, 
two of which belong to the first Beast, vv. 
5, 7, and one pair to the second, wv. 14, 15. 


a mouth speaking] ‘These words and the 
words which follow, down to “given to 
him” (before éfovcfa) are omitted in the 
codex of Erasmus—see wv. /I. 

great things and blasphemies ;| Cf. the de- 
scription of the “ Little Horn,” Dan. vii. 8, 
20, 25. The whole description is borrowed 
from Daniel;—the “war” also, ver 7 (see 
Dan. vii. 21); and the 42 months (Dan. vii. 


[v. 5—6. 


a mouth speaking great things and 
blasphemies ; and power was given 


unto him 'to continue forty and two tor, t 


months. 
6 And he opened his mouth i1 


25; xii. 7). The note of Antichrist, the 
utterance of “ b/asphemies,” is again added here 
—see ver. 1; ch. xvil. 3. 


and there was given to him autho- 
rity to continue] For this sense of the verb 
rendered “to continue” (mowjoa), taking as 
its object the following accusative, see Acts 
XV. 33; 2 Cor. xi. 25; James iv. 13:—or 
we may render, in contrast to “ speaking,” 
“authority to do his work during” (see 
Dan, vill. 24; xi. 28, 30, 32, LXX.; A.V. “to 
practise,” “to do’):—this latter sense is pre- 
ferred by Vitr., Hengst., Diisterd., De Wette, 
Words., Alford. Bleek and Ziillig take the 
meaning to be “to carry through his work,” 
ie., “to succeed.” The marginal rendering “to 
make war” rests on insufficient authority. 
The Cod. Sinaiticus reads “to do what he 
willeth,’—see vv. //., and cf. vv. 1, 2. 


forty and two months.] ‘This period, being 
that of the Woman in the Wilderness (ch. 
xii. 14)—of the Holy City trodden down 
(ch. xi. 2)—and also of the Witnesses (ch. xi. 
3), again indicates that the sway of the Beast 
is co-extensive with the course of the Church: 
“it is,” writes Hengst., “ the signature of the 
world’s dominion over the Church, or of the 
temporary subjection of the people of God.” 

Godet (/c., p. 375), interpreting as a 
“Futurist,” writes: This number— “the 
broken week” as before—the well-known 
period of Antichrist—signifies that in the 
midst of its development and at the height of 
its increase the power of Antichrist will be 
suddenly broken. Instead of completing his 
cycle, he will remain there like a tree blasted 
by lightning :—“ The Lord shall consume the 
wicked one with the breath of His mouth” 
(2 Thess. ii, 8). St. Jerome also sees here the 
latter “half week” of years in Dan. ix. 24 
(Comm. in Dan. vii., t. v., p. 671) :—see Note 
D atthe end of this chapter. 

The “Historical” school generally (e.g. 
Elliott) counts from the edict of Justinian 
which styles the Pope the “ Head of all the 
Churches ” (A.D. 533), or from the confirma- 
tory edict of Phocas (A.D. 606). The former 
date added to 1260 years (or 42 months, see 
on ch. xi. 2) giving 1793—the date of the 
First French Revolution, which struck a 
blow at the Pope’s supremacy; the latter 
date similarly giving 1866, a year still future 
when Elliott wrote:—see Note E at the 
end of this chapter. 

One of the earliest attempts to apply the 











Vv. 7—8.] 


blasphemy against God, to blaspheme 
his name, and his tabernacle, and 
them that dwell in heaven. 

7 And it was given unto him to 
make war with the saints, and to 


————* — - 


predictions of the Apocalypse to historical 
events is that of Dionysius of Alex. who 
applied to a contemporary, the Emperor 
Valerian, this description of the Beast. 
Valerian reigned for “seven” years (A.D. 
253-260), and his persecution of the Church 
lasted during the latter “42 months,” or 34 
years of his reign (Euseb. H. E., vii. 10). 

It is important to notice that it never 
occurred to Irenzus, when writing of the 
mysterious number 666 (see on ver. 18), to 
identify the Beast with Nero. Nor indeed 
did this idea, as Rationalists hold it, occur to 
those early writers on the Apoc.—not even 
to Victorinus (see Note E on ch. xvii. 11)— 
who thought that the Beast or his “‘ Heads” 
represented Emperors of Rome: see on ver. 3. 

As a “ Preterist” Mr. Maurice makes the 
42 months to “denote the whole of that time 
of lawlessness which preceded the accession 
of Vespasian” (p. 239). 

6. for blasphemies against God,| See 
wv. //.; and cf. ver. 5. 

to blaspheme His name,| For the nature of 
this sin see Lev. xxiv. 16; it is the note of 
God’s servants “to fear His name” :—see 
ch. xi. 18; Deut. xxviii. 58. 

and his tabernacle,| The Temple of God 

this name of “Tabernacle” or “tent” 
which was its original form; because the 
Church, which the Tabernacle designates, is 
now once more in the wilderness (ch. xii. 
6,14). See Ex. xxvi. 1. 


[even] them that dwell in the heaven.] 
Or “have their tabernacle” there. Omit 
“ and”—see vv. Ii. On the connexion be- 
tween the Temple and those that worship in 
it, cf. ch. xi. 1;—and on Heaven as the abiding 
place of the faithful, see ch. iii. 12; xii. 12; 
Phil. ili. 20; Heb. xii. 22. 

Diisterd., reading “and them that,” &c., 
sees here three kinds of blasphemy,—(1) 
against God’s Name; (2) against his Taber- 
nacle; (3) against those to whom God has 
opened heaven as a Tabernacle. 


7. And it was given unto him to make war 
with the saints, and to overcome them:] (On 
the omission of these words, see wv. /).). 
This clause exactly resumes what had been 
said by anticipation in ch. xi. 7—“ the Saints” 
here corresponding to “the Witnesses” there. 
Both passages rest on Dan. vii. 21, where 
what is said of the “Little Horn” is here 
applied to the Beast (see on ver. 5); while 


REVELATION. XIII. 


overcome them: and power was 
given him over all kindreds, and 
tongues, and nations. 


8 And all that dwell upon the 
earth shall worship him, whose names 


Dan. vii. 22 supplies the Church with conso= 
lation under this prospect; cf. also ch. ii. 10, 
and see Hengst. in Joc. ‘‘ The Saints,” accord- 
ing to the usage of the N. T are the believers 
on earth—see Acts ix. 32; Rom. xv. 253 
1 Cor. vi.1; &c. Cf. “the rest of her seed,” 
ch, xii. 17. For a different result of the 
conflict see ch. xii. 11; xvii. 14. 

and there was given unto him 
authority] See vv. //. The verse begins 
with these words in many very ancient autho- 
rities—A, C, P, Ir., And. 

over every tribe and people and 
tongue and nation.] See vv. H. This 
fourfold enumeration embraces all the 
dwellers upon earth,—see on ch. v. 9. Mede 
notes here: “Prima ejus expeditio incu- 
buit in Albigenses et Waldenses.” Renan 
understands the war which the Roman 
Empire (the Beast) waged against the Jews, 
adding: “The author [St. John] seems on 
the whole favourable to the Jewish revolt.”-— 
P. 413. 

8. And all that dwell on the earth shall 
worship him,| Ie. the Beast, regarded as 
Antichrist; or, as some interpret, the accus 
masc. “him” (see vv. //.) implies that the 
worship of the “ Dragon” is now meant—the 
worship of the “ Dragon” following t/is de- 
scription of the Beast, as the worship in ver. 
4 follows the description in ver. 3; and the 
future tense (not the past as in ver. 4) sig- 
nifying that the worship of the “‘ Dragon” is to 
be the result of the activity of his instrument 
the Beast (see ver. 7):—so Diisterd. The 
masc. pronoun proves, writes Stern, that not 
an abstract antichristian principle is meant by 
the Beast, but a concrete, definite personality. 
Hengst. refers the masc. pronoun to the 
“ King” in whom the Beast is personified 
(ch. xvii. 11). 


[everyone] whose name] See vv. /} 


is not written in the book of life] Or 
hath not been written. See on ch. iii. 5; 
xvii. 8. 

of the Lamb that hath been s/ain] See 
ch.v.12. In ch. xxi. 27 it is simply “ the 
Lamb’s book of life.” 


Jrom the foundation of the world.| See 
Heb. ix. 26; 1 Pet. i. 19, 20; and cf. Matt. 
xxv. 34; Eph.i.4. Bp. Pearson writes: “As 
he was ‘the Lamb slain from the foundation 
of the world,’ so all atonements which were 


679 


680 


are not written in the book of life of 
the Lamb slain from the foundation 
of the world. 

9 if any man have an ear, let him 
hear. 


REVELATION. XIII 


[vy 9—10. 


10 He that leadeth into captivity 
shall go into captivity: “he that¢ 
killeth with the sword must be killed ™ 
with the sword. Here is the patience 
and the faith of the saints. 





ever made, were only effectual by his blood.” 
—On the Creed, Art. x: see ch. xii. 11. 
“That death of Christ which was fore- 
ordained ‘ from the foundation of the world, is 
said to have taken place in the counsels of 
Him with whom the end and the beginning 
are one” (Alford). 

Relying, however, on ch. xvii. 8, many (Ham- 
mond, Bengel, Stuart, Ewald, Hengst., Bleek, 
Diisterd., Burger, &c.) connect “from the 
foundation of the world” with “written.” The 
theological significance of this interpretation 
is thus expressed by Dr. D. Brown (The 
Second Advent, p. 202): “ As to the Book of 
Life . . . it is all but unanimously under- 
stood to denote the book of God's elect.... 
It is a catalogue of the names of all that are 
destined to life everlasting;....as having 
the ‘names’ of all that are in it ‘ written 
from the foundation of the world’ (ch. xvii. 
8 ; xlil. 8), it teaches the origin of the choice 
of each and all of them in the everlasting 
electing love of God..... When those ‘on 
the left hand’ find not one of their names 
in the book of life, they will discern therein 
God’s eternal purpose, that they should be 
left to show what a fallen state is, . . . and that 
what God might righteously have done with 
all, He resolved to do with them as ‘ vessels 
of wrath fitted for destruction ’—to glorify his 
justice in their everlasting destruction.” (On 
this conclusion, cf. the note on ch. ili. 5). 

Observe that in this description of the first 
Beast there is something wanting to com- 
plete our idea of Antichrist ; there is none of 
that hypocrisy and deceivableness which other 

arts of Scripture lead one to expect. This 
1s supplied by the second Beast (ver. 11) ; see 
2 Thess. ii.; 1 John ii. 18. 


9. If any man hath anear,| The note of 
solemn attention, see ch. ii. 7 :—what is to be 
heard follows in ver. 10. For a pause of a 
like nature, see ch. xiv. 12; xvi. 15. 

10. If any man [is] for captivity, 
into captivity he goeth:] See vv. //.:— 
if not read in the text, the words “into 
captivity” are to be understood. Words. 
translates “If anyone [J/eadeth| into cap. 
tivity, he goeth into captivity,” nearly as 
A.V. The abstract term capfivity is used for 
captives— qui in captivitatem duxerit, ipse 
capietur.” The form of words is taken from 
jer. xv. 2; xliii, 11; cf Zech. xi. 9:—see 

ote F at the end of this chapter. 

if any man shall kill with the sword, 


he must be killed with the sword.| (Cf. 
Matt. xxvi. 52). This verse is designed 
either as a consolation, or as a warning. As 
a consolation, it intimates that the perse- 
cutors of the Church shall experience the 
vengeance of God, and suffer the same 
as they had inflicted on the saints (Deut. 
Xxxii. 43);—so Vitringa (p. 608), and this 
same note rings through the Apoc. (see ch. 
XViii. 5,6; xix. 2; cf. ch. vi. 10). AS a warn- 
ing, it foreshows the fate of Christians in the 
days of the Beast’s persecution—so Alford: 
‘As was the order of God’s wrath towards 
His people of old, so shall it be with His 
saints under the persecution of the Beast.’ 

The former sense seems to be the true one; 
especially if we consider the import of the 
words which follow as to “the patience of 
the saints,” showing that the Empire of the 
Beast would be of wide extent, and of long 
duration (Words.). 

“ Here” therefore, in the consolation just 
given, is the ground and source of 


the patience and the faith of the sasmts.] 
See ch. xiv. 12. “ Here,” i.e., during the rage 
of the Beast, is the place for patience and 
faith : in the endurance of persecution, must 
the patience—the “wisdom” (ver. 18; ch. 
xvii. 9)—of the faithful show itself. 

Godet, dwelling on this reference to the 
saying of our Lord to St. Peter in Matt. xxvi. 
52, writes: “In order that there may be no 
doubt as to the meaning, he adds: ‘ Here is 
the patience and the faith of the saints.” What 
he asks from the saints is resignation in face of 
persecuting violence ” (St. John, vol.i. p. 274). 

Ebrard points to three formule of exhor- 
tation:—(1) That which is given here; (2) 
The token of the Beast given in ver. 18 lest 
the saints should be deceived; (3) That 
given in ch. xiv. 12, 13. 

So far, notes Mede, as to the “Secular 
Beast ”—see on ver. I5. 


THE BEAST FROM THE EARTH (11-18). 


11. And I saw another beast} Of thesame 
nature therefore as the Beast in ver. 1, with 
whom he is contemporaneous (ch. xix. 20). 
Mention is often made of the jirst Beast 
without the second (ch. xi. 7; xiii. 13 xvii. 3, 
8, 11, &c.), but never of the second without 
the first. As Irenzus noticed (4dv. Her., ¥. 
28, 2, p. 326), the Beast from “the earth” ig 
identical with the “ False Prophet” (“Post 
deinde et de armigero ejus quem et pseudo- 


v. T4.j 


tr And I beheld another beast 
coming up out of the earth; and he 





prophetam vocat”);—compare ch. xix. 20 
with ch. xiii. 13, 14; and see ch. XVIE 13); 
xx. 10 (cf. Matt. vii. 15 ; xxiv. 11, 24, 25). 

There is no Beast mentioned in the pro- 
phecies of Daniel directly corresponding to 
this other Beast, or the “ False Prophet,” 
though we have seen in vv. 5, 7, that certain 
particulars in the description of the “ Little 
Horn”— viz. “the mouth speaking great 
things,” and the making “war with the 
Saints” (Dan. vii. 8, 21)—are found in the 
former Beast of this chapter. The “ Little 
Horn,” however, has a special feature to which 
there is nothing ‘analogous i in the frst Apoca- 
lyptic Beast—namely “eyes like the eyes of 
man,” or the symbol of intelligence. This 
symbol answers to the character of the second 
Beast as “ False Prophet.” Accordingly we 
have, in this chapter, this oe symbol of 
Daniel reflected under two forms. The 
emblem of Antichrist in Old Test. prophecy 
is now represented by ¢avo figures—those of 
the Beast and False Prophet—which are con- 
trasted with, and correspond in number to 
the “ Tavo Witnesses”: see on ch. xi. 3. It 
may also be that as the first Beast is the 
Anti-Christ, so this second Beast, or “‘ False 
Prophet,” is the Anti-Pzeuma (or ‘ Opponent 
of the Holy Spirit’); and thus, the ¢avo 
Beasts with the “ Dragon” (see ch. xvi. 13) 
form a hellish trinity, in contrast to the 
Divine Trinity of ch. i. 4-6 (see De Burgh, 
p. 265; Ebrard, s. 263; Gebhardt, s. 247; 
Burger, s. 210). Or differently :— 

We have not here, notes Bisping, “the 
many false prophets” of Matt. xxiv. 11; 
1 John iv. 1, but ‘antichristian prophecy,’ in 
the last times, converging to one personal 
agent,—a false Elijah (see ver. 13) who shall 
prepare the way for Antichrist. 

Haupt (The First Ep. of St. John, Engl. tr., 

p. 115) ont John ii 18, asserts that “ Scrip- 
ture gives us to discern in the ways of God, 
that every principle is finally presented in its 
concentration in one person”; and considers 
that “‘the two diverse presentations of the 
Beast in the Apoc.” are combined by St. Paul 
in 2 Thess. ii., “into one sole picture,”— 
“the Man of Sin,” borrowed from the de- 
scription of Daniel, and being, according to 
that analogy, a worldly potentate. How this 
combination of the many-headed Beast (or 

wer of the world opposed to God) and “the 
b-like Beast” (or anti-christian pseudo- 
prophecy) comes to pass, the Apocalypse 
gives a hint in ch. xiii. 15, when it says: “It 
was given unto him ” (¢.e., tothe Beast repre- 
senting pseudo-prophecy) “to give breath to 
the image of the Beast that the image of the 


REVELATION. XIII. 


had two horns like a lamb, and he 
spake as a dragon. 


Beast should speak (ver. 15).” It is not until 
the hostile ungodly power of the world re- 
ceives the spirit of pseudo-prophecy opposed 
to God—z.e., until both forms of opposition 
are united in one—that this enmity is raised 
to its highest form of activity. 

coming up out of the earth;\ Another cor- 
respondence with Daniel :—the four symbolic 
forms, in Dan. vii. 3, to which the “ Little 
Horn » belongs, came up from “ the sea,’ as 
the first Beast here in ver. 1; but they shall 
also “arise out of the earth” (Dan. vii. 17), 
as we are now told of the second Apocalyptic 
Beast. In this the character of the second 
Beast is symbolized: “ The wisdom that 
cometh ‘not down from above is earthly, 
sensual, devilish:”— James iii. 15. 

Hengst. compares John viii. 23 ;—I. Williams 
understands by “out of the earth,” “ from the 
visible Church of God ;” and he thinks that 
this Beast from the earth ‘may represent 


what is subsequently seen as the Harlot or / 


Babylon ”;—Diisterdieck limits the mention 
of “the earth” to what is said in ver. 12 as 
to the exercise of this Beast’s power over 
the earth and its inhabitants ;—According 
to Alford the first Beast was an Empire 
rising up out of confusion into order ; while 
this Beast from “the earth” arises out of 
human society and its progress [a view which 
Burger rejects as unscriptural]|: and Alf. ex- 
plains this as setting forth “the sacerdotal per- 
secuting power,” both Pagan and Christian— 
not l’aganmerely (as Hammond, Grot., Ewald, 
De Wette, Hengst., Diisterd. maintain), or 
Christian merely (as Elliott and others hold, 
who “ would limit it to the priesthood of the 
Papacy ”’), but symbolizing both ;—The True 
Prophets, notes Burger, announced to Israel 
the counsels of God; this “ False Prophet” 
announces to mankind the counsels of the 
“Prince of this World ;’—Stuart observes 
that Satan is Prince of the powers of the air ; 
the first Beast rises from the sea; here the 
second Beast is from the earth [or as Stuart 
translates “from the land” as opposed to 
“the sea”|; and thus all the elements are 
stirred up against Christians (ii. p. 273) ;—De 
Lyra made the Beast of ver. 1 to be the son 
of the Persian Chosroes, and the lamb-like 
Beast to be Mohammed ;—The second Beast, 
writes Sir I. Newton (p. 467), was the Greek 
Empire ; the first Beast was the Empire 
divided between Gratian and Theodosius ;— 
Mr. Birks understands that the two Beasts 
of this chapter denote the civil and ecclesias- 
tical Latin Empire. 


two horns like unto a lamb,| Ie., like the 
horns of a lamb—cf. ch. ix. ro. On the 


€81 


682 


12 Andhe exerciseth all the power 
ef the first oeast before him, and 


word rendered “/amb” see on ch. v. 6. 
Words. suggests that this word (arnion) may 
have been chosen in order to mark its anti- 
thesis to the word rendered Beast (therion) 
—see on ver. 1. The Lamb in ch. v. 6 has 
Seven Horns, and Hengst. supposes that the 
two horns of the lamb in this verse denote his 
inferiority in power to Christ. No further 
description is given of the form of this Beast, 
such as is given of the former Beast in ver. 1 
and in ch. xvii. 3; and Diisterd. thinks that 
nothing more is meant than that this emblem 
of the “ False Prophet” appears in form as a 
“ Jamb”—innocent and harmless in appear- 
ance, though speaking as a “dragon.” Al- 
though the absence of the definite article does 
not directly point to “ Te Lamb” in ch. xiv. 1, 
nevertheless the use of a term applied else- 
where some twenty-eight times in this Book to 
Christ, and only to Him, cannot fail to indicate 
here the working of Anti-Cérist. Note, that 
our Lord, in Matt. vii. 15, describes “ false 
prophets” as coming “in sheep's clothing.” 

According to Hippolytus (“ Ancolitus ” /.c., 
p. 26) the “two Horns” represent the Law 
and the Prophets; and he thence infers that 
this second Beast is to be outwardly fair, 
although inwardly a ravening wolf. 

By the “two Horns” Mede understands 
the “* power of binding and loosing,” claimed 
by the Roman Pontiff ;—Vitringa, the Francis- 
can and the Dominican Orders ;—Elliott, the 
Regular and the Secular Clergy. 


and he spake as a dragon.| The absence of 
the definite article again forbids a direct 
reference to “the Dragon” of ch. xii. 3; xiii. 
4; but we cannot doubt that the treacherous 
and seductive character ascribed to this lamb- 
like Beast in ver. 14, is included in the name 
of that evil power which is described in ch. 
xii. 9 as Dragon, Serpent, Devil, Satan, and 
points to Gen. iil. 1. 

Krenkel (/.c., s. 59), noting that ‘“‘ Hebrew 
antiquity knows nothing of a speaking dra- 
gon,” thinks that we should translate here 
“speaks as a serpent,” according to Gen. iii. 
He observes that “dragon” is used as equi- 
valent to “serpent” in the Clement. Hom. (ii. 
32, 34):—see Note B on ch. xii. 3. 

Stern notes that as before the Second 
Advent Enoch and Elijah (ch. xi. 3) will 
preach the kingdom of Christ, so a “ False 
Prophet,” enslaved to Satan, will strive to gain 
adherents to Antichrist. 

As a “Preterist” Mr. Maurice makes this 
Beast from “ the earth” to be that which sus- 
tained the Imperial tyranny of Rome,—namely, 
the religion of Rome (p. 243). 

Among rationalistic “Preterists,” Renan (p. 


REVELATION, XIII. 


[v. 12. 


causeth the earth and them which 
dwell therein to worship the first 





414) having observed fhat this symbol of the 
second Beast is by no means clear, nevertheless 
thinks that wv. 14-17 may indicate the thau- 
maturgy of the “ mathematician ” Babillus of 
Ephesus (Suet., Nero 36; Tac. Hist.,i. 22), 
or the legends as to Simon Magus (/. ¢., p. 
434). _Réville, indeed, positively fixes on 
Simon Magus, whom St. John and St. Peter 
encountered at Samaria, Acts Vili. 9-24 (J. ¢, 
p. 130). Krenkel understands by this Beast 
a spiritual power—the embodiment of False 
Prophecy—in the service of the Roman 
Empire (the first Beast), the existence of 
which in Cent. i. is proved by the references 
in Suetonius (Nero 36) and Tacitus (Ann., vi. 
21) to “ Astrologers,” ‘ Mathematicians,” 
“Chaldeans.” The chief type of the “ False 
Prophet,” according to Krenkel (ss. 80-82), 
was the historian Josephus, whom St. John 
thus notices as having abandoned the cause of 
his country (Sueton., Vespas. 5; Joseph., B. J. 
iii. 8,9). Volkmar goes farther still, and holds 
that, in vv. 11-17, St. John is describing St. 
Paul as the “ False Prophet” (see on ch. ii. 2), 
or, perhaps, the Pauline party in the Church. 
Volkmar also asserts that Rom. xiii. 1-11 is 
a perfect commentary on St. John’s description 
here of the second Beast:—“ As the Anti- 
christ of this Book is certainly Nero, so 
certain is it that his Christian prophet (Vor- 
redner) is Paul” (s. 205). This is too much 
even for Keim (/. c., s. 160)—who however 
sees a reference to the “ Paulinian party ” in 
ch. ii. 2: see as to this question Note A on 
ch. iii. 9. Reuss merely says,—“False pro- 
phecy, by which men are seduced and led to 
worship the frst Beast” or the Roman Empire, 
ch. xvii. (/.c., p. 378). And in his commentary 
he adds that, in the absence of details supplied 
to the author by the Old Test., we remark, 
in cases similar to the present, “un certain 
défaut de force plastique.” —#2 Joc. 


12. And be exerciseth all the authority] 
Iz., ‘ performs all the acts of authority "—like 
the phrase “to do the will,”’John iv. 34; vi. 
38, &c.: he performs them not, as the first 
Beast, by his direct power, but by words, 
and miracles, and signs. This verse, notes 
Burger, exhibits “this second Beast as a 
parody of the Holy Ghost ” (see on ver. 11); 
and he refers to John xvi. 13, 14. 


of the first beast in his sight.] Under his 
supervision—cf. ch. viii. 2; Deut.i. 38. Not- 
withstanding his lamb’s form, he exercises all 
the authority of the symbolic wild beast, 
which represents the other aspect of anti- 
christian power, in its presence and in its sere 
vice—see ver. 14; Ch. xix. 20 





v. 13—14.] 
beast, whose deadly wound was 
healed. 

13 And he doeth great wonders, 
so that he maketh fire come down 


REVELATION. XIII. 


from heaven on the earth in the sight 
of men, 

14 And deceiveth them that dwell 
on the earth by the means of those 





And he maketh the earth and them 
which dwell therein] Hengst. notes, not 
absolutely all inhabitants of earth, but the 
earthly-minded, cf. Phil. ili. 19, and see on 
ver. 6. 

to worship the first beast,| Gr. “that 
they shall worship” :—for this construc- 
tion, characteristic of St. John, see on ch. iii. 
9, and Introd., § 7, IV. (/). 

whose death-stroke was healed.| See 
ver. 3. The relation between the two Beasts 
or two forms of Antichrist—the secular 
World-power, and the spiritual World- 
power-—is expressed in this verse. To the 
former Beast the “ Dragon” had given his ex- 
ternal power (ver. 4); to the /atter intel- 
lectual gifts—the understanding to speak “ as 
a dragon”; see on ver. 11. The “ False 
Prophet” who causes the dwellers on earth to 
worship the Beast symbolizes the deification 
of the World and of the World-power. The 
old heathenism of the world had been, in 
point of fact, an apotheosis of created Nature, 
and this is still to be the work of Antichrist : 
“This,” writes Auberlen, “is the new 
heathenism sunk back into deification of 
nature and humanity, and of which it cannot 
be predicted what forms of folly and beast- 
nature it shall yet assume ” (/. c., p. 310). 

“ By the Seven-headed, Ten-horned Beast ; 
the Two-horned False Prophet ; and Babylon 
the Mother of Harlots” (ch. xvii.), Mede 
understands “ the state and kingdom of Apos- 
tasie.” ...“ Fhe Kingdom of Apostasie was 
to be the Roman Empire :’—the Beast, which 
nas “Ten Horns” on the seventh “ Head,” 
upon the recovery of a deadly wound in one 
of his “‘ Heads,” rises from the sea and succeeds 
to the power of the “ Dragon,” “ blaspheming 
God by another idolatrous worship.” ‘This 
I would call Anti-christendom. The King of 
this Apostatical Kingdom is the Two-horned 
False Prophet, the Roman Bishop” (p. 922). 

I. Williams notes that no explanation is 
given of this second Beast as there is of the 
first Beast and of the Harlot in ch. xvii. 
Observe also that Babylon, or the Harlot 
which sits upon the first Beast (ch. xvii. 5), 
arises after the “False Prophet” (ch. xiv. 8), 
and appears to be destroyed 4efore him,—see 
ch. xvili.; xix. 20. 

Renan is compelled to admit the difficulty 
which this verse creates for the rationalistic 
theory that the oe head of the Beast “ smitten 
unto death” signifies the Emperor Nero: 
“There is here,” he writes, “a confusion 


between the entire Beast with ‘Seven Heads’ 
(the Roman Empire) and the Head ‘smitten 
unto death’ (Nero)” (p. 414). Observe 
however, that this so-called “ confusion” be- 
tween the wounded Head and the entire 
Beast is twice insisted upon by St. John 
Ee iia here,and in ver. 14. See Introd., 
§ 4, 

13. And he doeth great signs,| Or 
miracles (onyeia)—the word always used 
by St. John. That Antichrist is to possess 
miraculous power is, indeed, intimated by 
our Lord and by St. Paul (Matt. xxiv. 24; 
2 Thess. ii. 9); but we cannot doubt that 
there is also a reference to the wonderful 
power over Nature which the spirit of man 
has attained to, and which has too often 
been abused to the deification of Nature 
and her laws, and to the disparagement of 
the Divine action which is ever present in 
Creation. 

Many refer here to the magical arts com- 
mon under heathenism ; and Victorinus (Cent 
iii.) comments: “ Even at this day the magi 
cians perform such signs by the aid of the 
fallen Angels” (/. c., p. 62). 

so that he even maketh fire to come 
down out of heaven to the earth| Or, that 
he should even make fire to come 
down] On the constr. with iva, see Introd., 
§ 7, IV. (f). 

We have here another analogy to the de= 
scription of the “‘ Tavo Witnesses” :—see on ch. 
xi.5. Writing on Luke jx. 54, Abp. Trench 
notes: “ How mighty a power this was in the 
eyes of [James and John] is evidenced by the 
fact that when in the Apoc. [John] records 
the great wonders and lying signs of the False 
Prophet, the only sign which he specially 
names” is that spoken of here.—Studies in the 
Gospels, p. 219. It is to be observed that this 
is the miracle which Christ forbade to be 
repeated if attempted in its literal sense.— 
Luke ix. 55, 56. 

14. And he deceiveth them bat dwell om 
the earth] See on ver. 12. 

by reason of the signs] On the prep. 
(61a) with the accus., cf. ch. i. 93 iv. 11; xi 
11. For the word “signs,” see on ver. 13. 

which it was given unto him fo do] 
Cf, ver. 7, and ch. vi. 4. 

saying tothem| ‘The part.(A¢yov) is in the 
nom.,—out of constr. as in ch. xi. 1: cf. below 
the masc. relative “who.” The use of the 
masculine gender here and in ver. 8 Burger 


683 


684 


miracles which he had power to do 
in the sight of the beast; saying to 
them that dwell on the earth, that 
they should make an image to the 


insists upon as proving “that by the Beast a 
man ig represented.” 


that they should make an image to the beast, | 
Ie., in his honour (see on ver. 15). The 
foundation of this symbolism is to be 
found in the erection of statues to the Roman 
Emperors to which divine honours were 
paid. Thus Pliny writes to Trajan, shortly 
after the Apoc. was written, how he made it 
an ordeal for the Christians to offer incense 
before the image of the Emperor (“Cum 
imagini tue, quam propter hoc jusseram cum 
simulacris numinum afferri, thure ac vino 
supplicarent.”—Epp., x. 97). We may also 
refer to “the image of Nebuchadnezzar’s 
magnified royalty” in Dan. iii. (see notes on 
Dan. iii. 1, 14, 15). This worship of the 
Beast through his image denotes, as stated 
on ver. 12, the deification of the World and 
the World-power throughout the conflict 
between the Church and Antichrist. 

Note: the “ Image of the Beast” is men- 
tioned ten times—four times in this chapter, 
and in ch, xiv. 9, 11; XV. 2; XVi. 23 xix. 20; 


XX. 4. 

The “ Ten-horned Beast,” notes Mede (p. 
421), isjoined with the “ False Prophet,” three 
times—ch. xvi. 13; xix. 20; xx. 10. When 
“the Beast” is joined with his “ lnage”— 
Che xivgy rhs XV. 2s XVI0 2s KX. 205 er — 
the “ Beast” is the “ False Prophet”; and 
the “ Image” is the Seven-headed Beast re- 
stored to the image of his former state as in 
ver. 3:—the “ False Prophet” was its restorer 
(ver. 15), and by his will the “ Image” is 
ruled (vv. 12, 15). 

Words. understands by the “ Image” the 
“personification of the Papacy in the visible 
form of the Pontiff for the time being;” and 
the “worship” the “ Adoratio Pontificis” 
prescribed in the “ Czremoniale Romanum” to 
be performed after each Papal election ; “it 
was performed to [Pope Pius IX.] on 
Wednesday, 17th June, 1846.” Elliott sees 
here the Papal General Councils of Western 
Europe, which answer to the symbol of the 
“image” of the Ten-horned Beast, i.¢., of 
“Papal Antichristendom, and Antichrist.” 

who hath the stroke of the sword, 
and lived.] Note, the prom. is masc. (see 
vv, /].), showing the personality of the former 
Beast :—cf. above the gender of “ saying.” 

& Ag with Daniel,” notes Keil,—who takes 
the first Apocalyptic Beast to be the fourth 
Beast which Daniel (vii. 7, 8) had seen as 
the “ Little Horn,”—‘“ the World-power and 


REVELATION. XIII. 







[v. 15. | 


beast, which had the wound by a 
sword, and did live. 

15 And he had power to give ‘life Gr, 
unto the image of the beast, that the 





its representative are conceived of as ome and 
the same, so here also with John. This is 
seen in the insensible transition of the neuter 
to the masculine (r@ Onpim és €xet).”—On 
Daniel, Engl. tr., p. 277. 

It is important to observe again that the 
wound of one of the Heads is here ascribed 
to the whole Beast:—see on ver. 3, and the 
remark of Renan quoted on ver. 12. 


15. And it was given [unto him] ¢o 
give life to it,] Gr. breath—as in marg.:; 
or spirit, and therefore “fe.” See vv. I.— 
the pronoun is in the feminine (airf). If the 
pron. is taken to be masculine (with &, B, 1), 
render, And it was given unto him to 
give life to the image; andso A.V. Cf 
VV. 7, 14. 


[even] to the image of the beast,| In this 
verse commentators see a reference to the 
power of speech ascribed to images of the 
gods. Grotius quotes Roman historians as 
to the fact of speaking statues—those e.g. of 
Juno Moneta, of Fortuna Muliebris, of Sil- 
vanus. Renan refers in proof of this to 
Valerius Max. (I., viii. 3-5); and to the wor- 
ship claimed for the effigies of the Emperors. 
It is not impossible that St. John may have 
intended here to signify that demon-power 
which was present in heathen idolatry, and 
to which St. Paul refers in 1 Cor. x. 19, 20. 
Nor again is it unlikely that he may have re= 
ferred to the “ worship” which “the spirit of 
the age” at all times receives, owing to the 
unconscious influence exercised by it over 
the minds of men. Indeed, that “ art-wor- 
ship” of which we hear so much at the 
present day seems to be leading men to the 
idolatry of a new heathenism. 


that the image of the beast should both speak, 
and cause| “The Image” is the subject of 
both verbs. Eichhorn and Hengst. regard 
the second Beast as the nom. to “cause,” 
rendering: “that the image of the beast 
should evenspeak; and that heshould 
cause” &c.—see ver. 12. According to the 
Codex Sinaiticus (see wv. //.) the sense is: 
that even the image of the beast 
should speak; and he shall cause &c. 
Words. explains: “The Papal Hierarchy 
. give breath to the image which they 
themselves have made [the Pope], and then 
the image speaks.” According to Bisping, all 
this will be fulfilled literally in the last days. 
that as many as should not worship the 
image of the beast] See vv. il.:—cf. ch. iii, g 


v. 16.] 


image of the beast should both speak, 
and cause that as many as would not 


worship the image of the beast should 
be killed. 


“The Image of the Beast” is found three 
times in this verse, signifying, doubtless, how 
great is the degree of this apostasy. 

should be killed.| Pliny’s letter to Trajan 
es on ver. 14) has been quoted as the 

undation of this symbolism (“ supplicium 
minatus, perseverantes duci jussi ”). 

This verse is, perhaps, the most difficult 
part of this most obscure description. In 
conformity with what has been already said 
of the nature of the two Beasts, may we not 
see in the “ Image” of the jirst Beast those 
forins of seduction in which that emblem of 
the material World-power is reflected, and to 
which the second Beast, or intellectual World- 
power gives their vitality—thus causing men 
(see ver. 14) to make of such objects 
“images” to receive their worship? Just 
before St. John writes “even now there are 
many Antichrists” (1 John ii. 18), he had 
written (ver. 16): “All that is in the world, 
the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, 
and the pride of life, is not of the Father, 
but is of the world ;’—and may not the 
temporal losses of those who disregard the 
appeals of ambition, or intellectual pride, or 
sensuality, or covetousness, be here symbol- 
ized by the fate of the early believers who 
would not join in the idolatrous practices of 
the heathen ? 

Mede (see on vv. 10, 14) interprets here: 
—“The ‘False Prophet’ [the Pope,— 
6 Bestia Bicornis seu. Pontifex Romanus’ gives 
to the ‘Secular Beast’ [see on ver, ro| the 
power of putting to death those whom he 
shall have condemned for heresy [‘ hzreseos, 
ut vocant, seu Imaginis violate —that is to 
say ‘Imaginis seu Bestia Secularis idolola- 
trice’).”—p. 509. 

16. And he causeth all,| Persons of all 
ranks and conditions, as in ch. vi. 15; xi. 18; 
xix. 18. For the constr. cf. ver. 12. The 
subject of the verb is either ‘“‘the Image,” or 
the Beast of ver. 11; doubtless the latter :-— 
gee on ver. 15. 


the small and the great, and the 
Tich and the poor, and the free and 
the bond, that there be given unto 
them] Gr. “that they give unto them” 
—see vv. /].; ie. “that men should give 
unto them,” or stamp on them,—the plural 
impersonal as in ch. xii. 6; xvi. 15. Words. 
would render “to cause all men to give 
themselves a mark”—“intimating compul- 
sion, under the semblance of choice,” “they 
gssume it voluntarily” (cf ch. xiv. 9, 11; 


REVELATION. XIII. 


16 And he causeth all, buih small 
and great, rich and poor, free and 


bond, "to receive a mark in their iGr. 
£8tve, 


right hand, or in their foreheads : 





Xv]. 25 xix. 20; xx. 4); so Grotius, Bleek, 
Diisterd., Burger, &c. De Wette gives the 
two versions: “dass Allen ein Maalzeichen 
gemacht wird;” and “dass Alle sich ein 
Maalzeichen machen.” 


a mark on ther right hand, or upon 
their forehead;| (See vv. //.). The badge 
of Antichrist, in contrast to the “sign upon 
thine hand” and the “memorial between 
thine eyes,” given to the people of God— 
Ex. xiii. 9; Deut. vi. 8; xi. 18. Archbishop 
Trench (see on ch. iii. 12), observing that 
the redeemed have “the name of God or 
the seal of God, on their foreheads (ch. vii. 3 ; 
ix. 4; xiv. 1; xxii. 4) with probable allusion 
to the golden plate inscribed with the name 
Jehovah ” (Ex. xxviii. 36-38), adds : “ Exactly 
in the same way, in the hellish caricature of 
the heavenly kingdom, the votaries of the 
Beast are stigmatics, having 4is name upon 
their foreheads.” — The Epp. to the Seven 
Churches, p. 183. In Matt. xxiii. 5 we read of 
the “phylacteries” or “frontlets” called by 
the modern Jews Tephillim,—see Smith’s Dict. 
of the Bible, art. “ Frontlets;” see, too, the 
note on Ezek. ix. 4. For the Divine seal, of 
which there is here the unholy imitation, see 
on ch, vii. 3; xiv. 1. 

Commentators also refer this “ark” or 
“brand” either to the heathen custom ot 
branding slaves and soldiers (hence called 
ottyparia.) n token of their obedience to 
their master or general (3 Macc. ii. 29); or 
to the branding slaves attached to some 
temple ( epddovAor) ; as well as other persons 
devoted to the service of some deity :—thus 
Lucian, De dea Syra, 59 [orifovra. dé mdvtes 
ol pev €§ Kapmovs, of Se és avyxévas] supplies 
an excellent illustration of the passage here. 
Herodotus (ii. 113) also mentions the brand- 
ing the temple slaves at Canopus with the 
sacred sign of Serapis:—as to the use of ima- 
gery borrowed from heathen customs, see 
on ch. ii. 10; vii. 9. The stzgmata men- 
tioned in Gal. vi. 17 are likewise cited (cf. 
Bishop Lightfoot, 2 Joc., and see Philo. De 
Monarch. i. 8, vol. ii. p. 221); implying that 
consecration to the service of the Beast is 
what is signified here. 

Reuss notes that this “mark” (yapaypa) 
means an incision or “cutting” such as was 
forbidden under the Old Law to the people 
of God (Lev. xix. 28). 

Hippolytus (“ Ancolitus,” /c., p. 26) ex- 
plains the “ szark ” on the hand to mean slavish 
obedience; and the “mark” on the forehead 


685 


686 


17 And that no man might buy 
or sell, save he that had the mark, or 
the name of the beast, or the number 
of his name. 


18 Here is wisdom. Let him 


REVELATION. XIII. 





{v. 17—18, 


that hath understanding count the 
number of the beast: for it is the 
number of a man; and his num- 
ber zs Six hundred threescore and 


SIX. 





to symbolize that men will exalt the Beast, as 
the forehead elevates a crown. 


17. that no man should be able] Omit 
And—see vv. il. The purpose and the 
result of imprinting the “ ark.” 


to buy or to sell,] I.e., to carry on social 
intercourse :—see on ch, xviii. 11; and cf. 1 
Macc. xii. 36; xiii. 49. 

Ancient expositors (Pmmasius, Beda, 
Haymo, quoted by Words.) see in the mark 
of the Beast an imitation of the Church’s 
Creed, Symbolum—a term which (in the 
plural) also means, in the language of com- 
merce, a covenant or treaty. Hence the 
reference to buying and selling, from which 
men are prohibited “unless they have the 
mark of the Beast; as merchants who sail 
in the same ship are known by the same 
sign.” And Aquinas (3, qu. 63, 3, 3, vol. xxiv., 
p. 311) says that the “ Mark of the Beast ” 
is the “ professio illiciti cultits.” 

By this prohibition Alford understands 
“the commercial and spiritual interdicts 
which have, both by Pagan and by Papal 
persecutors, been laid on nonconformity 

. . . down to the last remaining civil dis- 
abilities imposed on nonconformity in modern 
Papal or Protestant countries.” 

Godet (/.c., p. 308) explains: The “ Head” 
(ver. 3) which had been healed, and which 
now represents the entire Beast, returns 
as Antichrist (see on ch. xi. 13; xvii. 10)— 
as the eigsth Head—and persecutes the 
Church (see ver. 6). The Church is now 
declared to be outlawed (“hors la loi”), 
vv. 16, 17 :—“ It is the time of the last perse- 
cutions announced in the jth Seal.” This 
will be a time, notes Burger, when promises 
such as that in Matt. x. 41, 42, may acquire 
an unforeseen importance. 

The meaning of this symbolism Renan 
holds to be that the Roman coinage bore the 
effigy of Nero (see on ver. 18), together with 
the titles ascribing divinity to him which 
the Jews looked upon as blasphemous; and 
that the Romans forced this currency on the 
ake in all mercantile transactions (p. 419). 

éville (/. ¢., p. 120) sees a reference to 
that gradual extension of the right of Roman 
citizenship by Nero, Galba, and others, to 
the remote Provinces, which imposed on the 
Christians the necessity of transacting all 
business, even the most simple, under the 
seal of the Satanic Roman power. Nothing, 
notes Reuss, can show more eloquently 


tha’ these words the precarious state of the 
Chr.stians in face of the state-law under 
Nero. Theirs was a “ religio illicita.” 

save he that hath the mark, [even] the 
name of the beast} Omit “or” in this place 
—see vv. /]. The true text thus tells us that 
the “mark” was “a name.” 


or the number of his name.| “The mark” 
consists either of “the name” of the Beast 
written in express letters; or of “ the number” 
which is the sum of the numerical value 
of the successive letters of the name — not 
necessarily a proper name: see ch. xix. 13, 16. 
“The number of the name” is equally signifi- 
cant with “the name” itself. 


THE NUMBER OF THE BEAST (18). 


18. Here is wisdom.] Gr. the wisdom— 
observe the article. See ver. ro, and ch. xvii. 
g:—a note of attention as in ver. 9. Or, 
“Herein Wisdom shows itself,” in deci- 
phering the letters of the name. 

Auberlen explains (p. 343): “As the first 
Beast is to be met by patience and faith 
(ver. 10), the second Beast must be opposed 
by true wisdom ;”—Ewald takes “ Wisdom” 
(7 copia) to bea wise utterance in the sense of 
the Kabbala, viz. ‘“ Here follows the sublime 
saying which is intelligible only to the wise 
Kabbalist ;?—— Burger writes: “ When he 
shall appear whose name gives the number 
666, the Christian who has the true Wisdom 
knows what he has to expect from him.” 

Reuss, having stated that this verse 
“gives in an enigmatic form the historical 
name of Antichrist” (viz. Nero), adds: 
“ This verse is, then, so to speak, the key of 
the whole Book, and the explanation given of 
it will always be the touchstone of every 
tem of Apocalyptic interpretation ” (p. 378). 


He that hath understanding, let him 
count ihe number of the beast;| Of the first 
Beast—see ch. xix. 20. The words “the 
number of the Beast” occur only here :—the 
words “the number of bis name,” only in 
ver. 17, and in ch. xv. 2. Diisterd., Words., 
Alf., agree in seeing here a challenge to solve 
an enigma which the words that follow pro- 
nounce to be soluble: “It is a human 
number,” says Words., “and not a divine 
number which no one is able to count (see 
ch. vii. 9g; xx. 8).” This inference by no 





REVELATION. XIII. 


means follows from the text. It is not in- 
consistent with the firmest belief in the in- 
spiration of the Apocalypse, to hold that the 
name was unknown even to St. John himself 
(see Lee, On Inspiration, 4th ed. p. 209, &c.). 
At all events, so early a writer as Irenzus 
(who had conversed on this very subject with 
those who had seen St. John “ face to face ””— 
see above onver. 5; and Note G at the end of 
this chapter) was of opinion that had St. John 
intended the enigma to be solved at that 
time, the Apostle would himself have given 
the solution—see the words quoted, Introd., 
§ 2, (a), No. (10); and later still Andreas 
(J. c., p. 75) observes that if the solution be 
possible it must be left to time to reveal it. 

for it is the number of a man:] (Gr. 
“a number ofa man”). Note the connexion 
by “for” with the words that precede. The 
meaning is explained to be either (1) a sym- 
bolical number denoting a person—a man and 
bearing the zame of a man,—thus implying 
that Antichrist will be @ man (Beda); or (2) 
“the number of the Beast” is “the number of 
his name;” and its being “the number (or a 
number) of a man” signifies that we are to 
count as men usually count: e.g. in ch. xxi. 17 
“ aq measure of a man” is said to mean an or- 
dinary measure, just as in Isaiah viii. 1 “a 
man’s pen” means the instrument which men 
commonly use in writing. Accordingly we are 
to understand by this phrase, “the number 
indicating the name of an individual man” 
(who is to be the Beast or Antichrist), ob- 
tained, by giving the sum of the numerical 
value of the letters of his name. “The me- 
chanism of the problem,” as it is called, is 
founded on the Jewish Ghematria, or geo- 
metrical calculation—see below. 

Diisterd. objects against Grotius, Ewald, 
Ziillig, and others who uphold the jst inter- 
pretation, that we should then have had “ the 
number of a certain man” or of one man” 
(cf. ch. viii. 13); and Ebrard thinks that by 
these words is meant not a mystic symbolical 
number at all,—like the number 144,000 of 
the Sealed, or the 42 months,—but a number 
which can be readily assigned; and he un- 
derstands here by this employment of the 
number 6, the Roman Empire, which is the 
sixth WWorld-monarchy (ch. xvii. 10). 

and his number is Six hundred and sixty 
[land| six.) I. e., the number of the Beast is the 
number of his name—cf. ver. 17, and ch. xv. 
2. This number, 600 + 60 + 6, is repre- 
sented by three different Greek letters, y, &, ¢, 
corresponding to these three components; or, 
as in the earlier MSS., it is written in full 
(see vv. //.). The remarks of Irenzus on 
the o/d “various reading,” 616—to be found 
in some copies in his day, and still appearing in 
the important codex C and a few cursives 
—are worthy of particular attention: see 


Note G at the end of .his chapter. The 
examples given below will explain the 
methods by which it has been sought to 
read the enigma. The method generally 
adopted is that known as the Ghematria 
(Lewperpia) of the Rabbins, and is as old as 
the beginning of the Cabbala; viz. that of 
assigning to each letter of a name its usual 
numerical value, and then giving the sum of 
such numbers as the equivalent of the name. 
Thus in the Sibylline Books (i. 324-331), 
and in the Epistle of St. Barnabas (c. 9), 
our Lord’s name, Jesus, written in Greek 
characters, is, we are told, expressed by the 
number 888: viz., I=10+7=8+o0=200+0 
=70+v=400+0=200 = 888. 

The great majority of commentators, be- 
ginning with Irenzus, have made use of the 
Greek alphabet for this computation :—it was 
for Greek readers that St. John wrote; it 
was from the Greek alphabet that the formula 
“T am Alpha and Omega”—“ A and 2”— 
(ch. i. 85 xxi. 6; xxii. 13) has been taken; St. 
John usually adheres to the LXX. version of 
the Hebrew (e.g. in ch. ii. 27; xii. 5); and he 
usually translates Hebrew words into Greek, 
see on ch. ix. 11. Many, however, select the 
Hebrew alphabet, urging the Hebrew style 
of the entire Book; as well as the fact that 
all the names in the Apocalypse (except Anti- 
pas, ch. ii. 13) are either translated from the 
Hebrew, or left in Hebrew.—Nikolaos, Apol- 
lyon, Diabolos (ch. ii. 6; ix. 11; xii. 9), and 
in ch. xvi. 16 ‘the place called in the He- 
brew tongue Ar-Mageddon.” A third class 
of expositors employ the Roman numerals. 


(1). Of this class of solutions that which 
has, perhaps, received the most general assent 
is one of the explanations of Irenzus (not, how= 
ever, that which he himself most favoured), 
viz. Lateinos, which, written in Greek charac= 
ters, gives: A=30+A=1+T=300+E=5+ 
I=10+N=50+0=70+35=200= 666. By 
this is indicated the Pagan Roman Empire 
(“ Latini sunt qui nunc regnant,” Iren.). 
It also, as Alford iz Joc. concludes, em- 
braces “the Latin Empire, the Latin Church, 
Latin Christianity ;” and Alf. goes on to note 
“Short of saying absolutely that this was 
the word in St. John’s mind, I have the 
strongest persuasion that no other can be 
found approaching so near to a complete 
solution.” In his Prolegomena (§ v. 32), how- 
ever, he declares, “ That it is not ¢4e solution I 
have a persuasion amounting to certainty.” 

Dr. Adam Clarke (Pref. to the Rev. ,p. 2018) 
observes that the solution given by “J. E, 
Clarke” “amounts nearly to demonstration,” 
viz. 7 Aarwy Baoweta—(n=8 + A=30 + 
a=1 +7T=300 + t=10+ v=50+7=8)=407 
+ (B=2 + a=1 +0=200 + t=10 + A=30 
+ e=5 +1=10 + a=1)=259; and 407 + 
259—666. 


687 


688 


(2). The application of the Hebrew 
alphabet is not modern. Piscator, Jurieu, 
and others, in Cent. xvii., suggested Rémith, 
se., “Roman” (Beast, or Kingdom, or Church 
—see Note G). In recent times a warm con- 
troversy has arisen among rationalistic com- 
mentators as to the priority of suggesting 
the solution which they take as the key to 
their system of exegesis. Ewald led the 
way in 1828, but he held to the reading 616. 
Then Hitzig at Ziirich and Benary at 
Berlin, in 1836-1837, each insisted that the 
discovery of “‘Nero Cesar” as the Beast 
was hisown. M. Reuss of Strasbourg now 
intervened, claiming for himself the merit of 
the idea, which he had announced, he alleged, 
in 1835; while M. Réville declares that 
Professor Fritzsche was the original dis- 
coverer, at Rostock, in 1831. Accordingly, 
“Nero Cesar,” written in Hebrew, is alleged 
to be the name (J=50, 1200, 1=6, 
=50)=306 + (p=I00, p=60, 7=200)= 
360, £.e. 306 +360 =666. Here the Greek 
form of Nero (Neron) is represented in 
Hebrew characters ; but if the final z (which 
is=50) be omitted, and the Latin form Nero 
be taken, the Hebrew will give the number 
616, or the reading rejected by Ireneus—a 
proof, writes Scholten (/. c., s. 46) that the 
Name concealed under the number was 
known to the old copyists defore Irenzus. 

Does not the ignorance, however, of Ire- 
nexus (see on vv. 5, 17) as to any traditional 
explanation prove the exact opposite? while 
Ewald also points out that the quiescent 
Jod (=10) that should appear in the word 
Czsar when written in Hebrew letters (see 
Thalm, Bab., Gittin, fol. 56), is omitted in 
this computation, which accordingly does not 
give “the name of the Beast.” Renan (/.c., 
P- 416) shows that the name Cesar as given 
in Hebrew inscriptions of the first century 
has the Jod: the Jod, adds Renan, was omitted 
by St John as it would have given the un- 
symmetrical number 676. 

As to this interpretation, on which the 
school of modern rationalism boasts itself 
80 proudly, and on which the chief weight of 
the rationalistic exegesis of ch xvii. rests,— 
it may again be asked how could tt have been 
totally unknown to Irenzus, if known to 
those scribes who used the reading 616; 
especially since Irenzus, who had occupied 
himself with this very question, enumerates 
the different attempts made in his day to 
solve the mystery ’—How, if the Western 
scribes had believed that ‘“‘ Nero-Czsar” was 
intended, could the credit of the Apocalypse 
have been maintained, when the prophecy had 
been so signally falsified by the result ?—Nay, 
even were it admitted that “ Nero Cesar” 
is the name denoted by 666, nothing would 
be gained for the argument as to the date of 


REVELATION. XIII. 


the Apocalypse, or as to that exposition either 

of ch. xiii. 3 or of ch. xvii. 10 which rests on 

the name Nero; because, as already pointed 

out (Introd. § 4, a), Domitian also was 

known as Nero :— 

‘Cum jam semianimum laceraret Flavius 
orbem 

Ultimus, et calvo serviret Roma Meroni.”— 

Juv., iv., 37. 
** Frater [7 ¢, Titi] quem calvum dixit sua 
Roma Neronem.”’—Ausonius, De xii Ces. 

Gebhardt suggests that both Latinus, and 
Nero Czsar were intended to be concealed 
under this name by St. John, who thus indi- 
cates that the Roman Empire, and Nero are 
alike symbolized by the Beast (/. c., s. 235). 

(3). Bossuet has chosen Roman characters 
—DIoCLesaVegVstVs, ie., the Emperor Dio- 
cletian(D = 500+ L1=1 + C= 100+L 
=50+V=5+V=5+V=5)= 666. To 
this solution the Hugenots gave as a parallel 
LVDoVICVs (Lewis xiv.),—the name of 
Bossuet’s Grand Monarque. 

Reuss has well described the general cha- 
racter of the solutions depending on nume- 
rical computation, which have been hitherto 
proposed. This famous number “has been 
made to yield almost all the historical names 
of the past eighteen centuries, Titus, Vespa- 
sian, and Simon Gioras; Julius the Apostate 
and Genseric; Mahomet and Luther; Bene- 
dict 1X. and Louis XV.; Napoleon I.and the 
Duke of Reichstadt; and it would not be dif- 
ficult for any of us on the same principles to 
read in it one another's names.”—p. 381. 

Other solutions remain :— 

(4). Bengel, following a different course, 
regards the number as chronological,—the 
neuter form of the numeral as found in certain 
Greek MSS. (see vv. //.), and its masculine 
form in the Latin Vulgate, directing us to the 
word years as the noun to be understood (see 


. Introd., § 11, (b), IV. The first Beast rises 


from the sea shortly after A.D. 1058 (see on 
ch, xii. 14) :— ie, the representative of the 
Papal Hierarchy, Gregory VII., came forward 
if 1073; and about or after 666 years from 
that date the Beast from the earth (ver. 11) 
arises, which may be Jesuitism. Pope Inno- 
cent III. had already applied the number 666 
chronologically, in his Bull summoning the 
Fourth Lateran Council (see Hardouin, 
Concil., t. vii. 3, A.D. 1214);—Luther, while 
making the “Thousand Years” begin froin 
the birth of Christ, and end with Pope 
Gregory VII., reckoned 666 years from that 
Pontificate asthe duration to be assigned to the 
Papacy ;—De Lyra (A.D. 1329) had in like 
manner explained the number 666 as denoting 
a period of time, viz. the interval between the 
Incarnation and the death of Mohammed ;— 
and his contemporary Petrus Aureolus, like 
Pope Innocent III., took this period to 





REVELATION. XIII. 


denote the duration ef Mohammedanism ;— 
The Magdeburg Centuriators understand 
AD. 666, when Pope Vitalian ordered the 
public services to be only in Latin ;—Even 
Auberlen writes that the number 666 “cer=- 
tainly has, as all Apocalyptic numbers, its 
special and exact chronological signification ” 
which time alone can explain: in the number 
six, Moreover, as we are taught by the first six 
Seals and Trumpets, the judgments on the 
world are complete; and thus six is the sig- 
nature of the world given over to judg- 
ment, the development of that number here 
(6 + 60 + 600) indicating that the Beast can 
only rise to greater ripeness for judgment. 
Six is the half of Tavelve, which is the signa- 
ture of the Church of God (as 33 is the half 
of Seven); and this development of the num- 
ber six corresponds to the development of the 
number Teve/ve in the 144,000 of the sealed in 
ch. xiv. 1—“the judged World-power being 
contrasted with the glorified Church delivered 
from judgment” (/ ¢., p. 268). To the same 
effect :—“ We have noticed,” writes Dean 
Vaughan (J. c., ii. p. 66), “the perfect Seven, 
and the imperfect 4alf-seven;... . Wehave 
noticed also that the number Twelve, which 
(with its multiples) is the Apocalyptic signal 
of the Church; the ¢avelve Stars (ch. xii. 1), 
the four and twenty Elders (ch. iv. 4), the 
hundred and forty and four thousand which were 
redeemed from the earth (ch. xiv. 3). Can it 
be—the question has been asked, though we 
presume not to answer it—that the 666, the 
thrice repeated six, the reiteration of the half- 
twelve, is itself the symbol of the world, as 
the full and perfect Tave/ve is of the Church.” 
So also, in effect, Mr. Maurice and Burger. 
Reuss considers that the absurdity of the 


chronological interpretation of the 666 1s 
clear from the fact that St. John over and 
over again fixes the reign of paganism ag 
lasting no longer than three years and a half 

(5). An explanation, first suggested by Heu- 
mann, taken up by Herder, and noticed by 
Volkmar (who however supports “Nero 
Czsar”) a5 one intended by St. John, has 
been adopted by Godet: The number was 
originally represented by the letters yé5— 
the true form. Now x¢ is the name of Christ 
abridged; and & is the emblem of the Sere 
pent,—as St. John styles Satan ; and thus the 
emblematic sense of these three letters is ‘ Ide 
Messiah of Satan’” Further: Seven is -he 
Divine number, and 777 the complete cycle 
of Divine perfection which the false :essiab 
vainly endeavours to attain: “ John there 
fore sees in the cipher 666 the symbol of a 
threefold impotence—that of the Dragon to 
equal God, that of the Beast to equal Chri 
that of the False Prophet to equal the Spirit 
(J. ¢., p. 376). And thus & being the emblem 
of the “ Serpent,” the custom of the Gnostic 
heretics — especially the Ophites, or ‘wore 
shippers of the Serpent, who date from the 
first century (see on ch. ii. 24)—may be alluded 
to, of using for amulets gems with certain 
symbolic inscriptions, in this case the mark 
of the Beast, yé¢. And so Mr. Galton (Ox 
the Revelation, in loc.), who concludes “ that 
Antichrist will strive to do what St. Paul (2 
Cor. vi. 15) tells us cannot lawfully be done, 
namely, to join Christ with Belial—an evil 
conjunction represented by x&¢. 

It isto be borne in mind that the events 


under the seventh Trumpet (ch. xi. 15) have 
not yet come to pass. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Chap. XIIL 


Notre A ON VER. 1—ANTICHRIST. 


Although the name “ Antichrist ” does not 
in the Apocalypse, the anti-christian 
influence is again and again referred to under 
various figures,—as the Beast of ch. xiii. 1; 
—as Babylon (ch. xiv. 8), the City of Confu- 
sion opposed to Jerusalem the City of Peace;— 
as the Harlot (ch. xvii. 1) opposed to the 
Bride ;—as the lamb-like Beast, or “ False 
Prophet” (ch. xiii. 11) opposed to the True 
Witness. A great outbreak of evil is hereby 
foreshown when the “ Dragon,” and the Beast, 
and the “ False Prophet” (ch. xvi. 13), shall be 

let loose “for a little time ” (ch. xx. 3). 
The word Antichrist (dyriyptoros—found 
in 1 John ii. 18, 22; iv. 3; 2 John 7) 
signifies (1) a false Christ (dvri yptcrov,—rev- 
s), Matt. xxiv. 24, @ man who gives 

New Test.—V ou. IV. 


himself out to be Christ—as the impostors, 
some sixty in number, who claimed among the 
Jews the dignity of Messiah; (2) an antagoe 
nist of Christ, an o of his doctrine such 
as St. John describes in his Epistles. “The 
character assigned by St. John in his Epistles 
to Antichrist properly so called, is one of open 
hostility to the Divinity and Humanity of 
Christ ; but is not one of assumption of His 
attributes.” Wordsworth on 1 John ii. 18. 
Is, then, Antichrist a person, or a principle 
hostile to Christ? That a personal Antichrist 
is to appear a short time before the Second 
Coming of Christ was the general opinion of 
the Fathers—“ from the earliest,” writes Stern 
(s. 312), “down to Thomas Aquinas.” The 
text usually relied on seems to have been 
John v. 43. Thus St. Augustine writes: 
“De Antichristo dictum est, ef omnes sic in= 
xx 


689 


690 


telligunt quod ait Dominus ‘Ego veni in 
momine Patris mei et non suscepistis me: si 
alius venerit in suo, hunc suscipietis.” ”—Serm. 
cxxx. 6. St. Jerome quotes the same text, 
with the words: “ Rursumque de Antichristo 
loquitur ad Judzos.”—ad Algasiam, Ep. cxxii. 
And St. Hilary: “Et hic quidem Antichris- 
tum significari non obscurum est, mendacio 
paterni nominis gloriantem.”—De Trin. ix. 22. 

The other texts usually adduced are 
Matt. xxiv. 24; 2 Thess. ii. 3-10. 

There are three opinions as to a personal 
Antichrist: (1) He is Satan under a seeming 
human form ;—(2) He is an incarnation of 
Satan, i.¢., the prince of Hell united in essence 
to human nature, as it were an infernal imi- 
tation of the Logos become Man ;—(3) He is 
an actual man who of his own free will has 
given himself over to the Devil. The jirst 
opinion was put forward in a treatise to be 
found among the works of St. Hippolytus 
(De Consumm. Mundi, |. c., App. p. 4). The 
second opinion is supported by St. Jerome 

Comm. in Dan. vii. t. v. p. 671); St. Cyril. 
ieros. (Cateches. xv. 11, 12, p. 229); and 
ers. Many uphold the ¢4ird opinion, that 
Antichrist will be an actual man; and among 
them Stern, who elaborately expounds in this 
sense the present chapter (s. 319). 

The type of Antichrist before the Christian 
era was Antiochus Epiphanes. Auberlen (p. 
64) and Dr. Pusey (Daniel the Prophet, pp. 91, 
96) agree in regarding Dan. xi. 36 as setting 
prominently forward that typical relation: 
“The image of the Antichrist of the Old Test.,” 
writes Dr. Pusey, “ melts into the lineaments 
of the Antichrist himself ;” and he quotes 
St Jerome on Dan. xi. 35 :—“ As the Saviour 
had Solomon and the other Saints as types of 
His coming, so we may rightly believe that 
Antichrist had as a type of himself that 
most evil king Antiochus, who persecuted the 
Saints, and profaned the Temple.”! “It can- 
not be proved with absolute certainty,” writes 
Auberlen (p. 303), “ that a personal Antichrist 
will stand at the head of the antichristian 
kingdom, . . . . but the type of Antiochus 
Epiphanes is of decisive importance.” ” 

That Antichrist is ot a person is strongly 
maintained by others. St. John in his Epistles, 
writes Hengstenberg, makes no mention of a 

son: “He expressly states in 1 Ep. ii. 18, 
that the Antichrist is an ideal person, to be 
realized in a multitude of individuals:” we 
read of “many deceivers,”’ “false Christs,” 
“false prophets,” 2 John 7; Matt. xxiv. rz, 


1 Eusebius (Zcloge Proph., in Dan. xi, ed. 
Gaisford) writes :—apxéruxov 8 rod "Avtidxou 
6 *Avtixpicros, wat Tod *Avtixplorou ecixay 6 
*Avtioyos. 

? On tne title given to Antichrist by the later 
Jews, Armillus, see Note B on ch. ii. 6. 


REVELATION. XIII. 


24 ;—we read, a Thess. ii., of “tne mystery 
of iniquity ;” but mystery can be used only of 
a thing; and only of such could it be said 
“it already works.” Hence, Hengst. con= 
cludes : “The question is not whether persom 
or not person; but whether a real or an 
ideal person, such as we constantly meet with 
in the Psalms, of the wicked, the enemy, the 
adversary.” Soalso Words. on 1 John ii. 18: 
St. John “appears here to represent Antie 
christ as an incorporation of those who set 
themselves against Christ . . . . This is also 
in accordance with St. Paul’s prophecy (a 
Thess. ii.) concerning the ‘ Lawless one,’ or 
the ‘ Man of sin,’ which represents a form of 
evil displaying itself in a continuous series of 
persons who are, as it were, incorporated and 
personified in one .... In like manner, it 
seems that the word Antichrist represents 
a succession of persons, in different times, 
animated by a spirit of violent hostility to 
Christ.” This conclusion is not inconsistent 
with a possible development hereafter, in some 
personal agent, of the antichristian spirit. 
Many parallel references to the antichris- 
tian spirit are to be found in the writin 
of St. John. The only distinction to 
noticed—if it be a distinction—is that the 
idea is symbolized in the Apocalypse, and 
Spiritualized in the Gospel and Epistles. 
Thus in Rev. xii. 9, 12, Satan is the “ Dragon” 
cast down to earth ;—in John xii. 31; xiv. 30; 
xvi. 11, he is presented as “the Prince of 
this world ;” and in 1 John ii. 13, 14; ili. 12; 
v. 18, as “ the evil one.” It is in the Epi 
however, that the idea of Antichrist is most 
clearly spiritualized. There are “ 
-antichrists” (1 John ii. 18), as there are 
“many false prophets” (1 John iv. 1); and 
“many deceivers” (2 John 7). Both in the 
Epistles and in the Apocalypse “false pro= 
phecy,” which St. John identifies with the 
antichristian tendency, has Satan for its 
source. The spirit of Antichrist proceeds 
not from God but from the world (1 John 
iv. 3, 5), for“‘to be of the world,” and “to 
be of the Devil,” are synonymous expressions 
(1 John ii. 16; iii. 8, 12). In the Apoc. the 
antichristian principle is manifested by “ false 
prophecy” ; for the second Beast (ch. xiii. rr) 
seduces the inhabitants of the earth to wor= 
ship the first Beast, working miracles after 
the manner of “the false prophets” (Matt. 
xxiv. II, 24); nay, being expressly and re= 
peatedly styled “the False Prophet” (ch. 
Xvi. 13; xix. 20; xx. to). The Antichrist 
of the first two Epistles is the “Deceiver ”;— 
and so is the “ False Prophet” of the Apoc, 
(ch. xii. 9; xiii. 14). In 1 John iv. 1, we read 
of “spirits ” of “ prophets” who are not 
“of God.” Inthe Apoc. also the Satanic dea 
ciple is likewise manifold in its mani 
tions: (1) asthe “ Dragoz” (ch. xii 17) ;—(a) 





REVELATION. XIII. 


as the Beast with “‘ Ten Horns” (ch. xiii. 1) ;— 
(3) as the Beast with “Tavo Horns” (ch. xiii. 
11) ;—(4) as the “three unclean spirits” (ch. 
xvi. 13). The “spirits” in 1 John iv. 1, who 
are not “of God,” “are gone out into the 
world ;’—in like manner, the Apocalyptic 
spirits of evil, “the spirits of devils,” “go 
forth unto the kings of the whole world” (ch. 
xvi. 14). See Introduction, § 7, III., (/). 

Mede (Works, p. 722) held the opinion that 
“the time of the end,” 2. e., the end of the two 
prophetic periods of 1290 and 1335 days 
of Dan. xii. 11, 12 was to be marked by a new 
light imparted to the Church as to the inter- 
pretation of Prophecy—for so he interpreted 
the words ‘‘ knowledge shall be increased ” 
(Dan. xii. 4). Mede further supposed that 
this “increase of knowledge” was manifested 
A.D. 1120, by the discovery in that year of a 
new principle of expounding the predictions 
relating to Antichrist, who was no longer to 
be looked for in the person of an individual 
man, but in the series of Roman Pontiffs, or 
the Papacy. ‘This “discovery” was contained 
in a treatise, to which Mede ascribed the date 
1120, entitled “Qual cosa sia I’ Antichrist ” 
—according to which Antichrist was “dis- 
covered” to bea “ cosa” (or “ thing”) and not 
a “person.” Assuming that this treatise was 
circulated between the years 1120 and 1125, 
Mede concluded that this interval of jive 
or six years must be the “time of the 
end” when the “days” of Daniel were to 
be accomplished. The document thus re- 
lied on was preserved among the relics of 
the Waldenses, and was first published by 
Joannes Paulus Perrin.! Mede states its 
substance to be that the condition of the 
Church at the time when it was written, and 
not any one ferson, was the Antichrist of 
Prophecy. 

These Waldensian relics came into the 

ssession of Sir Samuel Morland,? Envoy 
in 1655 from Oliver Cromwell to the Duke 
of Savoy, and among them was the tract 
known as the “ Nobla Leyczon,” in which 
the lines occur that caused Mede’s mistake as 
to the dare of the treatise. These lines were 
thus printed and translated by Morland :— 

' Perrin’s ‘‘Histoire des Vaudois” 
printed at Geneva, A.D. 1618. 

2 They were deposited by him in the public 
Library at Cambridge, and were for a long 
time supposed to be lost. In the search for 
them which was caused by the discussion between 
Dr. S. R. Maitland, Dr. Todd, and Dr. Gilly 
_ Fespecting Mede’s ‘‘ discovery” and his conclu- 
sion therefrom, copies of the ‘‘ Mobla Leyczon” 
were found among the Ussher MSS. in the 
Library of Trinity College, Dublin, and also at 
Geneva ; and, by the aid of these, Mede’s mis- 
take—already detected through the internal 
evidence—has been fully proved. 


was 


‘* Ben ha mil e cent an compli entierament, 
Que fo scripta lora, Car son al derier temp.” 


‘* There are already a thousand and one hundred 
years fully accomplished, 
Since it was written thus, For we are in the 
last time.” 


A typographical error in the first of these 
two lines led to Mede’s mistake, and to 
the discussion to which that mistake has 
given rise. In Morland’s copy of the “/Vodla 
Leyczon,” the line runs thus :—“ Ben ha mil e* 
cent an” &c.,—there being an erasure bee 
fore the word “ cent,” where, by the aid of a 
magnifying glass, the Arabic numeral 4, ofthe 
same form as others used in the volume, is 
visible. In another copy of the poem the 
reading is: “mil e .cccc. anz compli &c.” 
Indeed a glance at the lines quoted above will 
show that the dialect issome hundreds of years 
later than Cent. xii. Bossuet (Hist. des Varia- 
tions, Xl. 12, 125) refers to Perrin’s “ Histoire 
des Vaudois,” and observes that Peter Waldo’s 
efforts were not made until 1160; and he 
argues against the date 1120 from the fact 
that in the “ Nob/a Leyczon” a work is quoted 
“que St. Augustin a intitulé des Milpar- 
lemens, C’est-a-dire des Mille paroles” —while 
this work is really a compilation made in Cent. 
xiii, and entitled “ Milleloquium S". Augus- 
tini.” Dr. Todd (Brit. Mag., vol. xvi. p. 605) 
has pointed out that what the “ Nod/a Leyce 
zon” states as to Antichrist and the Last 
Times is taken from the speculations of the 
Abbot Joachim; he had already concluded, 
before the copies of this work were dis- 
covered, that the poem must be later than 
the first ten years of Cent. xiii :—see on this 
subject the Preface to Dr. Todd’s Work 
“The Books of the Vaudots, 1865.” 

Mr. Bradshaw, of Cambridge (quoted by 
Dr. Todd, /. ¢., p. 221) ascribes this tract 
“to the beginning of the 15th century at the 
earliest.” 


NoTE B ON VER. 3—THE HOLY ROMAN 
EMPIRE. 


Mr. Freeman in his “ Historzcal Essays” 
(London, 1871) reviews this work of Dr. Bryce. 
He writes :—“In combating the vulgar error 
that the Roman Empire came historically to 
an end in 476, though Mr. Bryce is doing exe 
cellent service to the cause of truth, he is not 
putting forth zny new discovery. Thusmuch 
Sir Francis Palgrave has already established 
for the West, and Mr. Finlay for the East” 
(p. 135). “Mr. Bryce calls all due attention 
to the fact that the event of the year 476, so 
often mistaken for a fall of the Roman Empire, 
was, in its form, a reunion of the Western 
Empire to the Eastern... . The majesty 
of Rome still lived in men’s minds; the Roman 


x X 2 


691 


692 


Emperor, the Roman Consuls, the Roman 
Senate and People still went on . . . . Unless 
we remember that the line of Emperors never 
ceased, that from 476 to 800 the Byzantine 
Cesar was always in theory, often in practice 
recognized as the lawful Lord of Rome and 
Italy, it is impossible rightly to understand 
the true significance of the assumption of the 
Empire by Charles the Great” (p. 142). 
“ During the whole of Cent. viii. the Imperial 
power in Italy had been gradually waning ... 
the practical rule of the City had been trans- 
ferred to the Frankish King. Still the tie 
was not formally severed; the image and 
superscription of Cesar still appeared on the 
coin of his Western Capital, and Pippin and 
Charles ruled, like Odoacer, by no higher 
title than that of Patrician.” [Mr. Freeman 
notes at p. 141 that there is no ancient 
authority for the statement, most unlikely in 
itself, that Odoacer assumed the title of “ King 
of Italy”]. “The accession of Eiréne filled 
up the measure of Western indignation.” 
A woman could not lawfully sit on the throne 
of the Cesars: “The throne was vacant; 
the Christian world could not remain without 
an Emperor (Chron. Moissiac. A. 801, ap. 
Pertz, Mon. Hist. Germ. i. 505); the Senate 
and People of the Old Rome .... asserted 
their dormant rights, and chose their Patri- 
cian Charles, not as the founder of a 
new Empire, not as the restorer of a fallen 
Empire, but as the lawful successor of their 
last lawful sovereign, the injured Constan- 
tine VI. This belief in the absolute continuity 
of the Empire is the key to the whole theory ; 
but it is just the point by which so many 
readers and writers break down, and fail to 
take in the true character of the election of 
Charles as it seemed to the men of his own 
time” (p. 145). ‘From the death of Charles 
himself a state of division begins . . . . Then 
came the revival under Otto the Great 
ECHR oot The Holy Roman Empire 
d now assumed essentially the same form 
which it retained down to 1806” (p. 149). 
Writers on Prophecy have not overlooked 
this fact of the permanence of the Roman 
Empire; and, from it they argue in support 
of their own theories. Thus Auberlen, having 
observed that “some find in the Fourth 
Monarchy also [of Daniel] a prophecy of the 
Papacy ”—which, he adds, “may be designated 
as the English and French view ”—proceeds 
thus: “It is a fact that the Roman Empire is 
essentially still existing in history. The old 
Roman Empire never thought of representing 
itself as a continuation of Alexander’s Uni- 
versal Monarchy ; but the Germanic Empire 
knew no greater honour than to be a Holy 
Roman Empire of a German nationality. 
And even before it was dissolved, Napoleon 
had taken up the idea of the Roman Empire; 


REVELATION. XIII. 





—his Universal Monarchy was essentially and 
avowedly Roman; his son was called King of 
Rome; his nephew, in order to found his 
power, distributed among the French army 
‘Roman Eagles.” —The Romat Empire is tne 
ideal which exerts fascinating power on the 
rulers of the world, which they are ever 
striving to realize, and will doubtless succeed 
in realizing. Ofall phenomena of history none 
bears more essential resemblance to Antichrist 
than this demonic Napoleonism, which from 
the outset identified itself with the idea of 
the Roman Empire. In like manner it is 
the aim of the Czar’s policy to surround his 
throne with the splendour of Constantinople 
and the Eastern Empire” (/. ¢., p. 221). 


NoTE C ON VER. 3—THE FIRST OF THE 
CESARS, 


The rationalistic interpretation of the 
Apocalypse assumes as a first principle that 
the “ Heads” of the Beast symbolize seven 
Roman Emperors (see on ch. xvii. 10) 
counting from Augustus as the frst of the 
series. This assumption makes Nero! to be 
the fift/ Emperor. Some count backwards 
from the particular Emperor under whom 
they assume the Apocalypse to have been 
written ; others count forwards but differ as 
to the Emperor from whom the series is to 
begin—whether, e. g., fom Julius or Octavius 
(i. e., Augustus). Some even argue a prioré 
that, inasmuch as the design of the Apocalypse 
is to describe how the contrast between the 
Kingdom of Christ and the Roman World- 
kingdom took its rise; and, since Christ was 
born under the reign of Augustus? “ Julius 
Cesar was, for the New Testament history, a 
personage of no importance at all.” (Liicke, 
s. 839°). 


1 Philostratus (vc. A.D. 217) quotes a saying 
of Apollonius of Tyana (born circ. A.D. 50) re- 
specting Nero:—‘“In my travels I have seen 
the wild beasts of Arabia and India ; but of this 
wild beast, commonly called a tyrant, I neither 
know how many 4eads he hath, otre ei -yaud- 
vuxdy te kal kapxapddouy éeorl.”—Vita, iv. 38 
(ap. Philostr. Off. p. 178, Lifs., 1709). Do not 
these words imply that Apollonius had seen the 
Apoc.? If so, the later date of the Book is 
proved, 

2 The birth of Christ under Augustus has led 
many, both in ancient and modern times, to 
count from this Emperor. Thus Clemens Al. 
tells us that some exhibit the series of Emperors 
from Augustus (¢. ¢., ‘‘from the birth of the 
Saviour”’—rijs rod Zwripos ‘yevérews) ; but 
others from I'dios "lodAsos Kaicap, ped’ by Ad- 
youoros éBaclAcvoev.— Strom. i., t. i. p. 406. 

3 Liicke quotes Tacitus, dunal., i. 4; Hist. 
i. 1; Aurelius Victor, De Cesaribus, c. i.; 
Sextus Rufus, c. ii. ; Hippolytus, De Antichr, 
c. 56; Andreas, /.¢.,p. 78 ; Malalas, Chronogr. 
ix. ; Zonaras, Anan. x. 32. 


REVELATION. XIII. 


Dusterdieck makes the further assumption 
that the Apocalypse cannot have been written 
later than the destruction of Jerusalem. He 
also relies on the words of ch. xvii. 10 (“the 
five are fallen, the ove is”), and concludes that 
this “one”—the sixth Head or Emperor— 
must be Vespasian, and that the fib is 
Nero; for he omits Galba, Otho, and Vitellius 
(see Note E on ch. xvii. 10): and thus, count- 
ing back from Nero, Augustus is the first 
Emperor. 

Reville (Essazs de Critique religteuse, 1860) 
appeals to the opening words of the Annals 
of Tacitus, where the historian, having 
glanced at the forms of government which 
had prevailed in Rome,—Kings, Consuls, the 
Dictatorship of Cinna and Sulla, &c.,—goes on 
to add: “ Pompeii Crassique potentia cito in 
Czsarem, Lepidi atque Antonii arma in 
Augustum cessere; qui cuncta, discordiis 
civilibus fessa, nomine Principis sub imperium 
adcepit.” On this Réville comments: “ Dans 
esprit de Tacite, César n’eut que le pouvoir 
de fait—la potentia; Auguste seul eut l’im- 
perium” (p. 125). The people, he continues, 
shared this opinion; for Tacitus again writes 
(Hist. i. 90) that, in the adulation paid to Otho, 
“Clamor vocesque vulgi, ex more adulandi, 
nimiz et false: quasi dictatorem Cesarem, 
aut imperatorem Augustum prosequerentur ” 
&c.-——a passage which, of itself, goes to prove 
that Julius was the first of the Imperial line.* 

If it be asked, How could the question as 
to the succession of the Roman Emperors— 
if, indeed, it ever occurred to his mind—pre- 
sent itself to St. John? one naturally inquires 
‘ How did the question actually present itself 


1 Réville proceeds :—‘‘ L’historien Florus 
(sous Trajan) reproduit la méme division de 
Phistoire romaine, faisant aussi dater d’ Auguste 
la derniére période de empire ;” and he refers 
to the Proemium of Florus which states that 
his narrative will give the period ‘* from Romu- 
lus the king” ‘‘in Casarem Augustum septin- 
gentos per annos.” ‘‘ Plus loin il [Florus] observe 
*qu’aprés le double meurtre de Pompée et de 
César le peuple romain semblait revenu 4 l’état 
de l’ancienne liberté.” Here Réville stops short 
in the middle of a sentence; for Florus writes 
thus :-— 

“Populus Romanus, Czsare et Pompeio 
trucidatis, rediisse in statum pristine libertatis 
videbatur : et redierat ssi aut Pompeius liberos, 
aut Cesar heredem reliquisst . ... Dum 
Sextus paterna repetit, trepidatum toto mari: 
dum Octavius mortem patris ulciscitur, iterum 
fuit movenda Thessalia” (iv. c. 3, p. 464, 
Amst. 1702). And shortly before, Florus had 
written: ‘‘Czsar in patriam victor invehitur 
. . Itaque non ingratis civibus omnes unum in 
principem congesti honores , . novissime, du- 
bium an ipso volente, oblata pro Rostris ab 
Antonio consule, regni insignia.” —/6. iv. c. 2, 
p- 462 (see Note D on ch. ii. 10). 


to the mmd ofa Jew of that age’? We find 
that the Jewish historian Josephus leaves no 
doubt as to his opinion; and the value of his 
opinion will be recognized by any one who 
remembers how closely he was connected 
with the Romans. Josephus clearly informs 
us that Augustus was the second Roman 
Emperor; that Tiberius was the ¢éird; that 
Caius (Caligula) was the fourth. Nay, in 
an edict of Augustus granting privileges to 
the Jews, Augustus styles Julius his “ father,” 
and also “ Emperor”—eri rod éuod martpés, 
Avroxpdatopos Kaioapos.— Antt. xvi. 6, 2. 

Turning from Josephus to the Roman 
historian Suetonius (born circ. A.D. 70), we 
find that his work “The Lives of the Twelve 
Czsars” begins with the life of Juiius and 
ends with the life of Domitian, including the 
lives of Galba, Otho, and Vitellius.? 

Among the poems of Ausonius (¢ire. A.D. 
370) occur the verses entitled “De xii 
Cezsaribus,” which begin as follows :— 


‘* Primus regalem patefecit Julius aulam 
Cesar; et Augusto nomen transcripsit et 
arcem.”” 


The historian Dion Cassius (circ. A.D. 220) 
records that when Octavius had learned the 
contents of the will of Julius he at once 
assumed the name of Cesar; and when this 
name and the succession had been ratified 
“according to the usual custom,” from that 
time forth he was styled Gaius Julius Cesar 
Octavianus. “I accordingly” writes Dion, 
—eya S€ ovK Oxraoviavoy, adda Kaicapa 
avTov, Ort mace Tois TO Tov ‘Pwopaloy Kpdros 


! Josephus writes :—diadéxera: 58 xal todror 
“Avvios “Potos, é¢ od 5h wal TeAevTa Kaioap 
[sci2. Augustus], debrepos piv ‘Pwpatwy Aito- 
kpdtwp yevéuevos.—diadexerar 88 TH Kaloaps 
Thy 7yeuovlay, TiBépios Népwy, tpires ovros 
%5n Avroxpdtwp.—TiBépios 5 tére toy Tdiov 
Gmodeltas diddoxov.—Tdios 5 Fy Adroxpdrwp 
tétaptos.—Anit. Fud. xvili. 2, 2; 6, 10. 

2 This fact is important as bearing on the 
tationalistic interpretation of ch. xvii. 10; and 
Liicke attempts to evadeits force by quoting the 
epithet applied by Suidas (who wrote circ. A.D. 
950) to the ‘‘ Lives” of Suetonius, viz., Suyyen- 
kody Kaodpwy ;—clearly an erroneous epithet it 
he meant the kindred of Julius, for the Julian 
line was extinguished with Nero, and the new 
dynasty of the Flavii began with Vespasian. 
What Suidas did mean seems plain from the 
only other words which refer to the ‘‘ Lives,” 
and which follow this title, viz., wepiéxer 5¢ wal 
Blous kal d:adoxas ad’tay amd lovAlov éws Aope- 
tTiavov.— Art. Tpdykvados. The idea ascribed 
to Suidas, and the foundation of the rational- 
istic theory seem to rest on the later custom, 
which dates, as Gibbon (ch. iii.) observes, from 
Hadrian (A.D. 117), of reserving the title of 
Augustus for the monarch, and of applying that 
of Casar to his relations. 


693 


094 


AapBavovow 1 mpoonyopia avtn ekvevixnkey, 
ovop.dow (lib. xlvi. 47, p. 484, ed. Reimarus, 
Hamb., 1750). And in accordance with this 
statement Dion shortly afterwards styles 
Julius the firs‘ and Augustus the second 
Cesar.) 

The testimony of a Roman Emperor 
ought to be conclusive as to the succession 
of his predecessors. Among the writings of 
the Emperor Julian—‘the Apostate” (A.D. 
360)—occurs the fable of “ The Cesars,” in 
which the gods of Olympus receive the 
Czsars at a banquet; the guests appear, and 
we read as follows: as d€ kai Td Tov Karodpwv 
ouvekporeiro cupmdctor, eianet mpaTos IovALos 
Kaicap. Silenus looks at him, and addresses 
some jesting remarks to Jupiter; and then ; 
maifovros €Tt TavTa Tov Setdnvov, OxraB.avos 
emewoepxeTat, » « + « Tpiros cmesoédpapev 
avrois TiBepios, . . . . Then follow Caligula, 
the fourth Cesar (referred to as 6npiov 
srovnpov), and Claudius, the #/t4; and then 
émevoepxetat héyortt TS Seiknvd, Népoy pera 
THs KOapas, kK. T.. (Ofpp., ed. Lips. 1696, pp. 
308-310). Or to give the authority ofa writer 
of the following century (A.D. 444), in the 
Chronicle of Prosper of Aquitain (ap. Thesaur. 
Antt, Rom., ed. Grevius, t. xi. p. 282) we 
read: “Ex hoc loco continua Romanorum 
adnotantur imperia, et regnat apud eos primus 
omnium C. Julius Casar ... . Idibus 
Martiis C. Julius Cesar in curia occiditur. 
Cesar Augustus .... annis lvi.” In the 
Chronicon Paschale (written circ. A.D. 630) we 
read :—6 d€ “IovAwos Kaioap mpatos “Papaiwv 
npé€On povapxns Bacwres (i. p. 355). ‘Pwpaiov 
Oevrepos eBacihevoev Kaicap S<Bacros Av= 
yovotos (4b. p. 360). And still later:— 
Georgius Syncellus (circ. A.D. 800) :—'Pa- 
paiwy povapxns Tdios “IovAuos Kaicap érn é. 
+» + Tovrou xAnpovdpos viobernOels nv aiTa 
(@v7t "OxraBiayos Kaioap . . Aevrepos 
“Pwpaiey povapyns Kaicap S¢Bacros ’Oxra- 
ovos, 6 kal Avyovatos emtxAnbeis (ed. Dindorf, 
vol-i. pp. 574-577)- 

In fine Petavius--no mean authority—com- 
menting on a catalogue of Epiphanius (De 
Ponder. et Mensur., c. xi., t. ii. p. 169) counts 
Augustus as the second Emperor (#., p. 384): 
and to sum up in the words of an unexception- 
able witness who here differs from the great 
majority of rationalistic critics; M. Renan 
writes (L’ Antechrist, p. 407): “ Julius Cesar 
is always counted by Josephus as Emperor. 
Augustus is for him the second, Tiberius the 
third, Caius the fourth. Suetonius, Aurelius 
Victor, Julian, count in the same way.” 

The conclusion may be thus stated:— 


1 oitw yap mpoopirAGs TH Kaloaps TP mporéepyr 
wal &’ excivoy kal TG devtépw of Tapceis clxor, 
Gore wai lovAidroAw opas am’ aitod uetovoudoa, 


bb. xlvii. 26, p. 508. 


REVELATION. XIII. 






Mommsen' begins his chapter on “* The old Re- 
Dublic and the new Monarchy,” as follows; 
“The new Monarch of Rome, the first ruler 
of the whole domain of Romano-Hellenic 
civilization, Gaius Julius Cesar, was in his 

sixth year (born 12 July, 652 ?) when the battle 
of Thapsus placed the decision of the future 
of the world in his hands” (p. 450). “ Caesar 
was invested with the title of Imperator for 
life, B.c. 708” (p. 468)... . “ We find on 
Czsar’s coins, alongside of the dictatorship, 
the title of Imperator prevailing, and nm 
Czsar’s law as to political crimes,the Monarch 
seems to have been designated by this name; 
and, what is quite decisive, the authority of 
Imperator was given to Cesar not merely for 

his own person, but also for his bodily or 
adopted descendants” (p. 470)... . “‘ Cesar, 
very judiciously connected himself with Servius 
Tulius, in the same way as subsequently 
Charlemagne connected himself with Cesar, 
and Napoleon attempted at least to connect 
himself with Charlemagne” (p. 173).... 

“ As a worker and creator he still, after well 
nigh two thousand years, lives in the memory 

of the nations,—the first, and the unique 
Imperator Cesar” (p. 558). 

To the same effect Dean Merivale writes: 
“It is easy to say that it was not Cesar but 
Augustus after him that established the Roman 
Empire. Nevertheless the man who first 
conceives and executes a great design may 
command more attention from mankind than 
one who works upon his lines, and brings his 
designs to completion; and so it was that from 
generation to generation men have been wont 
to regard the immortal Julius as the first of 
the Cesars, and the first of the Roman 
Emperors.” The Roman Triumvirates, p. 169. 

In his history of ‘Tse Romans under the 
Empire’ Dean Merivale writes: “The stock 
of the Julii, refreshed in vain by grafts from 
the Octavii, the Claudii, and the Domitii, 
had been reduced to his [Nero’s] single person, 
and with Nero the adoptive race of the great 
dictator was extinguished. The first of the 
Cesars [Julius] had married four times, the 
second thrice, the third twice, the fourth 
thrice again, the fifth six times, and lastly, 
the sixth [Nero] thrice also.”—vol. vi. p. 365. 


1 The History of Rome, vol. iv., part tig 
Engl. transl., London, 1871. 

? Augustus inherited under the will of his 
great-uncle Julius. Suetonius writes: ‘‘ Ipse 
Augustus nihil amplius quam equestri familia 
ortum se scribit ... Octavius pater... morte 
obiit repentina superstitibus liberis . . . item 
Augusto, quos ex Atia tulerat. Atia M. Atio 
Balbo et Julia sorore C. Czesaris genita est. 
. . . Infanti [Augusto] cognomen Thurino in- 
ditum est . . . Postea Ceesaris et deinde Augusti 
Cognomen assumpsit, alterum testamento majoris 
avunculi,” &c. 


REVELATION. XIII. 


Nore D ON VER. 5.—THE THREE GREAT 
APOCALYPTIC PERIODS. 


As to whether these three periods, of 42 
Months, 1260 Days, and 34 Times, assumed to 
be equal in duration, are successive, or con- 
temporaneous, writers differ :— 

Godet (p. 360) makes the three years and 
a half to be the duration of the exile of the 
“Woman” (ch. xii. 14) which corresponds to 
the forty-two months of the reign of Anti- 
christ (ch. xiii. 5), and to the 1260 days 
during which the Two Witnesses prophesy 
(ver. 3): “ These three periods are really 
one and the same, applied successively, under 
these three forms, to the Church during the 
time of her emigration,—to Israel during the 
days of its future restoration purely external 
and national [see on ch. xi. 13 ],—and to Anti- 
christ during the time of his dominion.” 

Alford notes : ‘“ We have no right to suppose 
them, in any two given cases, to be identical, 
unless the context requires such a supposi- 
tion.” Thus, in ch. xi. 2, 3, “it is plain that such 
a view [their identity] is not required by the 
context”; “the two periods are equal in du- 
ration, but independent of one another ” :—and 
he adds on ver. 3: “It is a pure assumption 
that the two periods, the 42 months and the 
1260 days, coincide over the same space of 
time.” See also De Burgh, quoted in Note B 
on ch. xi. 2. 

To the same effect Burger notes: —The 
1260 days of ch. xi. 3 are not the same period as 
the 42 months of ver. 2 and the 1260 days of 
ch. xii. 6,—but an equal period preceding this. 
If, then, the 1260 days of ch. xii. 6, or the 42 
months of ch. xiii. 5 (= 32 years) be taken 
together with the other 1260 days of ch. xi. 3 
they make a period of seven years, divided into 
two equal parts. The jirst half is occupied 
with the preaching of the “Tavo Witnesses.” 
With the victory of the Beast (ch. xi. 7),—who 
is proved by ch. xiii. to be the Antichrist,—its 
second half opens; i.e., the 42 months of ch. xi. 
3, or the time of the decided ascendancy of 
Antichrist as described in ch. xiii. 5. Both 
halves together give the /ast “week” predicted 
in Dan. ix. 27. In Rev. xi. 1, 2, is described 
the state of the Church under the seventh 
‘Trumpet—see ch. x. 6, 7. From Rev. xi. 3- 
12 we learn what will immediately introduce 
this last period, and, at the same time, reveal 
what was not revealed under the first six 
Trumpets—namely, the Visitation with which 
God will strengthen His Church and vouch- 
safe the last testimony to the unbelieving 
world, before man’s enmity to heaven has 
reached its utmost intensity.. This /atter 
Vision accordingly that of the “Two Wit- 
nesses "—falls under the Second Woe, before 
the seventh Trumpet (ch. xi. 15) ; andthe 42 
weeks of ch. xi. 2, and ch. xiii, 5, beginning 


with the close of the 1260 days of the prophe- 
sying of the “ Two Witnesses” and with the 
victory of the Beast (ch. xi. 7) over them, are 
included under the seventh Trumpet. This 
result, adds Burger, removes the difficulty of 
understanding how the victory of the Beast 
could take place at the close of the 42 months 
of his rule, which would be the case if the 
spaces of time described in wv. 2, 3, were the 
same: one perceives, too, why the “ Little 
Book” (see on ch. x. 2) should form a part 
of the “ Sealed Book” of ch. v., as relating to 
the state of the Church in “the /as¢ times ;” 
while light is also thrown on ch. x. 11, because 
ch. xi. 1-12 certainly contains a prophecy 
“concerning many nations.” Cf. the intere 
pretation by Bisping of Dan. ix. 27, referred 
to on ch. ix. 12: In the midst of the [last or 
seventieth| “ Week” of Dan. ix. 27—from 
which time the 42 months begin to rua— 
Jerusalem “shall be trodden under foot.” 

Alf. concludes that the explanation of this 
period is “still among the things unknown to 
the Church ”;—“ no solution at all approache 
ing to a satisfactory one, has ever yet been 
given of any one of these periods.” 


NoTE E on cH. XI. 5.—“‘ THE EDICT OF 
PHOCAS.” 


Gregory the Great (Bishop of Rome A.D. 
590-604) was succeeded by Sabinian who 
held the see for only five months and sixteen 
days. After a vacancy of nearly a year, un- 
accounted for by Roman annalists, Boniface 
III.,a Roman Deacon who had represented 
Gregory in a mission to the Court of Con= 
stantinople, became Pope. One object of 
this mission had been to obtain the resigna- 
tion by the Patriarch of Constantinople of 
the title of “(Ecumenical ’ or “Universal 
Bishop.” ‘This title was first used in Cent. v., 
and owed its origin to the customary extravae 
gance of Eastern courtesy (see Gibbon on 
Oriental titles, /. c., ch. xvii.). It appears to have 
been given for the first time at the second 
Ephesine Council! by a bishop Olympius to 
Dioscorus, the Eutychian Patriarch of Alexe 
andria (Mansi, vi. p. 855). At the Council 
of Chalcedon (a.D. 451), in the complaint of 
two Deacons of Alexandria against Dios- 
corus, Pope Leo is styled ‘“ Oixoupevixés 
dpxverioxoros ” (Mansi, vi. pp. 1005, 1012). 

The Emperor Justinian had given the same 
title to the Bishops of Constantinople (Gie- 
seler, Kirch. Gesch. i. 2.,8. 678); and Pelagius 
Il. (A.D. 578-590) and Gregorv the Great 
both protested against it. 


1 a.D. 449, ‘*The Robber-Synod.’ The 
words are: ‘‘Concilio cui presul et primus 
est sanctissimus pater noster et universalis 
archiepiscopus Dioscorus.” 


695 


696 


Writers on prophecy assume that the Em- 
perer Phocas (A.D. 606), at the instance of 
Pope Boniface III., issued an edict to the 
effect “that the Apostolic See of Rome was 
the head (‘Caput’) of all churches, for that 
the Church of Constantinople had taken to 
itself the title of frst (‘Prima’) of all 
churches.” This statement is found for the 
first time in a single, short, and unconnected 
passage in the history of the Lombards 
written at the close of Cent. viii. by Paul 
Warnfried, commonly called “ Paulus Dia- 
conus” (ap. Muratori, Script. Rer. Ital., i. 
465). We next meet it, a hundred years 
later, in Beda, copied literally from Paul 
(De Temp. Ratione, ed. Giles, vi. 323). Again, 
after the lapse of three centuries, we find 
it inserted verbatim by Anastasius the Li- 
brarian in his lives of the Popes (Vita 
Bonifacit III.). After him it was copied by 
Siegebert of Gembloux in a treatise entitled 
€Chronographia:’ and from these works it 
has been simply repeated by all subsequent 
writers. Mr. Hallam (Middle Ages, roth ed., 
ii. 160) thus comments on the use which has 
been made of this passage :—“I observe that 
some modern publications annex considerable 
importance to a supposed concession of the 
title ‘ Universal Bishop,’ made by the Emperor 
Phocas in 606 to Boniface III., and even 
appear to date the Papal supremacy from this 

ch.” Perhaps, he adds, some loose ex- 
pressions of Mosheim (Ecc/. Hist. ii. 169) 
may have led to this mistake; “but there 
are several strong objections to our con= 
sidering this as a leading fact, much less as 
marking an era in the history of the Papacy: 
—(1) Its truth, as commonly stated, is more 
than questionable. The Roman Pontiffs 
Gregory I. and Boniface III. had been vehe- 
mently opposing the assumption of this title 
by the Patriarch of Constantinople, not as 
due to themselves, but as one to which no 
bishop could legitimately pretend. There 
would be something almost ridiculous in the 
Emperor’s immediately conferring an appel- 
lation on themselves which they had just 
disclaimed.” (2) “The concession of Phocas 
could have been of no validity in Lombardy, 
France, or other Western countries, where 
nevertheless the Papal supremacy was incom- 
parably more established than in the East.” 
- --. (4) “ Whatever the title ‘ Universal 
Bishop’ meant, the Patriarchs of Constan- 
tinople,” proceeds Mr. Hallam, “had borne it 
before, and continued to bear it ever after- 
wards (Dupin, De Ant. Discipl. p. 329):”— 
e. g. Heraclius, successor of Phocas, con- 
tinued to give the title to the Patriarch of 
Constantinople :—see Gieseler, ib., s., 680. 

Mr. Hallam, indeed, himself is in error 
when he to state that Popes Pela- 
gius II. and Gregory I. disclaimed the title 


REVELATION. XIII, 


‘Universal Bishop, “though it bad been 
adopted by some towards Lev the Great in the 
Council of Chalcedon (Fleury, t. viii. p. 95).” 
In these words is repeated a mistake as ancient 
as the time of Gregory the Great who him- 
self believed it (see his Epistles, lib. v. 18, 20, 
41; Vili. 30). The title “Head of the Uni- 
versal Church,” was, indeed, inserted by the 
Roman Legates in the Latin version of the 
Acts of the Council, but the original records, in 
Greek, give it no countenance. In the re- 
cord of the voting concerning Dioscorus we 
read—6 dy.@tatos kai paxapitaros apxtemt= 
aKorros THs peyadns Kat mpecBurépas “Popns 
Aéwv (Actioiii., Mans, vi. p. 1048); while in the 
Latin version of the Acts which Leo sent to 
the Bishops of Gaul, the words appear thus: 
“ Sanctus et beatissimus Papa, caput universalis 
ecclesia” (Leonis Epp. 103 (82)). The fable 
which the “ Catechismus Romanus” retains, 
that St. Cyril, at the Council of Ephesus, 
named the Bishop of Rome “ Archiepiscopum 
totius orbis terrarum Patrem et Patriarcham” 
(pars ii., c. 7. qu. 24 § 4), first appeared in the 
“Aurea Catena” of Thomas Aquinas on 
St. Matt. xvi. 18. “It is even laid down” 
observes Mr. Hallam, “in the Decretum of 
Gratian that the Pope is not styled ‘Universal,’ 
—‘nec etiam Romanus Pontifex universalis 
appellatur,—though some refer its assumption 
to ine ix. (Nouv. Tr. de Diplom., t. % 
Pp. 93 ” 

On the words of Paul the Deacon quoted 
already to the effect that, in the year 606, 
Phocas styled the See of Rome “ ead” of the 
churches, because the Church of Constanti- 
nople had the title “frst” of the churches, 
Mr. Hallam says: “This was probably the 
exact truth: and the subsequent additions 
were made by some zealous partisans of Rome, 
to be seized hold of in a later age, and turned 
against her by some of her equally zealous 
enemies ” (zdid.) 


NOTE F ON VER. 10.—THE TEXT OF 
VER. Io. 


The Textus Receptus reads :—<i tis aixpa- 
Nociav cuvdye, eis aixpadociay wrayer 
The Cod. Aes. (A) Teadag et ms els 
aixparwoiay, eis aixpatwoiavy vmdye. This 
reading of A, writes Dr. Scrivener, “though 
apparently unsupported except by a Slavonic 
MS., and the best copies of the Vulgate," looks 
more probable” than that of 8, B, C, P.— 


Inirod., p. 568. The old transl. in Irenzus 
gives :— “Si quis in captivitatem duxerit, in 


captivitatem ibit” (4dv. Her. v. 28, p. 326). 
The Armenian Version, notes Tisch., gives: 


1 The Vulg. gives: ‘‘Qui in captivitatem 
duxerit, in captivitatem vadet.” Tregelles gives 
the more correct form: ** Qui in captivitatem, 
vadit in captivitatem.” 








REVELATION. XIII. 


—“Sunt enim quidam qui in captivitatem 
tradentur;” and it goes on: “et sunt quidam 
qui gladio morientur, et sunt quidam qui pst 
ipsos occident.” He gives as the Coptic:— 
“ Ducens in captivitatem, ingrediatur.”* 

The MS. used by Erasmus merely read : 
el tis aiypadwciay ovvdye. Er. completed 
the clause, but altered the reading given him 
by Valla, viz—ei ris yet aixuadwoiay irayey 
as the Complutensian reads. 

Hengstenberg supports the veading of 
the Text. Rec., quoting 1 Macc. xiv. 7: 
kai ouvayayev aixpadociay ro\Anv— it core 
responds,” he writes, “to the Hebrew moan 
m3, and denotes the bringing together of cap- 
tives (Luke xxi. 24) for the purpose of trans- 
amb them from their own to a foreign 

d:” cf, Amosi. 6. Bleek in like manner takes 
the abstract as put for the concrete (“So 
jemand Gefangene fuhret, der wandert in 
Gefangenschaft),” referring the words to the 
Beast and his adherents. Renan to the same 
effect translates: “ Celui qui fait des captifs 
sera captif 4 son tour.”—p. 412. 

De Wette rejects the different readings 
proposed: “Perhaps the author wrote, «i 
Tis eis aixp., eis aixu., and the ellipsis was 
filled up by different glosses.” 


Nore G ON CH. XII. 18.—THE NUMBER OF 
THE BEAST. 


I. According to St. Irenzus Antichrist sums 
up in himself all the wickedness of former 
ages both before and after the Deluge; “the 
number of his name,” therefore, is suitably 
set forth as 666 (xaradAnA@s ovv Kai TO Gvopa 
aitov éfe tov apiOuoyv x&-'). Thus Noah 
was 600 years old when the Deluge came 
(Gen. vii. 6). In after times Nebuchad- 
nezzar’s image was in height three score (60) 
cubits, and in breadth six (6) cubits.’— 
Dan. iii. 1. Accordingly the 600 years of Noah, 
together with the numbers (60 and 6) denot- 
ing the height and breadth of the image, signify 
the number of Antichrist’s name. The num- 
ber in Rey. xiii. 18, adds Irenzus (4dv. 
Her. v. 29, 30) teaches us that the num- 
ber of the name of the Beast exhibits, 
according to the computation of the Greeks, 
by the letters which are in it, 600 and 
60 and 6:—“ Some persons, however, have, 
through error, subtracted 50 from the 
middle number of the name (ovx oida mas 
é€adhadnoay tives éxaxodovOncarres iStaricpa, 
Kat Tov pécov 7Oérnaav apiOpoy Tov dvdéparos, 
¥ Widicpa bedorres, kai avti trav éé Sexadar, 


! Griesbach gives as the reading of the Coptic 


and Slavonic, ef tis aixuadwciay irdye, and as 


the reading of the Syr., ef tis aixuadwolay 
éraye: cis aixuarwciay le 


play dexdda Bovddpuevor eivac); but this was 
the fault of the scribes, as usually happens 
when numbers are set forth by etters, and 
when the Greek letter denoting 60 (£) is 
altered into the Greek letter Idta denoting ro 
(«). Certain persons have even dared to look 
for a name represented by the false number 
(€rdAunoav Kai Ovoua ava(yreiy exov 7 v 
erdaduevoy kat Sinuaptnpevoy apiOudv); be- 
coming liable to the punishment of him who 
adds or takes away aught from Scripture (Rev. 
xxii. 18, 19). Irenzus then proceeds to state 
sundry explanations which had, in his time, 
been proposed ; among which he gives La- 
TINUS? observing :—‘‘AATEINOS nomen habet 
sexcentorum sexaginta sex numerum: et 
valde verisimile est ... Latini enim sunt qui 
nunc regnant.”—id., p. 329. If, he adds (in 
the passage No. (10), quoted in the Introduce 
tion, § 2, a), it were right at the present 
time to proclaim openly the name of Anti- 
christ, it would have been spoken by him 
who beheld the Visions of the Apocalypse,— 
“nomen autem ejus tacuit.” Canon Farrat 
(The Expositor, May 1881, p. 345), apparently 
in illustration of this remark, writes: “ Jose- 
phus was in high favour, first with Poppcea 
and then with the Flavian dynasty, yet he stops 
abruptly in his explanation of the prophecies 
of Daniel, with a mysterious hint that he does 
not deem it prudent to say more,—‘ Daniel 
did also declare the meaning of the stone to 
the King: but I do not think proper to relate 
it.’—Anit. x. 10, § 4.” 

R. Fleming (/c., p. 30) observes “ that 
even the Hebrew contains the number 666, 
in the numerical letters thereof, whether we 
make use of N10 Romana, scil. Sedes, or 
wry Romanus vel Latinus.” From the 
number being found in Aazveivos Irenzus 
“concluded that he was to be a Roman.” 
Thus, = 200 + 1=6 + D=40 + *= 10 
+4 Io +N= 400) = 666. And again (4 
= 200 — BD = 40 + Y= Jo + J = 50 
+1= 6 +¥Y¥ = 300) = 666. “And 
whereas Bellarmin objects that Latinus should 
be rendered by a single Jota and not by 4, 


1 Dr. Scrivener (2. ¢., pp. 450, ), aptl 
illustrates this alteration of fre ee e ae ee 
ing as EBdouqKovra ef, for diaxdoia: éBdourjKovta 
€g, in Acts xxvii. 37; where the “ difference 
between B and the Received Text would consist 
of the insertion or the contrary of the letter w: 
whether in fact the Evangelist wrote woos or 
cos, ‘ about 76’ or ‘276’.” 

2 The word Zat#inus has been objected to, 
because the term had no existence in the first 
century except in the poetry and local 
graphy of the Campagna of Rome ; and, aa thee 
name of a language, was utterly unknown in 
any form within the Apostolic sphere—see for 
example Luke xxiii. 38 (‘Payaixois); John xix. 
20 (‘Pwyuaiorh). 


As 


698 


he is exceedingly mistaken: for not only Ire- 
nzus renders the word thus, but all the Greeks 
do the same ”—e.g. ’Avroveivos, SaBeivos. 

Of all the solutions current in his time 
Irenzus! prefers TEITAN, a word which con- 
sists of six letters, of two syllables—each con- 
sisting of three letters, and which may well 
designate Antichrist, as being the name of 
one of the giants who assailed the gods. For 
this last reason modern writers (Wetstein,? 
Knittel) have adopted it; and also from its 
similarity to “Titus,” the name of the con- 
queror of Jerusalem. The name Titan is 
also mentioned by Victorinus, as being a 
name “quem gentiles Solem, Phebumque 
*ppellant.” Victorinus is also made to add 
that if we use Latin letters we get per anti- 
brasin “ Diclux” (D=500, l=1, C=100, 

=50, V=5, X = 10)—“id quod Grece 
sonat Te:rdy, nempe id quod Latine dicitur 
Diclux, quo nomine per antiphrasin expresso 
intelligimus Antichristum.” This suggestion 
of Diclux is a senseless interpolation; and 
the interpolator, whoever he was, was so 
ignorant as to make Victorinus, who lived 
circ. A.D. 294, also give as a solution Gensertc 
(A.D. 429). Bengel indeed tells us that it 
was Ambrosius Autpertus (circ. A.D. 770) 
who composed DICLVX. out of DCLXVI. 
—the Roman numerals denoting 666. 

Among the names given by Andreas, as if 
after Hippolytus, is Bevédixroo. Andreas might 
indeed have heard of Benedict of Nursia (A.D. 
530); but, as Bengel points out in his Gzomon, 
this name, signifying “The Blessed ”—er 


1 Hippolytus (De Antichristo, c. 50, ed. 
Fabric. p. 25) also writes :—7oAAa yap cvpicko- 
bev ovduata ToiTy TH &piOus iodWnpa mepiexd- 
neva, and, following his master Irenzus (see 
Photius, Cod. 121), he gives Tertay, Evdv6as, 
Aareivos, as his solutions. Hippolytus (‘‘ An- 
colitus,” Zc., p. 26: see Note C on ch. xii. 3) also 
adopts the reading 666; and adds to other ex- 
planations the word Aavriadoc, 

? Wetstein notes :—‘‘ Andreas: Terrav ka? 
‘Immddutov. Hesychius: Terravy .. . . Td Tod 
éytixplotov bvoua. Beda : ‘Hic numerus apud 
Grecos in nomine Titanis, id est gigantis, di- 
citur inveniri’ [viz T=300+ E=5+I1= 
10+ T= 300+ A=1+N = 50= 666; and 
Beda adds: ‘ Hocsibi nomen Antichristus, usurp- 
atum ire putatur de quo scriptum est exu/tavit ut 
gigas ad currendam viam,’ G&c.). Eleganter 
[continues Wetstein] et apposite Ioannes Titum 
Flavium Vespasianum patrem et filios hoc nomine 
designat. Convenit nomen Te:rdy prenomini ip- 
sorum 7ifus. Resipsaetiam convenit. Titanes 
tuerunt Sceoudxoi, tales etiam Vespasiani.” 

The idea of getting the reading 616 by dropping 
the final 3 in Nero’s name, is not a discovery of 
modern rationalists ; for Wetstein goes on to note: 
**Sin autem ex aliorum codicum lectione pre- 
feras 616, invenies hunc numerum demta litera 

trema N in voce Te:rd, que TZitum clarius 

esignat.” 


REVELATION. XIII. 






antiphrasin, “ The Cursed”—1s an interpola- 
tion made for the purpose of bringing in the 

name of Pope Benedict IX. (A.D. 1033-1044). 
The date of this Pope being thus 1000 years 
after the Passion, his name, accordingly, gave 
si “~ ee me Kingdom of the Beast (ch. xx. 
7). Aret C5, D> BB ives 6 Nuxnrng, 

“The Conqueror,” a ciel by Stern, 
_ Here it should be noted that it was only 
in the later written Greek character that 
final o became s (o really denotes 200 ; and 
that s is to be distinguished from s’—originally 
used for the numeral 6, but afterwards asa 
short form of or. Hence we may see the 
error of Salmasius and Grotius, who think 
that St. John referred to “Ulpius T ”(rajanus), 
in Greek OdAmuos, Ubpiost,— viz. (0 = 70 +u= 
400 +A=30 + r=80 + t=10 +o=7o+ 
=6)=666:! 

II. The solution “Nero Czsar”—the name 
being written in Hebrew letters as app 3 
(=666), or app 171) (=616)—has been men- 
tioned above in the note on this verse. The 
mode of writing this name in the Hebrew of St. 
John’s day would be “pp jy3 (see Thalm. 
Babyl., Gittin, fol. 56). The name “Czsar” 
(nD) is found without quiescents in the inscrip- 
tions of Palmyra of Cent. iii. (Vogulé, Syrie cen- 
trale, Inscr. semit., pp. 17, 26); but the Naba- 
thean inscription of Hebron which belongs to 
A.D. 47, presents pp (Vogiié, i., p. 100). 
Renan observes: “ The omission of the » may 
appear strange in the first century ; it is pro- 
bable that the author has designedly suppressed 
it in order to have a symmetrical cypher é£axé- 
cot éEnxovra €€ With the’ he would have 
had 676”—p. 416.7 In consequence of this 
difficulty, Ewald (s. 263) explains “ Cesar of 
Rome,” and writes O19 ID'p,—(p=100 + 9 = 
Io + D = 60+ 1 = 200) = 370 + (1 = 200 
+1=6+0D = 40) = 246; and thus gets 
37° + 246 = 616,—the number indicated by 
the reading which Irenzus rejected. 

The reference to Rome in Hebrew letters 
has re since been meg e ar in raphe than 
one form owing to the diffic oO i 
that such a group of letters ig al be 


1 The commentary ascribed to Tichonius 
(see Note A on ch. vi.) adopts the reading 616, 
We there read (ap. Of. S. August., t. iil. p. i. 
App., col. 154, Ant. 1700): ‘‘ Vumerus, inquit, 
ojus est sexcenti sedecim. Quem faciamus secundum 
Greecos maxime quia ad Asiam scribit, ef egv, 
inquit, a e w. ‘Sexcenti et sedecim’ Grecis 
literis sic fiant xis’. Quee note solute, numerus 
est: redactze autem in monogrammum et notam 
faciunt et numerum et nomen. Hoc signum 
Christi intelligitur, et ipsius ostenditur simili- 
tudo, quam in veritate colit ecclesia.” 

2 Ewald, however, refers to the Syriac, and 
also to Jewish writings (cf. Josepp6n, 2, 23, 
Pp pe Br.) for the form pp as well as 1D‘) 
—s, 263. 


REVELATION. XIII. 


used: eg. nn = “ Roman” Beast (nn), 
or Kingdom (n\99~D):—so Jurieu, Piscator, 
Launay, Daubuz, Osiander;—or = AD 
3737) “excelsa et preampla:”—so Vitringa, 
(p. 633). Zillig’s solution is the most elaborate 
of all:—The Rabbinical title of the Anti- 
Messias is Armillus,? a name which 1s equl- 
valent to Balaam (see Note B on ch. ii. 6). 
Accordingly Zullig takes for the number the 
words “ Balaam, son of Beor, the soothsayer ”— 
DDIpA ya 2 oyda, from which he omits } 
twice (Num. xxiv. 3, 15), as well as the 
art. 11; and giving their values to the remain- 
ing letters he gets 666. (Mr. Elliott gives a 
solution, “suggested by a friend,” in Arabic 
characters, which signify Catoolikee Lateen). 

III. The Latin solutions are comparatively 
few: e.g. that ascribed to Bishop Bedell— 
PAVLO V. VICEDEO, (i.e., ‘in the time of 
Paul V. Vicegerent of God’). Roman Catholic 
writers of course retorted: e.g. “ Luther” gave 
the number, under his early name “ Martin 
Lauter ;”—or “ Joannes Calvinus ;”—or “ Beza 
antitheos,” counting at pleasure according 
to Saxon, or Greek, or Hebrew numerals. 
Thus “ Martin Lauter” is represented as fol- 
lows by Feuardentius (p. 200) in his notes on 
Irenzus (v. 30)—(M=30+ A=1+ R= 
80 + T=100 + I=9 + N=40)=260 + (L 
=20 +A=1+ V=200+ T =100+ E=5+ 
R=80) = 406; and hence 260 + 406 = 666, 
where the letters of the Roman alphabet are 
counted, as in the Greek, by units, decads, 
hundreds. The same name reads in Hebrew 
characters, under the form sndy,— 5 = 200 
+n=400+ 5 =30+ 1=6 +5 =30= 666. 
(See Belarmin., De Rom. Poni. ili. 10). 

To give a few other examples :— 

Weyers:—Idios Kaioap, Caius Cesar, or 
Caligula. Zuschlag (reading 616) :—Aios 
Kaicap, the Divine Cesar. Gensler :—Julian 
the Apostate, “Arosarjo. Gensler takes an era 
called after some man or men, “ for it is the 


1 Daubuz observes that the Harlot’s name 
§* Mystery,” in ch. xvii. 5, in Hebrew 11ND, gives 
the same result. 

7 Canon Farrar (/c., p. 336) states that in 
the Talmud ‘“‘the Emperor Caligula is called 
Armillus because of the ‘bracelets’ (armil/e) 
which he had the folly to wear in public.” No 
other reference however is given for this state- 
ment ; it resembles the origin of the name Cali- 
gula (ca/iga). Pliny (H. N. xxxiii. 2, 37) says that 
the Emperors conferred the armz//a on soldiers 
of merit, who were citizens :—“ armz//as civibus 
dedere quas non dabant externis.” Suetonius 
indeed says that Caligula “ manuleatus et armz/- 
fatus in publicum processit” (Calig., c. 52); 
just as he mentions that Nero was accompanied 
by “armillata et phalerata turba” (/Vero, c. 30); 
but the historian makes no mention of a ame 
derived from avmil/a. Tacitus says nothing of 
such a name. 


number of a man;” and he takes the era 
of the Seleucidz, which began B.c. 31%. 
To this number he adds 355 which gives, 
according to him the date of Julian. The 
Vandal Genseric, Tevonpixdo (A.D. 429) is also 
named ;—Mohammed, in Greek characters, 
viz. Maopeéric, as given by Zonaras, Euthymius, 
and Cedrenus;—Napoleon, written NazoNe- 
évrt;—Pareus gives ‘Iraduxa éxkAnoia, “the 
folic termination,” writes Mr. Elliott, 
“being given to “Ira\ced,” inasmuch as “the 
Latin is of /£olic origin.” Hengstenberg, 
after Vitringa, gives the curious solution, 
viz., “In the whole Old Testament there 
is but one instance in which the number 666 
occurs in connexion with a name. It is saia 
in Ezra ii. 13: ‘The sons of Adonikam 666. 
The name ddonikam must therefore be the 
name of the Beast.”—vol. ii. p. 52. (Beda 
notices, that 666 talents were the yearly 
revenue of Solomon 2 Chron. ix. 13). 

See Calmet, Dictionary of the Bible, art. 
“ Antichrist ;’—Ziillig, “ Excurs zu kap. xiii, 
18;”—Elliott, Hor. <Apoc. iii. p. 242;— 
A. Réville, Essais de Crit. Rel. p. 72, &c. 

IV. Two specimens of interpretation may 
be added in conclusion :— 

(2) “An interpretation of the No. 666, by 
Francis Potter, B.D., Oxford, 1642;” with 
a letter commendatory of Joseph Mede, who 
describes this tract as “ The happiest that ever 
yet came into the world.” 

The author states “that in ch. vii. the 
Mystery of the number 144, which is the 
number opposed to 666, consists in the 
square root of it which is 12, and that 
therefore the mystery of 666 must be in the 
square root of it also.” Now (25)?= 6253 
and the remainder as being “unusefull” (p. 
66), may be disregarded. “The first decreed 
and limited number of Cardinals and parish 
Priests in Rome was 25 ;”—‘‘ The number of 
the gates of Rome was 25 ;”’—“ The Popish 
Creed consists of 25 articles, as the Apostles’ 
doth of 12;” &c. In reply to the objection 
that 25 may as well be the root of any number 
between 625 and 676 (the square of 26) 
as of 666, the author says no,—for, among 
other reasons, ‘‘no other number whose root 
was 25, could be expressed by the numeral 
letters of the Beast’s name, as concerning the 
word aureivos, and divers other names of 
this Beast in divers languages hath been, and 
may be observed.” pp. 190. 

(2) Lange in Herzog’s Real-Encyclopadte 
(art. Antichrist, i. 375), observes “that the 
numbers of the Apocalypse in general are 
not cabbalistic, enigmatical numbers, but 
symbolical numbers.” The number 666, ac 
cordingly, may perhaps be explained aftu: 
the analogy of the numerical symbolism of 
this Book; and the key to this solution may 
be found in the contrast between the “ uurest” 


699 


700 


of apostates and the “rest” of the faithful 
—see ch. xiv. 11, 13. Lange sees, therefore, 
a threefold contrast to the sacred Seven :— 
“The 600 is perhaps the number of the end- 
less, curse-laden time, which will amount to 
a pure “on: 60 is the number of false pro- 
phecy in contrast to the 70 Elders of Moses 
(Ex, xxiv. 1) and the 70 disciples of the Lord 


1 Hilgenfeld has published a Latin text of the 
apocryphal ‘‘ Apocalypse (or avdAnyts) of Moses.” 
7 epee in his notes chapters i., viii., and 
X., With our Gospel of St. Matthew, with St. Paul 
in his Epistles, and with the Revelation of St. 
John. Matt. xxiv. 21, and Rom. ii. 15 resemble, 


CHAPTER XIV. 


i The Lamb standing on mount Sion with his 
company. 6 An angel preacheth the gospel. 
8 The fall of Babylon. 15 The harvest of the 


REVELATION. XIV. 


[Ven 


(Luke x. 1); 6 is the number of endless 
trouble as opposed to 7 as the number of 
sabbath-rest. ” 

The more this question is considered, the 
more one is inclined to accept the conclusion 
of Bellarmine :— 

“ Verissima igitur sententia est eorum qui 
ignorantiam suam confitentur.” 


he thinks, the words of this apocryphal writer; 
and Hilgenfeld concludes that Rev. xiii. 18 is 
founded on the following enigma of ch. ix: 
‘€Tunc illo dicente homo de Tribu Levi, cuj 
nomen erit THE, qui habens vii. filios,” &c. [cf 
2 Mace. vii., sq.]—/Vow. Test. extra Can., Fascic. 
i, pp. 105, 112, 114. 


world, and putting in of the sickle, 20 The 
vintage and winepress of the wrath of God. 


ND I looked, and, lo, a Lamb 
stood on the mount Sion, and 





(Ver. 1 rd dpviov.—rd dvopa aitod xai rd dvopa.—{1 reads xalépévoy (for yeypappevov), an 
error for xa:éuevov—as Andr. seems to have read]. Ver. 2 xal 7 havi qv jrovea as xO. Ver. 4 


om. 3rd ciow. Ver. 5 \etdos.—om. yap.—om. évamov Tod Opdvov Tov Geou (1 


also omits these 


words, which Er. supplied from the Vulg. ante thronum Dei: Luther, “fiir dem stuel Gottes”). 


Ver. 6 émt rods.—xaOnpévouvs.—xal emi mav. Ver. 7 éyov. 
om. 1 TOAts.— 7 for Ort.—Ta Eb. Ver. 9 GAdos ayyedos Tpiros. 
[A omits dyiwv]. Ver. 12 7 vropovn.—om. 2nd de. 

isch., 8th ed.; others read dm’ dpri].—dvananoovra.—rad ydp épya. Ver. 14 k 
Ver. 16 trys vep&Ans. Ver. 18 6 €xav.—pov7.— 


vidv. Ver. 15 om. cou.—om. rod bef. bepica. 


[1 omits ris dymédov]. Ver. 19 roy néyav [with A, B, C, PS 
rov Anvoy ... Tov péyay, Which Er. changed into rnv Anviv . . . THY peydAny]. 


CuHap. XIV. 


The Fifth chief Vision of the Revelation 
Proper now opens and is contained in this 
chapter :—see Introd. § 12 

The Seal-Visions, speaking generally, have 
occupied the section from ch. v. 1 to ch. viii. 1; 
and the Trumpet-Visions have extended from 
ch. viii. 2, down to ch. xi. 19, on which there 
is, apparently, an abrupt break between ch. xi. 
and ch. xii. In ch. xii. and ch. xiii. the origin 
and fortunes of the Church Militant, as well 
as the source of her conflict with the world, 
have been represented; and now, in order to 
fill up the break between ch. xi. and ch. xii., and 
immediately before the “ Seven Jast Plagues” 
(ch. xv. 1), the present chapter is interposed. 
It contains ¢4ree principal Visions—each open- 
ing with the formula, “And I saw,’—an 
episode (vv. 12, 13) separating the second 
Vision from the third. (1) In vv. 1-5, the 
servants of God are consoled as they con- 
template the terrible prospect disclosed in 
ch. xili.;—(2) In wv. 6-11 follow the an- 
nouncements of the three Angels containing 
distinct references to ch. xiii. ;—(3) In vv. 12, 


Ver. 8 Gos Sevrepos dyy.— 

Ver. 10 om. rev re ayy. 

er. 13 om. pot.—[Gmapri is read 
obec Opotoy 


reads tiv peydAnv.—t reads 
er. 20 e£wbev.] 


13 the episode is interposed ;—(4) In vv. 14- 
20 the Seer beholds the Vision of the Harvest 
and the Vintage. As in ch. vii. a Vision of the 
glory of heaven was given in order to animate 
and support the Church at the approach of 
“the great tribulation” (ch. vii. 14), So here, 
before the Seven Vials are poured out, there 
is given, in vv. 1-5, a Vision of the Redeemed, 
setting forth the recompense reserved for those 
“that overcome” (see ch. ii, 113, tii. 12, 215 
and the note on ch. iii. 22). 


THE LAMB ON MounrT ZION (1-5). 


1. And I saw,| For the same formula 
introducing a separate Vision, see vv. 6, 14; 
for the formula “ J seard,’ see ver. 13 :—cf. 
On\ch.)1.2); “iv. 1s ve 11. 

and behold, the Lamb] (See vw. //.). 
Note the definite article, “the Lamb,” the 
Lamb of ch. v. 6:—for the thought implied 
see ch. v. 9; Vil. 14; xii. 11; xii, 8. Chri 
in the form of a Lamb, appears in contrast to 
the Dragon-form of Satan in ch, xiii. 4. 


standing upon the mount ae Here 
only and in Heb. xii. 22, do we “ Mount 






v. 2—3.] 


with him an hundred forty and four 
thousand, having his Father’s name 
written in their foreheads. 

2 And I heard a voice from 
heaven, as the voice of many waters, 
and as the voice of a great thunder: 


REVELATION. XIV. 


and I heard the voice of harpers harp- 
ing with their harps: 

3 And they sung as it were a new 
song before the throne, and before 
the four beasts, and the elders: and 


‘no man could learn that song but the 





Zion” (“ Jerusalem which is above,” Gal. 
iv. 26) mentioned in the N. Test. In Heb. 
xii. 18 the spiritual Zion is contrasted with 
the outward and earthly Zion which was the 
seat of the old Covenant; and as in ver. 2 the 
Voice is heard from “ 4eaven,” so here we 
have the heavenly Zion, the seat of the hea- 
venly Temple which is related to the ancient 
Tabernacle, or “ Tent of meeting ” (Num. xvii. 
4; cf Ex. xxv. 21, 22), as the substance to the 
shadow (Ex. xxv. 40) :—it is the place “ where 
God and Angels meet with men, and the 
righteous are eternally blessed” (so Stern, 
Hengst., Ewald, Ebrard). This Disterd. de- 
nies, regarding Zion as the emblem of the 
sacred home on earth of the New Test. Church, 
as it had formerly been the home of the Old 
Test. Church. More literally still, Burger 
understands the actual, earthly Zion, or Jeru- 
salem, to which converted Israel is hereafter 
to return. At all events, Zion, “the City of 
the Lamb,” is opposed to Babylon, the city of 
the Beast—see ver. 8 (Words.). 

an hundred and forty and four thousand,| 
Observe the absence here of the definite article, 
and the use of it in ver. 3 when these same 
words are referredto. Accordingly the refer- 
ence is now not directly to the 144,000 of ch. 
vii. 4, but to the innumerable multitude of ch. 
vii. 9. Inch. vii. 4 the 144,000 were the Sealed 
on earth; what is now intended is to exhibit 
by anticipation the Redeemed 7 heaven ; and 
the same sacred number (see on ch. vii. 4) is 
employed by which the Sealed had been 
designated, because it is that very body, con- 
sisting of “the Israel of God,” for whose 
consolation this Vision of heaven is designed. 

The article is also wanting in the first clause 
of ch. xv., where we read “a sea of glass” 
(cf. ch. iv. 6). Burger explains this absence 
of the definite article by observing that, in ch. 
vii. 4, St. John had not then seen, but had 
merely “ 4eard the number of them which 
were sealed ;” and therefore that this is an 
absolutely new Vision :—what the Sealing had 
intimated, he now sees fulfilled. 

having his name, and the name of his 
Father, written on their forebeads.| (See vv. 
¢i.). All who have been “ sealed” throughout 
the ages as the servants of God, and who have 
“come out of the great tribulation” (ch. Vii. 
14) are now beheld by the Seer—as if their 
conflict were past and over—bearing the Name 
wherewith they had been sealed. We observe 


here the fulfilment of the promise given in 
ch. ili. 12 (cf. Ex. xxviii. 36, 38); as well as 
the contrast to ch. xiii. 16 :—for the contrasted 
mark of evil, see also ch. xvii. 5. 

Some (e.g. Zillig, De Burgh, Burger) un- 
derstand by the 144,000 the converted or the 
elect from among the Jews; and so, with 
a peculiar modification, Godet,—see on ch, 
vil. 4; X. 8; xi. 13. Ewald identifies the 
144,000 here with “the armies which were 
in heaven,” ch. xix. 14. 

2. a voice from heaven,| Cf. ch. x. 4, 8 
If we understand the scene to be the Aeavenlp 
Zion (see on ver. 1), the Voice may be taken to 
proceed from the 144,000, although it is by 
mo means necessary to suppose this. If we 
understand the scene to be the earth/y Zion, 
then the voice (the speaker being left unde= 
fined) comes down from heaven, and the 
144,000, “the Israel of God,” listen to it on 


as the voue of many waters,| Cf. chi 153 
xix. 6. 

and as the voice of a great thunder :] 
Ch: Vi-jti3? X-1 35, 4= 

and the voice which I heard was as 
[the voice] of harpers harping with their barps:] 
See vv. //.; and Note A on ch.v.8. For the 
prep. “with” (év) see on ch. vi. 8. The 
strength of the heavenly Voice is attuned to - 
harmony with the notes of the harp: cf Ps, 
xliii. 4. These words join on to ver. 3— 


8. and they sing as it were a new song} 
See on ch. v. 9, where the words “ as it were 
do not ap The song is “ mew,” because 
the adoration of the Lamb is introduced:—cf 
Deut. xxxi. 19-22. The song is “ mew,” notes 
Burger, because a new act of Divine power, 
viz. the Judgment close at hand, is now to 
be praised (cf. Ps. xxxili. 3; xl. 3; xcvi. 13 
cxliv. 9). Bengel sees a reference in the word 
“new” to the idea of “first-fruits,” ver. 43 
and so Bisping—the 144,000 are as it were 
“the élite of the Redeemed.” De Burgh “cone 
jectures” that the “ zew song” is the same as 
that in ch. v. 9, ro—the “song of Messiah’s 
kingdom.” 

and before the four living beings and 
the elders:| Here we have once more the 
symbolism of ch. iv. 4-11. 


and no man could learn the song] Cf. the. 
similar thought, ch. ii. 17; xix. 12. 


Cf 


70% 


702 REVELATION. XIV. 





[v. 4—5. 


These 'were redeemed from among }S= 
men, being the firstfruits unto God 
and to the Lamb. 


hundred and forty and four thousand, 
which were redeemed from the earth. 
4 These are they which were not 


defiled with women; for they are 
virgins. These are they which fol- 
low the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. 


5 And in their mouth was found 


no guile: for they are without fault 
before the throne of God. 





save the hundred and forty and four thou- 
sand,| A comparison with ch. v. 9 renders it 
still more probable that the 144,000—who 
symbolize the innumerable multitude of 
ch. vii. 9—are beheld, by anticipation, in 
eaven; a result confirmed by the words 
which follow. On the other hand, Alf, 
following Disterd. (see on ver. 1), pronounces 
it to be “essential to the right understanding 
of the Vision, that the harpers and the song 
are in heaven, the 144,000 on earth.” 

[even they] which had been redeemed 
Jrom the earth.) Gr. “bought,” “pur- 
chased: ”—cf. the verb here and in ch. v. 9 
with Gal. iv. 5. (The concord of the mas- 
culine participle with the fem. “ thousands,” 
Dusterd. notes, is “ad sensum :” cf. ch. v. 13). 


4. were not defiled| ‘The tenses must be 
attended to in this passage. As noted on ver. 
1, a Vision of the Redeemed, as if their course 
were past and over, is exhibited to the Church 
on earth: accordingly, here and in ver. 5 the 
past tense is necessarily used—“ were not de- 
fied,’ “was found ;” and each of these aorists 
is followed by the present, “ they are,” expres- 
sive of a permanent state. Between these two 
“ double-membered ” propositions two others 
are interposed—one relating to the present, 
viz. “they follow ;” the other relating to the 
past, “they were redeemed.” (Dtsterd.) 


they are virgins.| ‘They represent “the 
faithful Bride” married to the spotless Lamb 
—ch. xix. 7,9 (Words.). These words may 
imply (if understood literally) the state de- 
scribed in 1 Cor. vii. 1, 73 or (if understood 
spiritually) the state of those, whether married 
or unmarried, who are spoken of in 2 Cor. xi. 
2. When understood in this latter sense, the 
words may imply either purity of soul, as 
seems pointed at in ver. 5; or the chastity 
which is opposed to the “ fornication” = 
Babylon (ver. 8)—viz. spiritual loyal 
God, as opposed to spiritual disloyalty : = 
ii. 4, and also the spiritual sin of Jezebel, ch. 
ii. 20-22. Burger understands those who 
have zof entered into the marriage state, and 
who thus, in the Last Days, have kept them- 
selves free from all the cares of this life, 
according to 1 Cor. vii. 32, 33:—cf. Matt. 
viii. 19; Luke ix. 57. 
That the words can only ve understood 
spiritually seems to follow from the whole 
tone of Apocalyptic symbolism:—cf. the 


mention of the Bridegroom and the Bride, of 
the Harlot and her fornications. Elsewhere 
we have the language of Ps. xlv., of the Can- 
ticles, of the Book of Hosea, above all of 
2 Cor. xi. 2.:—“‘ I have espoused you to one 
husband that I may present you as a chaste 
virgin to Christ.” 

See Note A at the end of this chapter. 

These [are] they which follow the Lamb) 
See vv. //.:—the present tense (see above) 
denotes their existing state of glory—cf. ch. 
vii. 17. Or, on the other view of this passage, 
the entire obedience of the Redeemed during 
their earthly life is implied, ‘“ following ” their 
Lord even to death; cf. Matt. x. 38; John 
xiii. 36, 37; Heb. xiii, 13. 


These were redeemed from among men,| See 
on ver, 3; and cf. the preposition here (dd) 
with the “ out of” (éx) in ch. v. 9. 


[to be] the first-fruits unto God and unto 
the Lamb.| Separated from the entire mass 
as the best absolutely —see Num. xviii. 1a, 
and the notes on Ex. xxii. 29; Deut. xxv 
2-11; chosen by God as “ frst-fruits "—see 
James i. 18—they had while on earth been 
consecrated to His service: cf. Titus ii, 14. 
The opinion of many that these are first-fruits 
from among the Redeemed themselves, or that 
they are so called with respect to those who 
shall come after them, seems unsuitable, Still 
more so the notion of Reuss that the idea of 
“ first-fruits” implies a privileged class, and 
accounts for the mention of a twofold Resure 
rection in ch. xx. 


5. And in their mouth was found no lies] 
See vv. Hl. With the past tense, “ eas found, 
compare “qwere not defiled,” ver. 4. The 
most general sense of “a lie” i is to be under- 
stood—see ch. xxi. 8, 27; xxi. 15; a sense 
expounded in 1 John ii. 22: compare Propet 
viii. 44; and also the title “ False Prop: 

. Xvi. 13. 


they are without blemish.] Omit the 
words “for,” and “before the throne of God ”— 
see vv. /]. Ps. xv. is the best commentary 
on this passage. 

The “Historical” interpretations at this 
point are of the usual character :—Cocceius 
refers to the protests of the Synod of Frank-~ 
fort, A.D. 794, against image worship ;—The 
144,000, according to Vitringa (p. 639), are 
the Waldenses and Albigenses, who first dared 


v. 6.] 


6 And I saw another angel fly in 
the midst of heaven, having the ever- 


to abandon the communion of the Mystic 
Babylon, the harpers being Wiclif, Huss, and 
other Reformers ;—Elliott sees in ver. 2 the 
Reformation ; the “ xew song” being the union 
of all the Reformed Confessions, and the 
144,000 the elect among Protestant nations 
who did not give way to a cold orthodoxy. 

Among “ Futurist” interpreters, De Burgh 
regards the 144,000 as being “the rest 
of the Woman’s seed” (ch. xii. 17)—the 
“Woman” being the Jewish Church—who 
are to pass into the presence of the Lamb, ex- 
empted from death, and being“ changed and 
translated, as shall be the Saints alive at the 
Lord’s coming:” and he concludes that, 
“before the Vials of wrath are poured out, 
they shall be translated—the Jewish ‘/irst- 

its) and the Gentile ‘ Aarvest’” (pp. 272, 
276). Todd (p. 116) considers that the event 
seen in this Vision “occurs after the revelation 
of Antichrist, and immediately before the 
proclamation ‘that the hour of God’s judg- 
ment is come.’” 

Two of the Visions which now follow (vv. 
6, 14) areintroduced by thesame formula, as in 
ver. 1, “ And I saw”—the intervening episode 
(wv. 12, 13) including the words “ dnd I 
beard” (see on ch. i. 2). These Visions an- 
nounce judgment on the world which worships 
the Beast, and thus serve to cheer and sup- 
port, throughout all the ages from the begin- 
ning, believers who are the sufferers from the 
Beast’s oppression. 


THE THREE ANGELS OF JUDGMENT (6-11). 


Ebrard compares ch. xviii. with the Visions 
of this passage. Bisping (after Gerlach) takes 
wv. 6-11 to foretell that three great events at 
the end of the last World-week are imme- 
diately to precede Christ’s Second Advent :— 
(1) The announcement of “the eternal Gos- 
pel” to the whole earth (Matt. xxiv. 14) ;— 
(2) The fall of Babylon ;—(3) A warning to 
all who worship the Beast. 


6. another angel] Different from those who 
appeared in the earlier scenes—see on ch. x. 1. 
It may be, as Hengst. suggests, an Angel diffe- 
rent from the Angelus interpres of ch.1. 1, who 
is supposed to be the speaker in ch. x. 4; 
Kiv. 13; &c.—see on ch. it. 

flying in mid-heaven,] Commentators 
refer to the Eagle in ch. viii. 13, which an- 
nounced the “ Three Woes.” In wv. 7, 8, 9, 
are heard the sayings of the three Angels. 

the eternal gospel] The word “ Gospel” 
is found in the New Test. solely in its technical 
sense; and thus, as in Rom.i. 1, the definite 


REVELATION. XIV. 


lasting gospel to preach unto them 
that dwell on the earth, and to every 





article is not used here—the only place in St. 
John’s writings where the word Gospel] 
occurs. 

Owing tothe absence of the art. many exclude 
this sense, and render “an eternal gospel,” 
of which the contents are contained in ver. 7 
—so Grotius, Ewald, Zillig, De Wette, 
Hengst., Disterd., who appeal in proof to ch, 
x. 7; and thus the sense would be, “a mese 
sage of good news,” relating to the Lord’s 
Second Coming. Burger says this Vision can 
denote nothing but a last admonition and 
summons to conversion shortly before the 
End. But, in these senses why “eternal”? 
Some see in this expression an allusion to 
God’s predestination. 

Bishop Wordsworth justly notes: “It 1s 
the same Gospel for all nations, and for all 
ages, even unto the end of the world. And 
St. Paul has said, ‘ If any man preach any other 
gospel’ &c., Gal. i. 9.” If we except these 
words (or Matt. xxiv. 35), the title or idea of 
“ eternal” (cf. Heb. ix. 14) is not applied to 
“ the Gospel” elsewhere in the New Test. 

[For the classical use of the word aiwyos, 
see Plato, De Republi. ii. 363 D, where the 
opinion is mentioned of those who make the 
fairest reward of virtue in “ Hades” to be 
peOnv aiamov. Cf. De Legg., x. 904 A., avoe 
AcOpov Sé by yevduevoy, GAN aiK aiariory 
Wuxny kat cpa, x.7.d. :—see also Tim., 37 D.; 
38 B.; Locr. 105]. 

to proclaim uzto] Or bring unto. The 
infinitive depends on “saving,” cf. John xvi. 
12:—on the active form of the verb see on 
ch. x. 7. (For the insertion of the prep. ézi, 
see vv. /j.). Dusterdieck suggests as a parallel 
ch. x. 11—where the prep. has a dative. 
Hengst. explains the sense to be “over,” 
and this, by the position of the Angel in the 
highest heaven; the proclamation “over” 
every “nation,” &c. forms the counterpoise 
to the influence of the Beast—ch. xiii. 7. In 
Mark ix. 12, the signification seems to be 
‘towards, ‘with reference to;’ and so, pere 
haps, here. 


them that dwell| G1. “sit”—see vv. I]. 
On the word “sit” cf. Matt. iv. 16 :—for the 
thought, intimating the false security of man- 
kind, see Matt. xxiv. 37, &c.; 1 Thess. v. 2. 

and unto every nation, and tribe, and 
tongue, and people;| See vv. ij. Cf. Matt. 
xxiv. 14: “This gospel of the kingdom shall be 
preached in all the world for a witness unte 
all nations, and then shall the end come.” 

Elliott illustrates this description by the 
fervour which animated many of the 144,000 
at the close of Cent. xviii. in the establishing 


793 


704 


nation, and kindred, and tongue, and 


people, 
7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear 


*P2.x46. God, and give glory to him; for the 
3,“**"* hour of his judgment is come: and 


REVELATION. XIV. 






[v. 78 


worship him that made heaven, and 
earth, and the sea, and the fountains 
of waters. 

8 And there followed another“ 
angel, saying, “Babylon is fallen, is ch 





Evangelical Missions to the heathen. “The 
end is close at hand when this great era of 
Christian missions is inaugurated” (Alf). 
On the other hand, as a “ Futurist,’ De 
Burgh holds that “the preaching of the Gospel 
in this Dispensation has not hitherto had 
for its object the conversion of the world ”— 
which is to be “the work of Christ’s Second 
Advent ;” and he understands the preaching 
of the Gospel in this verse as designed “to 
test, not convert, the nations” (p. 281). See 
on ch. xv. 4. 

Victorinus takes this Angel to be Elijah, and 
the Angel in ver. 8 to be the other “ Witness :” 
see ch. xi. 3. 


7.and he saith with a great voice,] 
The part. (A€yev) is in the nom.—see 
wv. Il. 


and give him glory;] Cf. ch. xi, 13. 

Sor the hour of bts judgment is come:] Cf. 
ch. vi. 17; xi. 18. The Judgment is introduced 
at ver. 14; and to the eve of that consumma- 
tion this verse points. Elliott notes that this 
new era of missions points out the sounding 
of the seventh ‘Trumpet, and the outburst 
of the French Revolution of 1789, to be the 
epoch. 

the seaven and the earth and sea and 
fountains of waters.| The A. V. here 
omits the definite article where it occurs, 
and inserts it where it is absent. Cf. the divi- 
sions of the waters in ch. viii. 8-11; xvi. 3, 4. 
On the objects of Creation here specified the 
judgments of the Seals, the Trumpets, and the 
Vials are poured out. In ch. viii. 7-12 the 
first four Trumpets relate to this same four- 
fold division—the earth, the sea, the sweet 
waters, the heaven. 


8. And another, a second angel, fol- 
lowed,] (See wv. /).). This “second 
Angel” is expressly distinguished by this de- 
scription from the “another Angel” in ver. 6. 
It belongs, notes Dusterd., to the dramatic 
animation of the scene that each new an- 
nouncement is committed to a special angelic 
messenger. 


Saying, Fallen, fallen is Babylon the 
great,] (Omit city—see vv. //.). This use of 
the aorist—in the sense of the “ prophetic pre- 
terite ”— expresses the certainty of the fall: cf. 
ch. x. 7; xi. 18; xviii. 2, and see on ch. xv. 1. 
The language is taken from Isai. xxi. 9, the 
verb denoting the violent fall and overthrow 
of kingdoms—cf. Ezek. xxx. 6; and see on 


ch. xvii. 10. With the fall of Babylon, the 
capital of the ungodly World-kingdom, the 
Old Test. connects the redemption of the 
people of God (Isai. xit. 19; xlvii. 1; Jer. 
li. 1-10). [B,C omit the second “fallen ”], 

This is the first mention of Babylon in the 
Apocalypse, and—if we except 1 Pet. v. 13— 
in the New Test.; the name of the Old Test. 
World-power being now transferred to the 
New Test. World-power (ch. xiii.; xviii. 10). 
The title “ Great” was applied to Babylon by 
Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. iv. 30). “ Great Baby= 
lon” is now but “a possession for the bittern, 
and pools of water” (Isai. xiv. 23) :—see the 
note on Dan. iv. 30. As in ch. xi. 7 there is 
an anticipatory mention of the Beast before 
he is fully described, so here the 
event of the last Vial (ch. xvi. 19) is fore- 
shadowed. 

Babylon, in its first form on the plain of 
Shinar, was the living type of the idolatrous 
city. Shinar, as an ideal land of unholiness, 
is contrasted with Israel, “the Holy Land” 
(Zech. ii. 7,12). “‘ What was Nineveh under 
Sennacherib, was Babylon under Nebuchad- 
nezzar. The type remained, though a city 
of the West became the ruling power of the 
earth ” (Maurice, /. c., p. 323). 

For the more special interpretation of 
“Babylon,” see generally on ch. xvii. 

Tertullian (Marc. iii. 13), Jerome (ém Isai. 
xlvii.), Augustin. (De Civ. Dei, xviii. 22), 
larmine, Bossuet, Bleek, Déllinger, Hengst., 
&c., understand Rome Pagan;— It was usual 
among the Christians, writes Renan, “ whether 
through precaution against the police, or from 
a taste for mystery, to designate Rome by 
the name of Babylon (1 Pet. v. 13; Apoc. 
xiv.—xviii.; Carm. Sibyl]. v. 142, 158): the 
Jews called Rome ‘ Nineveh, and the Roman 
Empire ‘ Edom, see Buxtorf., Lex. Chald.” 
(p. 36) ;—Vitr., Bengel, Elliott, &c., take it 
to mean Rome Papal ;—Beda the evil world 
(“Diaboli civitas”);—Herder, Zillig, &c., 
Jerusalem ;—I. Willi “Heathen Rome 
and adulterous Jerusalem” (p. 260) ;—Bis- 
ping, referring to ch. xvii. 18, “the chief 
City of the Antichristian World-power of the 
Last Days—the Capital of the Beast from 
the Sea.” 

The fact is once for all to be noted here 
that nothing is more marked in Scripture 
than the contrast which is maintained between 
Babylon as the type of the World, and Jeru- 
salem as the type of the Church (cf. ch. xxi, 
2). This contrast is introduced by the foun- 





i i i ee ee, ee 


v. 9—10.] 


fallen, that great city, because she 
made all nations drink of the wine of 
the wrath of her fornication. 

g And the third angel followed 
them, saying with a loud voice, If 
any man worship the beast and his 


REVELATION. XIV. 


image, and receive Ais mark in his 
forehead, or in his hand, 

10 The same shall drink of the 
wine of the wrath of God, which is 
poured out without mixture into the 
cup of his indignation ; and he shall 





dation of Babel soon after the Deluge; and it 
is completed by the establishment of the house 
of David in the City of Zion. Babylon is 
ever the scene of confusion ;—“ Jerusalem is 
built as a City that is at unity in itself.” 
This is the theme of St. Augustine’s great 
work De Civitate Dei: the contrast between 
the two Cities—the worldly and the heavenly 
—supplies him with an interpretation of the 
whole Bible. Their actual relations gave 
shape to the entire history of the ancient 
people of God. If Babylon be supposed to 
be an emblem of the Church, this main 
analogy of Holy Writ is lost sight of; and 
the meaning which we ought to deduce 
naturally from its history and its types is 
forgotten :—see Introd. § 12. 


which hath made al] the nations to 
drink] See vv. //. Cf. the text of this verse 
with that ot ch. xvili. 3. 


of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.| 
On the idea of “ fornication” here, see on 
ch. xvii. 1; and also on ch. ii. 14, 20-22. 
This whole passage as to Babylon is founded 
on Jer. li. 7, 8—see ch. xvii. 4. On the 
symbolism here see also Ps. lx. 3; lxxv. 8; 
Isai. li. 17, 22; Jer. xxv. 15. 

As De Wette notes, two ideas are here 
combined :—Babylon has made the nations to 
drink of the wine of her fornication (ch. xvii. 
2,4); and in retribution God shall give her 
to drink the wine of His wrath (ver. 10; 
ch. xvi. 19): but the sense is not—as Zullig, 
Stuart, &c., explain—‘“ infammatory or in- 
toxicating wine.” 

According to Elliott after the proclamation 
of the Angel of missions (ver. 6), and in order to 
encounter the growing political power which 
was subsequently gained in England by the 
Church of Rome in 1829,—the next great 
crisis in the Church was the founding of 
the Reformation Society in 1827. What 
follows in this Vision, he adds, is unful- 
filled. 

Note, the Cod. Sinait. omits from the word 
* saying,” to ‘with a great voice,” in ver. 9 
(hxodovbnaer, omeotel.). 

9. And another angel, a third, fol- 
lowed them, saying with a great voice] 
(See vv. //.). This announcement connects 
itself more closely than the two preceding 
with ch. xiii. 

Tf any men worshippeth the beast and his 

New Test— Vou. 1V. 


image,| The spiritual “ fornication” referred 
to in ver. 8 is thus defined. 

Wherever the “ Beast” and “his Image” 
are coupled together, as here,—viz. in ver. 
11; ch. xv. 2; Xvi. 2; xix. 20; xx. 4,—Mede 
(p. 421) understands by the “ Beast” the 
“ False Prophet” (ch. xiii. 11); and by “ Ass 
Image,” the “ Seven-Headed Beast” restored 
of ch. xiii.3 see on ch. xiii. 14, 15. 


and receiveth a mark on Ais forehead, 
or upon his hand,| Cf. ch. xiii. 16. Ebrard 
notes that the Beast has not fallen with 
the fall of Babylon, which is but one of 
the “ Heads” of the Beast : this he takes to be 
the sixth “ Head ”—see ch. xvii. 10, 11. 


10. he also shall drink] TIe., as well as 
Babylon and the nations, see ver. 8, and cf. 
ver. 17:—or, even he. Hengst. and Alf. 
would regard the conjunction as “ quasie 
redundant.” 


of the wine of the wrath of God,| See on 
ver. 8. 


which is prepared unmixed in the cup of 
dis anger;] Gr. “which is mixed un- 
mingled (or undiluted) in the cup”— 
the figure “ Oxymoron.” For the sense given 
in A. V., “to pour out,’ Grimm refers to ch. 
Xvill. 6; and also to Bel and the Dragon, 
ver. 11; <Anthol. xi. 137. So Disterdieck, 
who explains that the universal custom of di- 
luting wine with water (cf. Isai. i. 22) for 
ordinary use gave the verb the sense of 
“ pouring out,”—see Wetstein, Zillig refers 
to Ps. lxxv. 8 (LXX): “In the hand of the 
Lord there is a cup and the wine is red; it is 
full of mixture ;” and he takes the word “un- 
mixed” to mean not “ unmixed or undiluted 
wine,” but “ undiluted sixture,” consisting of 
the ingredients by which the Orientals added 
strength to their wine, viz. spices, myrrh, 
opiates, &c. (cf. Mark xv. 23); the sense being 
“he shall drink of the wine of God’s wrath 
—the undiluted mixture poured out in the 
cup.” Hengst. takes up the idea of this 
use of ingredients, but he attaches it to the 
verb, leaving to the adj. the sense of “ undi- 
luted wine”—so that “the wine of God’s 
wrath is mingled [with strength-giving ingre- 
dients], itself being undiluted [with water], 
in the cup”:—-the wine of God’s wrath, 
though its intoxicating power is increased, 
is tempered by no clemency. So also 
Words. ; 


YY 


795 


be tormented with fire and brimstone 
in the presence of the holy angels, 
and in the presence of the Lamb: 

1r And the smoke of their tor- 
ment ascendeth up for ever and ever: 
and they have no rest day nor night, 
who worship the beast and his image, 


in the presence of the holy angels,| Cf. Luke 
xv. 10; which of itself sets aside the inter- 
pretation of De Wette—“in the judgment 
of the Angels.” An aggravation of their 
punishment is signified, notes Diisterd., by 
the fact that Angels are spectators; and he 
refers to ch. xi. 12; Luke xvi. 23, &c. See 
vv. |]. 


1l. of their torment| ‘Their,’ because 
“ any man,” ver. 9, is taken collectively. 

goeth up] Cf. ch. xix. 3. The source of 
this description is Gen. xix. 28 ; Isai. xxxiv. 
9, Io. 


for ever and ever;| Gr. unto ages of 
ages:—note the absence of both articles 
here; see on ch. i. 6. Endless duration a 
parte post is signified. 

and they have no rest] Cf. this eternal 
unrest of the apostate worshippers of the 
Beast, with the blessed rest reserved for the 
faithful :—see ver. 13. 


day and night, they that worship the 
beast and his image, and whoso receiveth.] 
Hengst. observes that ch. xx. 10 supplies a 
decisive objection to the interpretation of 
Vitringa (p. 660) that an evil conscience in 
this life is meant, which allows no rest day 
and night. 

Renan accounts for the imagery in this 
passage by the natural convulsions which he 
supposes the Seer to have witnessed. Renan 
is struck by the fact that the great erup- 
tion of Vesuvius, A.D. 79, occurred (accord- 
ing to him) some ten years after the 
Apocalypse was written; but he is equal to 
this difficulty: “‘We shall soon see,” he 
writes, “this strange locality [which there is 
no proof that St. John ever visited] inspire 
the Author of the Apocalypse, and reveal to 
him the pit of the Abyss ten years before 
nature, by a singular coincidence, opened 
again the crater of Vesuvius.”—pp. 331, 334: 
—see also on ch. ix. 2. 

The older Protestant expositors usually 
understood by the three Angels (vv. 6-11) 
human personages. De Wette classifies such 
opinions: Launoy finds in the first Peter von 
Bruis, in the second Wiclif, in the third 
Luther ;—Brightman sees Wiclif, Jerome of 
Prague, Luther ;—Mede sees the opponents 
of image-worship, the Waldenses and Al- 
bigenses, Luther ;—Calovius sees in the first 


REVELATION. XIV. 






|v. 1I—1g 


and whosoever receiveth the mark of 
his name, 


12 Here is the patience of the 
saints: here are they that keep the 
commandments of God, and the faith 
of Jesus. 


13 And I heard a voice from 


Luther, who preached “ the eternal Gospel,” 
in the second Chemnitz (“alter Martinus”), 
among the third Calovius recognizes himself 
(“et alii, inter quos- Ego indignissimus 
omnium”). Bengel fixes the periods of the 
three Angels:—The jirst Angel, John Arnd 
(“ mid-heaven” being Germany), preaches 
“the eternal (aimvov) gospel,” the gospel 
which lasts for an ‘“ #on”:—but as a 
“ Chronus” (see on ch. vi. tr) = 11194 years 
—an on, which is equal to two Chroni,= 
22222 years; and this period, accordingly, 
extends from the date of the Reformation 
(A.D. 1614) to A.D. 3836 (= A.D. 1836, + 
2000 years the duration of the double Millen- 
nium—see on ch. xx. 2). The second Angel 
(ver. 8) Bengel makes to be Spener from 1635 
to 1727; and the fhird (ver. 9) he regarded 
as not tar distant ; while he makes the Harvest 
and Vintage (vv. 15-18) extend from A.D. 
1740 to A.D. 1836. 

Hammond, as a “ Preterist,” refers the sec- 
tion vv. 6-11, to the period between Domitian 
and Constantine. 


THE EPISODE (12-13). 


12. In order to comfort and support the 
Church still militant on earth, three Angels 
have proclaimed the history of the Christian 
ages:—the diffusion of “the eternal Gospel” 
(vv. 6, 7); the fall of the World-power (ver. 
8) ; the doom of the ungodly (vv. 9-11). And 
now, lest the faithful should be discouraged 
by the prospect opened out in wv. 10-11, 
the loving admonition already given in ch, 
xiii. ro is once more repeated. See ch. xix, 
9, Io. 

Here 1s the patience of the saints, The end 
which the preceding description is intended 
to enforce is here laid down :—see on ch. xiii, 
9, 10; XVi. 15. 

they that keep the commandments of 
God,] Omit “ dere are,” see vv. il.; and for 
the constr. cf. ch. i. 5; ii. 20. 

and the faith of Jesus.) Cf. ch. ili, 10; 
« the faith of Jesus” rests on “ the testimony of 
Jesus,’ ch. xii. 17; see Mark xi. 22. 


13. And I beard a voice from beaven] 
See on ver. 2, the voice, as before, being 
left undefined :—on the dramatic effect thus 


REVELATION. XIV. 707 


the Lord 'from henceforth: Yea, pace 


v. 13.] 


heaven saying unto me, Write, 
Blessed are the dead which die in 


produced see on ch. i. 1, 10. Hengst. sug- 
gests that the voice may proceed from one 
of the just made perfect; or from one of 
the Elders, ch. vii. 13, 14. 


saying,; Omit “unto me”—see vv. li. 

Write] On the command to “ aurite” 
see on ch. i. 11; and cf. ch. xix. 9; xxi. 5. 

Blessed| This epithet is applied only to 
men by St. John—John xiii. 17; xx. 29; 
ch. i. 3, &c. It is applied by St. Paul to 
God—e.g. in 1 Tim. i. 11. 

In ver. 12 the judgments on the ungodly 
were urged as the motive for patience; here, 
the eternal blessedness of the faithful. 


are the dead which die in the Lord) Com- 
pare 1 Cor. xv. 18; 1 Thess. iv. 13-18. Not 
merely martyrs (as many hold), not merely 
those who suffer in time of persecution, but 
each member of the Church ;—every one in 


glory ;—each of the 144,000 “ redeemed from 


the earth” (ver. 3), whose “blessedness” is 
now the theme. “ Which die,”—not “who 
have died :” thus including those, too, who 
die in later times. 

from henceforth:| Cf. John xiii. 19; xiv. 7. 
The natural meaning is that, dating from 
the utterance of the heavenly voice, “the dead 
which die in the Lord” are blessed from that 
time forth; and that time begins with the 
era of Redemption. 

The words “from henceforth” (see vv. 
/.) are variously connected: some connect 
them with “ Blessed,” in the sense of imme- 
diate blessedness, cf. Luke xxiii. 43; Phil. i 
23 (Bleek, De Wette, Hengst.);—others 
with the verb “die,” in the sense, “How 
much better it is to die before the evil to 
come,” Eccl. iv. 2 ; Isai. lvii. 1 (Ziillig) ;—or, 
“The time is soon coming when it will be 
better to die than live” (Cocceius, Ham- 
mond) ;—Mede refers the words to the deaths 
of future martyrs ;—Alf. takes this complete 
blessedness to date from the time when “the 
harvest of the earth is about to be reaped ;’— 
Stern refers to the time of Antichrist when 
they who die in the Lord are to enter into 
Paradise at once (and so far Ewald agrees, 
comparing ch. vi. 9-11; vii. 9-17), thereby 
escaping that course of purification after death 
which all who had died previously must pass 
through ;—“ From henceforth” is joined by 
others (see Margin) with the words that 
come after, the Spirit promising immediate 
blessedness after death, so Andreas, Primas., 
beda, and the Vulgate: “ Amodo, jam, dicit 
Spiritus.” Lambert Bos (Exercitt. Phil., in 
loc., ed. 2, p. 300), reading drapri renders, in 


saith the Spirit, that th saith the 
ai e Spirit, that they may rest = 


the same connexion, “ perfectly,” “ absolutely,” 
“ altogether,” —“ Omnino nz inquit Spiritus ;” 
but, as Words. notes, whenever the G 
word rendered “yea” is used in the New 
Test. it stands first in the sentence. 


Yea, saith the Spirit,| Cf. the Divine con- 
firmation similarly added, ch. xix. 9. It is 
the Spirit which gives this assurance, as the 
milder echo of Christ’s more powerful voice 
(Ewald)—cf. ch. ii. 7, 11, &c.; xxi. 17; 
1 Tim. iv. 1. We have here the “Amen” 
of the Spirit of Prophecy. Ziillig considers 
that two voices are heard—the first that of 
the speaker who is not defined; the other 
that of the Spirit of Prophecy, see Isai. Lxi. 
Bisping and Burger take this second clause 
to be uttered by St. John himself, appeal- 
ing in confirmation to the Spirit of Prophecy. 

Or render, in the Lord. From hencee 
forth, yea, saith the Spirit, that]. 


that they may rest from] Gr. “that they 
shall rest:” see vv. //.; cf. ch. xxii. 14; 
Eph. v. 33. 

See on ver. 11,—we may contrast this 
announcement of perfect rest, with the con 
dition, there described, of those who worship 
the Beast. 

This clause, stating the ground of the 
blessedness (the constr. being compounded 
of “that they may,” and “in that they 
shall,” cf. ch. ix. 20) Ebrard connects with 
“saith ”—* the Spirit saith that they shall ;” 
cf. Mark ix. 12, and see 2 Cor. viii.7. Winer 
(s. 283) supplies from the previous clause 
“they die,” ze. “in order that they shall 
rest,” cf. ch. iii. 9; vi. 11. Professor Moul- 
ton notes :—“ May not iva be more simply 
connected with uwaxapior, as it is by Disterd., 
Alf., A. Buttm.?”—p. 399. Burger explains, 
“Yea [the intent is] that they may rest,” &c., 
cf. John ix. 3: and so Reuss “Si (quand) les 
fidéles meurent, est pour vivre,” &c. On 
the future after iva see Introd. § 7, (/). 


for their works follow with them] 
See vv. //.; and cf. ch. vi. 8 on the phrase 
“ to follow with ”—which, as Hengst. notes, is 
found out of the Apoc. only in Luke ix. 49 
where St. John is the speaker. We may here 
refer to ch. vi. 11, as explained by ch. xix. 8, 
—1 Cor. xv. 58 supplying the commentary: 
see also the Lord’s words Matt. xxv. 34-40. 
Ewald (s. 270) comments: “ Yea, they shall 
rest in death from their heavy troubles! their 
works are so far from being lost through 
their death, that they follow them into eter 
nity.” Burger compares ch. ii. 2; xx. 12; 
1 Cor, iii. 13-15. 


¥ ¥-2 


708 


REVELATION. XIV. 


ftom their labours; and their works 
do follow them. 

14 And I looked, and behold a 
white cloud, and upon the cloud one 
sat like unto the Son of man, having 





[v. 14—15. 


on his head a golden crown, and in 
his hand a sharp sickle. 

15 And another angel came out of 
the temple, crying with a loud voice 





THE HARVEST AND THE VINTAGE (14-20). 


14. And I saw, and behold, a white cloud ;| 
The colour of heaven, see on ch. ii. 17,— 
always in the Apoc. denoting Christ’s pre- 
sence. 

and upon the cloud [I saw] one sitting /ike 
unto the Son of man,| (See vv.//.). For this 
title of Christ see on ch.i. 13. Here, as in 
ch. i. 13—the only instances in which the title 
occurs in the Apocalypse—the articles are 
not found. Vitringa urges the absence of 
the article as a reason why we are to under- 
stand an Angel, and not Christ; and so 
Grotius, Bengel, Zillig, De Wette, Bleek,— 
Bleek further urging that the words “ another 
Angel,” ver. 15, prove that an Angel merely 
is intended (but see ver. 6, where, as in this 
case, there is no reference to an Angel pre- 
viously spoken of). Bleek also argues that, 
were Christ introduced here, the Angel in 
ver. 17 would be placed on an equality with 
Him :—but the whole tone of this verse forbids 
such a conclusion, see below. 

Winer (§ 59, I1, s. 473) suggests that the 
participle (ka@npevov) is a neuter following 
“ behold,’—viz. “something sitting upon the 
cloud like a man,” &c., the constr. then passing 
into the masc. 

having on his head a golden crown,| The 
conqueror’s crown,—see on ch. vi. 2. He 
has not as yet assumed His diadem as King, 
ch. xix. 12,—see on ch. ii. 10. We have here 
the fulfilment of Matt. xxiv. 30; Luke xxi. 
27:—‘“ Then shall appear the sign of the Son 
of Man in heaven ;” “ Then shall they see the 
Son of Man coming in a cloud with power 
and great glory.” 


and in his hand a sharp sickle.| As “Lord 
of the harvest,” Matt. ix. 38 :—on the imagery 
see Joel iii. 13; ~ John iv. 35-38. On this 
Vision I. Williams notes: “ The picture is 
itself a parable :—the golden-crowned Reaper 
on the symbolic cloud, and that cloud illu- 
mined by the presence of the Son of Man 
seated thereon, as on His throne !”—p. 263. 
The Son of Man is related to the three 
Angels which follow in vv. 15, 17, 18, as the 
Rider in ch. vi. 2 to the three who come 
aiter Him (ch. vi. 3-8); and He is distin- 
guished from them by his titles “Son of Man,” 
“He that sitteth on the cloud” (ver. 15), 
and by His “ golden crown.” 

Mede, Hammond, and others understand 
wm this whole passage not the final judgment, 


but some previous coming of Christ; and 
so Déllinger, who sees the judgment on 
heathen idolatry and the triumph of Chris- 
tianity. On the other hand it seems that 
this Vision (vv. 14-20) is related to the final 
judgment; just as the sixth Seal (ch. vi. 
12-17) is related to the completion of the 
mystery of God :—see ch. x. 7. 


15. Now follow the three prophetic types 
of approaching Judgment—the Harvest (Isai. 
xvil. 5; Jer. li. 33), the Vintage (Joel iii. 13), 
the Treading of the grapes (Isai. xiii. 2, > 
The thought conveyed is the nearness 
judgment. Many (Bengel, Words., Alf, De 
Burgh, &c.) regard the “ Harvest” as signifyi 
the gathering in of the godly; the “ Vintage” 
and “‘Wine-press” as signifying the crushing 
of the wicked. This interpretation, however, 
scarcely agrees with our Lord’s own intere 
pretation of the “ Harvest,” in Matt. xiii. 30, 
38-42. Godly and ungodly alike may well 
be included in both the “ Harvest” and the 
“ Vintage.” 


And another angel] See on vv. 6, 14. 


came out from the temple,| Or “the Sane- 
tuary” (see on ch. xi. 1) in heaven, ver. 17, 
which, according to ch. xi. 19; xv. 5, 
been opened, and from which the Angels 
with the Seven Plagues proceed (ch. xv. 
6). 

crying with a great voice to him that sat on 
the cloud,| These words also have been urged 
in order to show that Christ cannot be re- 
ferred to in ver. 14—for He, it is said, could 
not receive a command from an Angelas here, 
To this it has been often answered that the 
Angel is but the messenger of the will of God; 
and as to the mysterious relation between 
the Son and the Father, we have the Lord’s 
own words, John v. 19, 30. 


Send forth thy sickle,] The verb here is 
ménov. For the cognate verb (amoareAho) 
see Mark iv. 29; and cf. Joel iii. 13 (eEamo- 
oreikare, LXX.), from which the image is 
borrowed. A different verb (8a\\) is used 
in vv. 16, 19. Hengst. thinks that the 
phrase “send forth thy sickle” rests on 
the personification of the sickle as an as- 
sistas 

The sickle was “a curved scimitar or knife” 
used for reaping or pruning. Its use in this 
passage both for the Harvest and for the 
Vintage denotes, Words. observes, that the 
term is to be taken figuratively. 


to him that sat on the cloud, * Thrust sJede 


v. 16-—I9. } 


in thy sickle, and reap: for the time 
is come for thee to reap; for the har- 
vest of the earth is 'ripe. 

16 And he that sat on the cloud 
thrust in his sickle on the earth; and 
the earth was reaped. 

17 And another angel came out of 
the temple which is in heaven, he 
also having a sharp sickle. 

18 And another angel came out 


for the hour to reap is come;|] Omit 
for thee—see vv. il.; and cf. ver. 7. 


for the harvest of the earth is over-ripe.] 
Gr. “is dried up,” cf. Marg.:—in John xv. 
6 the verb is rendered “ is withered.” Cf. Mark 
xi. 20; and see below, ver. 18. 

(in the De Crv. Dei, iv. 8, St. Augustine 
speaks of the sown corn growing up ‘‘ab 
initiis herbidis usque ad aristas aridas”). 


16. And he that sat on the cloud} See on 
ver. 14. 

cast Ais sickle upon the earth;] For the 
verb see on ver. 15; and cf. John xx. 25, 27. 
The extent of the reaping over the earth is 
denoted by the prep. “upon,’—see on ch. 


1. 20. 


ard the earth was reaped.| Burger also 
would restrict the Harvest to the “ gather- 
ing together the elect,’ Matt. xxiv. 31 ;— 
but see on ver. 15, and cf. the words of Christ, 
Matt. xiii. 30. 


17. And another angel came out from the 
temple which is in beaven,| Or “Sanc- 
tuary,” as in ver. 15. 


4e also| As well as the Son of Man, ver. 
14:—cf. ver. 10. Hengst. would regard this 
Angel also as Christ; for the treading the 
grapes must belong, he thinks, to Him to 
whom the reaping the harvest belonged; and 
this Angel, too, has “a sickle.” 


18. And another angel came out from the 
altar,| The Altar already mentioned in ch. vi. 
9, 10; villi, 3—the Altar of burnt offering 
under which lie the souls of “those who had 
been slain because of the word of God;” 
and from which the Angel now comes forth 
to avenge their blood. 

As to this Angel we read: (1) That this 
Altar is his peculiar place as “the ministering 
spirit” who brings the command to execute 
judgment ;—(2) That, as described in the 
words which follow, it is 

he which hath] See vv. I. 


power over fire;| Gr. authority over 
the fire;] Either fre generally,—as eg. 
“the Angel of the waters,” ch. xvi. 5 (cf. ch. 


REVELATION. XIV. 


from the altar, which had power over 
fire; and cried with a loud cry to 
him that had the sharp sickle, saying, 
Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and 
gather the clusters of the vine of the 
earth; for her grapes are fully ripe. 
1g And the angel thrust in his 
sickle into the earth, and gathered the 
vine of the earth, and cast :¢ into the 
great winepress of the wrath of God. 


xi. 6); compare also ch. vii. 1. Or, the fire 
spoken of in ch. viii. 3-5, which was the fire 
from the censer that kindled the judgments. 

and he called with a great voice] See 
vy. Il. 

to him that had the sharp sickle, saying,] 
Viz. the Angel in ver. 17. 

Send forth thy sharp sickle,| The verb 
is the same as in ver. 15, and translates liter- 
ally the Hebrew verb in Joel iii. 13. 

the vine of the earth;\ Not, it has been 
observed, the “ vine out of Egypt” (Ps. lxxx. 
8), or that to which Christ likened himself 
(John xv. 1), but “the vine of the earth.” 
(See vv. //.). 

As noted by others (see on ver. 15), Burger 
also sees in the “ Vintage” and “ Wine-press” 
tokens of the judgment on the ungodly. 

Ewald takes “the vine” to be a type of 
Palestine, and these words to indicate the 
Holy Land;—Grotius places the scene in 
Syria and Egypt;—Mede, Hammond, Wet- 
stein, in Italy. 

Invv. 15, 17, 18, we have three Angels fol- 
lowing Christ (see on ver. 14) as in the first 
four Seals (ch. vi. 2-8); and ¢hree Angels 
having already appeared in vv. 6, 8, 9, the 
number Seven is thus a feature of this Vision 
also. 


19. And the angel] Not, as in ver. 16, 
“* He that sat on the cloud.” 


cast 4is sickle into the earth,| The verb is 
the same as in ver. 16. 


and gathered the vintage of the earth,} 
Gr. “ the vine.” 

and cast it into the winepress, the great 
[winepress], of the wrath of God.| (See vv. 
i/.). A masculine adjective, and a feminine 
substantive :—the confusion seems to have 
arisen from the substantive being both mase. 
and fem. The imagery corresponds with that 
of ch. xix. 15 (cf. Lam. i. 15); it is founded on 
Isai. lxili. 1-6, where see the notes. 

Primasius (ap. Migne, Patrolog., vol. 68, 
Pp. 890) illustrates this passage by Matt. xiii. 
41; 1 Cor. ili. 9:—he reads the masc. (rav 
péyav), and translates, “‘ and cast the proud oue 
into the winepress” Xc. [*‘ Dicendo ire Dé 


7°29 


710 


20 And the winepress was trodden 
without the city, and blood came out 
of the winepress, even unto the horse 


REVELATION. XIV. 


[v. 20. 


bridles, by the space of a thousand 
and six hundred furlongs. 





sententiam hic pro ira Dei posuit quam superbo 
dicit inflictam, quem etiam magnum vocat.”). 

20. And the winepress was trodden| As 
m Isai. xiii. 3—the usual phrase, see Judg. ix. 
27; Neh. xiii. 15; Jer. xlviii. 33. 

without the city,| (See vv. /].). Hengst. 
gives the true meaning: “The ‘ city,’ without 
any accompanying epithet, can only be that 
which was the City by way of eminence in 
Scriptural usage—‘ the Holy City’ (ch. xi. 2’, 
Jerusalem ; but this in the Apoc. is always a 
designation of the Church.” Hence we have 
here a judgment on the world as opposed 
to the Church—cf. ch. vii. 1-8.  Ziillig, 
Ebrard, De Wette, Stern, Disterd. explain 
the “city” to be the literal earthly Jerusalem, 
which the nations assail (ch. xx. 9). Ebrard 
places the scene in the valley of Jehoshaphat 
(Joel iii. 12-14). Hammond and Wetstein 
understand Rome. 

and there came out blood from the 
qwinepress,| ‘The juice of the grape being a 
type of blood—cf. Isai. Ixiii. 3. 

even unto the bridles of the horses,| Le., 
such was the depth of the blood-stream. 
The mention of “ 4orses” points forward to 
ch, xix. 11-15, where Christ and his armies 
appear on “ ahite horses” (cf. ch. vi. 2), and 
where mention is again made of “ the wine- 
press.” 

a thousand and six hundred furlongs 
off.] An idiom peculiar to St. John—see 
John xi. 18; xxi. 8; cf. Acts x. 30. (The 
Cod. Sinait. reads ‘a thousand and two 
hundred”). Or render—‘as far as a 
thousand...furlongs.” 

The furlong, or stadium (rd oradiov—in 
plur. of oradco1, or Ta oradia) is 600 Greek, or 
606% English feet; about of a Romanmile: 
see ch. xxi. 16. Sixteen hundred is the square 
of forty, or the square of four multiplied by 
the square of ten; and thus, as Four is the 
‘signature’ of the earth (see ch. vii. 1) and Ten 
the signature’ of completeness, this symbolic 
number denotes a space of vast magnitude: 





see Introd. § 11, (a); and cf. the 144,000o= 
4x 3” x ro° in ver. 1. Hengst. understands 
“a judgment encircling the whole earth.” 
From the early expositors, Victorinus 
Primasius, Beda, onwards a ce to 
the four quarters of the earth has been in- 
sisted upon: e.g. Victorinus, “per omnes 
mundi guatuor partes” (/. c., p. 62). Ebrard 
considers that the signification of the number 
40 (40 X 40=1600) as the symbol of punishe 
ment (Num. xiv. 33; Judges xiii. 1; Ezek. 
xxix. 11) is intended. St. Jerome (Ep. ad 
Dardan. 129) takes this source of the num- 
ber to be the distance “from Dan to Beer= 
sheba,” which extends to a distance of scarcely 
160 miles (“ vix clx. milium”), although 160 
Roman miles are equal to 1280, not 1600 
stadii:—this explanation is accepted by C. a 
Lapide, Eichhorn, Zillig, &c. The Itinerary 
of Antoninus makes the distance from T 

on the north to Rhinocorura (now E/ Arish) 
on the border of Egypt to the south, to be 
1664 stadii; and thus the meaning would be 
that the blood-stream covered the whole sur- 
face of Judeza—so Grotius, Bengel, Bleek, 
Reuss, &c. (in Isai. xxvii. 12, the LXX. render 
“the stream of Egypt” by Réinocorura). See 
Smith’s Dict. of Gr. and Rom. Geogr., vol. ii. p. 
709; and Note B at the end of this chapter. 

Some who adopt this interpretation regard 
Palestine as a type of the Church, 

Krenkel (/.c., s. 84) applies this description 
to the battle of Ar-Mageddon, ch. xvi. 16, the 
scene of which he places near Jerusalem; 
arguing from the mention of Mount Zion, 
ver. 1, and from the supposed allusion to 
the length of Palestine. On this, Stuart not 
unreasonably asks, “What has Palestine to 
do with the present battle? ”—the measure 
comes as near the breadth of Italy as it does 
to the length of Palestine: and Stuart thinks 
that the breadth of Italy is meant. Mede 
sees here the extent of the Roman Empire. 
Brightman (see on ver. 11) interprets of 
England and its Reformation,—the Angel in 
ver, 18 being Cranmer. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Chap. XIV. 


NOTE A ON xiv. 4.—ST. JoHN’s TITLE 

mapevos. 

The words of this verse, together with the 
absence of St. John’s name from 1 Cor. ix. 5, 
suggested the belief of many in early times 
that the Apostle was unmarried:—see Ter- 
tull. De Monogam. c. 17; Cyrill. Alex. Orat. 


de Maria Virg., Opp. p. 380; August. De dome 
Conjug. c. 21; Jerome, ad Jovin., i. 14, 363 
Epiphan. Her. 51, 12. 

Hence the title wap6évos sometimes given 
to him, as in the superscription of the Apoca- 
lypse quoted by Litcke’ from Codex 30 of 


! “¢ Schriften des Joannis,” iii. s. 52. 


v. 1.] 


Griesbach (Cent. xii.). The title which St. 
Augustine, in more than one place (Quest. 
Evang. ii. 39; Inscr. Tract. x.), states was 
prefixed to St. John’s first Epistle, viz. “ Ad 
Parthos,” is conjectured by Hug, Gieseler 
(Kirch. Gesch., i. 118), and others to have 
arisen from this title wap@évos. Ambrosiaster 
writes on 2 Cor. xi. 2: “Omnes Apostoli, 
exceptis Joanne et Paulo, uxores habuisse 
dicuntur.” 


Nore B ON VER. 20.—THE STADIUM. 
The Stadium (r6 ordésov, in plur. of ora- 
d:o1, OF ra cradia) or furlong was a Grecian 


REVELATION. 


XV. 71 


measure taken in name and length from the 
foot-race course at Olympia. It was employed 
in the East after the age of Alexander the 


Great; and is mentioned in 2 Macc. xi. 5; 


xii. 9; &c.; and in the N. T. in Luke xxiv. 13 ; 


John vi. 19; xi. 18; 1 Cor. ix. 24; Rev. xxi 
16; andhere. The Stadium = 600 Greek feet 
(Herod. ii. 149); or 125 Roman paces (Plin. 
i. 21 ; cf. Censorin. 13), so that eight stadia = 
one Roman mile. It is equal to 6063 feet 
of our measure, 7.e. 53% feet less than our 
furlong:—see Winer, Real Worterb., art. 
Stadium; Smith, Dict. of the Bible, art. 
Weights and Measures. 





CHAPTER XV. 


1 The seven angels with the seven last plagues. 
3 The song of them that overcome the beast. 
7 The seven vials full of the wrath of God. 


ND I saw another sign in heaven, 
a great and marvellous, seven an- 
gels having the seven last plagues; for 
in them is filled up the wrath of God. 





[Ver. 2 om. €x rod xapayparos aitod. Ver. 


3 Tov SovAov.—F or dyiay read e6yav (A, B, P), 


OF aidvey (8, C: cf. 1 Tim. i. 17); [1. reads rév é@vay, which Er., relying on a copy of the 
Vulgate, where he found “ rex sanctorum” (a corruption of tke true reading of the Vulg., “ rex 


seculorum”), altered into ray dyiwv. 


This reading is preserved in A. V., and by Luther, “ du 


Konig der Heiligen.” Tregelles suggests a confusion in the MSS. between AIONOQN (=e6véav) 


and AIQNQN]. Ver. 4 om. oce.—do€acet. 


Ver. 5 om. idov. 


Ver. 6 oi Exovres.—[A, C read 


Aiboy, —B, P read Xivoy xadapdv,—® reads xa6. divous].—om. 2nd xat.] 


THE SEVEN VIALS (xv. 1—xvi. 21). 


The Sixth chief Vision of the Revelation 
Proper opens here:—see the remarks intro- 
ductory to ch. xiv. 

The Vision of the Seven Vials themselves 
is contained in ch. xvi.; but previously, in ch. 
xv., the Seer beholds “ Seven Angels” (ver. 1) 
as in ch. viii. 2; and then, before the Angels 
execute their office, the “ Just made perfect ” 
sing the praise of God (wv. 2-4) ;—as in ch. 
viii. 2—5 there is a solemn offering of prayer and 
its results before the Trumpet-Angels “pre- 
pare themselves to sound.” The Vials—unlike 
the Seals and Trumpets which are divided 
into groups of four and three (see the remarks 
introd. to ch. vi.)}—are divided, like the Seven 
Epistles (see the remarks introd. to ch. ii.), 
into groups of ¢4ree (ch. xvi. 2-4) and four 
(ch. xvi. 8-17) by the voices in ch. xvi. 5-7. 
As in the Visions of the Seals and Trumpets, 
the sixté Vialis separated from the seventh by 
the episode announcing (in vv. 13-16) the 
assembling of “ te dings” for Ar-Mageddon, 
Compare also the episodes of ch. vii., and ch. 
x. I—-ch. xi. 14. 

Here St. John again “ recapitulates ” (see 
the remarks introd. to ch. viii.) ; he re-ascends 
to “an earlier point in the Prophecy; and 
enlarges on the judicial chastisements to be 
inflicted on the Empire of the Beast.” 
( Words.) 


THE SEVEN VIAL-ANGELS (1-8). 


1. And I saw] A Vision of the “Seven 
Angels” is alteady, before ver. 6, granted to 
the Seer. This is denied by Ziullig; who 
thinks that the Angels are first seen in ver. 6, 
and that these words are a mere superscrip= 
tion to the chapter, which really begins at 
ver. 2. Bisping and Burger also regard 
this verse as merely anticipatory, concluding 
that the Angels do not receive the “ Seven 
Plagues” until ver. 7. 


another sign) See ch. xii. 3. On the word 
“ sign,” as indicating what is figurative, see 
on; ch. as5 X17; 33 

in heaven,| What is now prepared “ in 
heaven” is carried out on “ earth” in ch. xvi. 

great and marvellous,| Surpassing the 
“signs” in ch. xil. 1, 3, and in this respect,— 
that the Angels who have power to inflict 
the coming trials themselves Aave the “ Seven 
Plagues” (see wv. 1, 6) and direct the 
Divine judgments (ch. xvi- 9, 21). This 
“marvel” is not explained to the Seer as is 
that in ch. xvii. 6. The Angels all appear 
at once; although, unlike the Seven in ch. 
Vili. 2, they do not receive the “ Via/s” until 
ver. 7. ‘ 

seven angels} The absence of the definite 
article indicates that these Angels had not 
been seen before. There is no reason for 


712 


2 And I saw as it were a sea of 
glass mingled with fire: and them 


REVELATION. XV. 


{v. 2. 


that had gotten the victory over the 
beast, and over his image, and over 





takin,; them, with De Wette, to be Archangels. 
As implied in ch. xvi. 5, they have each a 
distinct office. 

having seven plagues, [which are] the 
last,| J.e., the “ Plagues” leading to the final 
judgment which belongs to the seventh Trum- 
pet (see ch. x. 7) :—ch. xvii. 1, indeed, seems 
to imply that the judgments which are then 
introduced follow those of the Vials, or, 
at least, synchronize with them. Diisterd. 
notes that ch. xvi. 15 points to something 
which is now near at hand. The Vials them- 
selves bring us not to the “ great day of final 
account, but to the fall of Babylon, and the 
consequences of that event which are im- 
mediately to usher in the Day of Christ’s 
coming ”—Todd, p.75. Nevertheless, neither 
ch, xvii. 1, nor ch. xxi. 9 are conclusive as to 
the order of time. 

Sor in them is finished the wrath of God.] 
See ch. x. 7: xiv. 8:—‘‘the prophetic aorist, 
which speaks of a thing foreseen, and decided 
by God as a/ready done.” — Words. 

Elliott considers that we are now brought 
to the opening of the French Revolution of 
1789. So also Mr. Faber, who takes chapters 
xv.-xxli. to be the second portion of the 
Sealed Book (ch. v.), and to extend from 
A.D. 1789 to the end of all things:—see on 
ch. v. 1; and on ch. x. 8. 

2. And I saw] The formula announcing 
a new Vision—see on ch. iv. 1; xiv. 1. He 
had already seen the “ Seven Angels” (see on 
ver. 1), and now, before the Vision of ver. 5 
—before the Angels enter on the scene—this 
Vision of the Redeemed is interposed. Pre- 
paration is again made for the events in ch. xvi., 
as was the case in ch.xi.15,&c. ‘“ For the t4ird 
time,” notes Reuss, ‘“‘ the promised and im- 
minent accomplishment of God’s decrees is 
celebrated beforehand by those who shall 
find in them rest and felicity” (ch. xi. 15; 
xiv. 1, &c.). 

as it were a sea of glass). Or a glassy 
sea. The material or the appearance is, as 
it were, of glass—see on ch. iv. 6, a scene 
identical with that beheld here. This is 
further shown by the presence of the Four 
Living Beings in ver. 7 (on the absence of the 
definite article, cf. ch. xiv. 1). This identity 
Ebrard questions, because we do not read 
here “‘ /ike unto crystal,” but 


mingled with fire ;| As observed on ch. iv. 
6 the “ sea of glass like unto crystal” denoted 
the purity and calmress of God’s rule. 
The intermingling of mercy with justice is 
there symbolized in ver. 5; and so here the 
game conjunction is signified by the altered 


words, “mingled with fire:”—fire denotes 
judgment ; and thus both aspects of the Divine 
rule are now also exhibited. Many see here 
a symbolical representation of the Red Sea. 


and them that come victorious from 
the beast,| 1. Williams: “ Not over as our 
translation has it, but rather from the Beast, 
—they have vanquished by flight, escaped 
from the net of the fowler” (Ps. cxxiv. 6). 
And so Ebrard, the present tense denoting 
that the act of overcoming still continues: as 
in ver. 3 “ they sing,” not “ they sang.” 

De Wette rightly takes these words to 
be an ideal anticipation, as in ch. vii.9. The 
palm-bearing multitude may be recognized 
as reappearing here, just as the 144,000 of 
ch, vil. 4 reappear in ch. xiv. 1. 


and from his image, and from the nume- 
berof his name,] Omit “over sis mark, 
and”—see vv. li. (Winer, § 47, S. 329, 
notes on wav €k t.vos—* Victoriam ferre ex 
aliquo”). These words refer back to ch. 
xlil. 4, 15, 16; xiv.9. As Todd remarks 
{see on ver. 1), this Vision brings us down to 
the fall of Babylon, ch. xvi. 19 ; and theretore 
precedes the events disclosed in ch. xiv. 14— 
20. For Mede’s interpretation of “the Image 
of the Beast,” see on ch. xiii. 143 Xiv. 9. 


standing by the sea of glass} Or the 
glassy sea—as above. (For the prep., emi, 
with an accus., see ch. iii. 20; Acts xxv. 10; 
cf., too, ch. viii. 3 ; ix. 14). So Bengel, Ebrard, 
Words., Alford; and Abp. Trench writes: 
“It is, as Bengel gives it rightly, ‘dy the sea 
of glass’ (‘ad mare vitreum’), which ‘sea of 
glass’ we are not to understand as a solid 
though diaphanous surface, on which these 
triumphant ones stood or could stand; but ‘ as 
it were a sea of glass,’ not a ‘glassen,’ but a 
‘glassy’ sea,—a sea that might be compared 
to glass in its clearness and transparency ” 
(On the A.V. of N. T., 2nd ed., p. 139). The 
usual sense of the prep., “upon the sea,” is 
adopted by Stuart who takes “the sea” to 
be “the pavement of the court above (sea in 
the sense of an extended level surface), in 
the midst of which the throne of Ged stands ;” 
and so Ziilig regards the “glass mingled 
with fire” to signify ‘a mosaic floor,’ 
which the elect from among the Gentiles 
stand in the same Temple-court, behind the 
elect from among the Jews, the 144,000:— 
see on ch. xiv. 1. In support of the former 
rendering is the explanation of the symbolism 
given by many commentators:—Thus, I. 
Williams writes of the “sea” in heaven, 
“before as ‘of glass’ only, now of ‘fire’ 
from the trials of these last days:—they are 





_ a ae 


ORs vy. 1. 


v. 3—4.] 


his mark, amd over the number of his 
name, stand on the sea of glass, having 
the harps of God. 

3 And they sing the song of 
Moses the servant of God, and 


the waves of the Red Sea, which appear on 
fire as the Sun of Righteousness arises upon 
them, on the margin of which the true 
Israelites sing the song of Moses, and the 
saving Lamb” (/.c., p. 274);—and Words. : 
** Standing on its shore are seen those . 

who are delivered from his [the Beast’s] sway 
as the Israelites were in their Exodus from 
the land of Pharaoh”: to the same effect 
De Wette, Stern, Hengst. 

The words are also applied allegorically : 
Grotius understands the mass of heathen 
Christians animated by the love of God ;— 
Vitr., the conqueror stands on the firm ground 
of truth illumined by the fire of Divine justice ; 
—Calovius, the sea denotes baptism, the fire 
the wrath of God ;—De Burgh, the Baptism 
of water, and the Baptism of fire (Matt. iii. 
11), “denoting their purification by trials.” 

The “ sea of glass” notes Andreas (/. ¢.,p. 
85), signifies the multitude of the saved ;— 
its being “mingled with fire” points to 1 
Cor. iii. 15, those “‘ saved as through fire.” 

having harps of God.| Instruments of 
music wholly dedicated to His praise—see 1 
Chron. xvi. 42; 2 Chron. vii. 6; and cf. 
ch. v. 8; xiv. 2. 

The “harps,” writes Andreas, denote the har- 
mony of the virtues modulated by the Spirit. 


8. the song of Moses| More probably that 
preserved in Ex. xv. 1r—the song of triumph 
after the passage of the Red Sea (see on ver. 
2)—than that given in Deut. xxxil. Hengst. 
urges in confirmation of a reference here to the 
Red Sea, that the work of the Angels was to 
renew the plagues of Egypt—see on ch. xvi. 
“The song of Moses” is sung by delivered 
Israel after the Egyptian plagues: here the 
hymn of praise is sung by the Redeemed 
before the last victory of the Church over the 
antichristian world. 


the servant of God,] (See vv. Il,). For this 
title see Ex. xiv. 31; Num. xii. 7; Josh. xiv. 
7; Ps. cv. 26; Mal. iv. 4; cf. Heb. iii. 5. 


and the song of the Lamb,| Many (e.g. 
Grotius, Vitr., De Wette, Hengst., Ebrard) 
explain that “the song of Moses” is here used 
“of” or “in honour ef” the Lamb; and the 
analogy of ch. xiv. 1 leads Hengst. to add that 
“the Lamb sings this song along with His 
people.” Diisterdieck (followed by Alf.) ex- 
plains that this song was composed at once by 
Moses and the Lamb, and was taught to the 
gingers (see ch. xiv. 3) ;—that it betokens, in 


REVELATION. XV, 


the song of the Lamb, saying, Great 
and marvellous are thy works, Lord 


God Almighty; ‘just and true are <Pe tas 


thy ways, thou King of saints. 
4 2Who shall not fear thee, O 3. 


fact, what we elsewhere learn from a com- 
parison of ch. vii. 9, &c. and ch. x. 7 with ch. 
vii. 4, &c. and ch. xiv. 1, viz. the essential 
unity of the Churches of the Old and the New 
Test. (cf. ch. xii. 1, 17). So also Reuss :— 
“ For the Author, the Church is the true Israel, 
Ch, Chagingr Millen ivi.) 4istixe nena) SiVer Ly 
&c.” Andreas (/. c.) thinks that there are here 
two songs, one of the pious under the Old 
Test., the other of the New Test. believers ;— 
Cocceius understands the harmony between 
Prophecy and the Gospel ;— Ziillig, that 
these worshippers “who were formerly ido- 
laters express in this song their conversion to 
Moses and to Jesus.” The meaning rather 
is that the song in which Moses celebrated 
the deliverance from Egypt, isnow renewed, 
and receives its perfected close when God’s 
people are finally delivered by the Lamb. 

Writers point out how we have in the 
Apocalyptic song which follows distinct 
echoes of the Old Test. 


saying, Great and marvellous [are] thy 
works,| See Ex. xvii. 11; 1 Chron. xvi. 9; 
BS UGXI i 2iGXxKI Kae 


0 Lord God, the Almighty;] See on ch. 
ik) Cha Chemive Sh exiin7. 

righteous and true(are] thy ways,| Cf.on 
ch. iil. 7; and see Deut. xxxil. 4 (the second 
Song of Moses) ; Ps. cxlv. 17. 

The word “righteous” (8ikacos) is used 
by St. John to signify both the rectitude of 
the Judge, and the rectitude of the person 
judged who comes up to the required standard, 
It occurs in the Apoc. usually in the former 
sense,—e. g. here; ch. xvi. 5, 73 xix. 23; cf 
John v. 30. In the /atter sense ‘it occurs in 
ch. xxii. 11; cf. rt John iii. 12. 


thou King of the ages.] Or thou 
eternal King. See vv. //. The title given 
by this reading is found in 1 Tim. i. 17:— 
or, taking the alternative reading (for there 
is no authority for the reading of the Textus 
Receptus, and of the A. V., “thou King of 
saints”), we have 


thou King of the nations. ] Perhaps alt 
nations: the title is givento Jehovah in Jer. x. 
7, as indicating His relation to all mankind— 
cf. Ps. xxii. 28. This reference to Jer. x. 7, 
and the mention below, in ver. 4, of “the 
nations” afford considerable sanction to 
this reading. 


4. Who shall not fear, O Lord, and 


713 


714 


Lord, and glorify thy name? for thou 
only art holy: for all nations shall 
come and worship before thee; for 
thy judgments are made manifest. 

5 And after that I looked, and, 


lorify thy name?| (Omit ‘ thee,’—see vv. /l.). 
ese words also rest on Jer. x. 7. They 
suggest a designed contrast to ch. xiii. 4, as 
being similar in form and subject :—see also 
Ps. lxxxvi. 8-10. The question asked rests 
on the first two of the following three clauses 
each beginning with “for,” or “ because.” 

Sor [thou] only (art) holy ;| The word ren- 
dered “holy” (caxos) is applied to God only here 
and in ch. xvi. 5. It is applied to Crist in 
Acts ii. 275; xili. 35 (Ps. xvi. 10); and Heb. 
vii. 26. We have but one word “ oly” to 
render both that which the Greek has here, 
and that which in ch. ili. 7 (dyios) is used of 
Christ. The term here, if applied to Man, 
signifies one who diligently observes all the 
sanctities of religion; as applied to God it 
denotes that He is one in whom these 
eterna] sanctities reside :—see Abp. Trench 
quoted on ch. iii. 7. 


for all the nations shall come] See Ps. 
lxxxvi. 9; Isai. ii. 2-4; Ixvi. 23; Micah iv. 
2-4; Zech. viii. 22. ‘These words contain the 
sum of the Old Test. predictions as to the 
conversion of the heathen. De Burgh (see on 
ch. xiv. 6) further quotes these words to prove 
“that not until the coming of Christ in Judg- 
ment does the conversion of the world take 
place” (p. 297); and he goes on distinctly to 
state that it isan error “to expect the conver- 
sion of the world as an event to grow progres= 
sively out of the present dispensation.”—idid. 
This, as a testing result of the “ Futurist” 
system, is deserving of notice. 


for thy righteous acts have been 
made manifest.) This third clause (note 
the tense) beginning with “for” refers to 
that which immediately precedes, and gives 
the reason why “all the nations shall come and 
worship before” God. “Thy righteous 
act:” i.e. “thy deeds in righteousness to- 
wards the nations,—thy judgments.” This 
noun (d:xaiwpa) is found in the Apoc. only- 
here and in ch. xix. 8—in both places in the 
plural. Inthe plural it signifies (1) ‘ precepts,’ 
* ordinances,’ Luke i. 6; Rom. ii. 26; Heb. ix. 
I, 10; (2) as here, actions corresponding to 
the righteousness which is fulfilled by them,— 
a righteousness which is the sense of the word 
in the singular, e.g. in Rom. v. 18. The 
verb “to make manifest,” found here and in 
ch. iii. 18, is frequent with St. John—e.g. 
John i. 31; iii. 21; 1 Johnii. 19; &c. 

Ebrard divides this Song into four Strophes : 


REVELATION. XV. 


[v. 5—6. 


behold, the temple of the tabernacle of 
the testimony in heaven was opened : 

6 And the seven angels came out 
of the temple, having the seven 
plagues, clothed in pure and white 





(1) God is praised for His works ;—(2) As 
King of the nations ;—(3) All the world shaB 
glorify Him ;—(4) Because He alone is holy, 
&c. See on ch. xviii. 4-20. 


6. And after these things I saw,] After 
the preliminary Vision of the “ Seven Angels” 
(ver. 1), and after the heavenly Song. 

and the temple of the tabernacle of the testi- 
mony in heaven] (Omit “bebold”—see vv. Ih) 
The phrase, “‘the Tabernacle of the Testimony,” 
is found in Acts vii. 44. It was so called as 
containing the Ark with the Law of God 
which ¢estifies against sin (Ex. xxv. 16, 21; 
XXX. 36; XXXiv. 29; xxxviil.21). The pattern 
existed in heaven (see Ex. xxv. 40; Heb. viii. 
5), and was doubtless that which St. John now 
beholds—cf. Ex. xxix. ro, 11 (LXX.); Num. 
xvii. 7; 2 Chron. xxiv. 6; &c., in which 
texts we read only of the “‘ Tabernacle of the 
Testimony.” The “Sanctuary” or “Temple” 
(see on ch. xi. 1)-—the structure which be- 
longed to “ the Tabernacle of the Testimony ” 
as enclosing it—is what is here meant. By the 
gen. appositional, notes De Wette, the Temple 
is descri as consisting of the Tent or 
Tabernacle made after the Divine pattern :— 
here it points to the Ark of the Covenant, ch. 
xi. 19. Ebrard notes: “ The Temple, so far 
as it was the place of the Ark of the Cove- 
nant, and therefore ‘The most Holy place,’ 
is here opened.” With this act of opening, 
adds Ebrard, the last and deepest mystery is 
unveiled. In ch. xi. 19 the Ark had become 
visible,—as in ch. viii. 3, before the Temple 
was opened, there had been a preliminary 
Vision of the Altar térough the Veil. Now 
the Holy of Holies is opened, and the Veil is 
withdrawn. While the Church is still 
struggling and suffering, the Ark appears for 
a moment (ch. xi. 19); now, when the Holy 
of Holies is thrown open, St. John is shown 
the Church triumphant in the New Jerusalem 
—see on ch. xix. 11. 


6. and there came out from the 
temple] Cf. ch. xiv. 15,17. There is no= 
thing in prophetic imagery more striking 
than this picture of the Seven Angels issuing, 
in solemn procession, from the Sanctuary. 

the seven angels] See ver. 1. 

that have the seven plagues,|] The 
article (see wv. //.), referring back to ver. 1, 


shows that in ver. 1 a preliminary Vision 
was exhibited. “The Angels Save the seven 





v. 7—8.] 


linen, and having their breasts girded 
with golden girdles. 

7 And one of .the four beasts gave 
unto the seven angels seven golden 
vials full of the wrath of God, who 


liveth for ever and ever. 


plagues even before the “Seven Vials” are 
given to them” (Hengst.). See on ver. 1. 


arrayed in linen, pure [and] bright, ] 
(Omit “ and,”—see vv. /l.). We cannot here 
refer (with Hengst.) to ch. xix. 8 ; for the word 
rendered ‘“ /inen” in that verse is different 
(not Aivov, but 76 Bicowoyv). The meaning 
“ linen” is very suitable here, as describing 
the angelic priestly attire (De Wette); cf. 
ch. iv. 4; Acts x. 30. 

The reading (Aidov) of important MSS., 
and the comments of ancient expositors, 
do not allow us to reject the sense, arrayed 
with [precious] stones, pure [and] 
bright—(Gr. with stone: see ch. xvii. 4; 
and cf. ch. xxi. 11), a thought borrowed from 
Ezek. xxviii. 13 (“every precious stone was 
thy covering”) where the stones named are 
found in the High Priest’s breastplate (Ex. 
XXvili. 17-20) :—see the note on Ezek. xxviii. 
13, and Note A at the end of this chapter. 
This reading gives the sense that each Angel 
wore raiment studded with precious stones. 
It is to be noted moreover that the word 
rendered above by “Jinen” is found else- 
where in the New Test. only in Matt. xii. 20, 
where it signifies “ flax :’—see Note A. 

In connexion also with this reading, Ps. 
Cxvili. 22; Isaiah xxviii. 16; 1 Pet. ii. 6 have 
been referred to. 


and girt about their breasts] As our 
Lord appears in ch. i. 13, a different noun 
(uacrds not o77Oos) being used. 


THE SEVEN VIALS (7-ch. xvi. 21.) 


7. And one of the four living beings] 
See Note B on ch. iv. 7. As representing 
“the creaturely life of nature” one of the 
Living Beings now reappears, and takes part 
in sending forth the coming plagues “into 
the Earth” (ch. xvi. 1). Cf. the action here 
with that of the Cherub in Ezek. x. 2, 7. 


gave unto the seven angels| We may also 
note the similar reappearance of one of the 
“Seven Angels” of ver. 1, in ch. xvii. 1,and in 
ch. xxi. 9:—of this fact see Ebrard’s inter= 
pretation quoted on ch. xvi. 21. 


seven golden vials} See Note A on ch. v. 8. 
The “ Vials” point to the metaphor i in ch. xiv. 
10, “the cup of God’s anger ”—the “ Vial” < 
Amos vi. 6) was the shallow “bowl” 


REVELATION. XV. 


8 And the temple was filled with 
smoke from the glory of God, and 
from his power; and no man was 
able to enter into the temple, till the 
seven plagues of the seven angels 


were fulfilled. 


which they drew from the larger goblet (Alf, 
in loc. quotes from Plato’s Crito, xpucais 
guddats €k TOU KpnTHpos apuTropevor). For 
the figure of the pouring out God’s wrath in 
judgment see Ps. lxxix. 6; Jer. x. 25 ; Zeph. iii. 
8. The “Trumpets” (ch. viii. 2, 6) announce 
judgment on God’s enemies; the “ Vials” 
execute His judgment on the Empire of the 
Beast. The “Vials” are Seven in number 
because “in them is finished the wrath of 
God ”—ver. 1. It is also to be noted that in 
ch. xxi. 9, the Angels still “have” the “ Vials ” 
which are still full; as if this judgment were 
even then future (see on ver. 1, and on ch. 
xvi. 21). 

The function of the Four Living Beings 
here is more significant than that which 
is assigned to them in ch. vi. 1, 3, 5, 7- 


liveth for ever and ever.| Diusterd. notes 
that this close of the verse adds, as in ch. i. 8, 
solemnity to the description:—cf. ch. i. 18; 
iv. 9, 10; x. 6; and see the pledge given of 
old to God’s people in the Song of Moses, 
Deut. xxxii. 40. With this manifestation of 
Divine wrath compare ch. xix. 15. 

Bengel observes that the “ Vials” do not 
constitute the Third Woe (ch. xi. 14), but 
are merely the preparation for it. In common 
with the majority of writers he notes that 
these plagues run out quickly. 


8. And the temple was filled with smoke 
from the glory of God,| As in Isaiah vi. 4 ; cf. 
Ex. xl. 34; 1 Kings viii. 10; 2 Chron. v. 14; 
Ezek. x. 2-4. We have in the “ smoke” 
(often “the cloud”) a symbol of the glory 
of the Divine Presence. Many, with refer- 
ence to the fre of judgment, understand 
the “ smoke” as the token of Divine wrath. 
Both ideas are, doubtless, combined: “ The 
shrine is opened which it was death to a 
stranger to approach (Num. ili. 10) 
Nor is it again closed, though inaccessible 
for a time from the awful Presence of 
God’s glory in the cloud, and His wrath in 
the smoke.”—I. Williams, p. 278. 


and from His power ;| See on ch.i. 6. On 
God’s present “foqwer” in heaven, which 
is not yet recognized on earth, see ch. iv. 
11. On this whole description, cf. Ps. xviii. 
8-15. 

and no one was able to enter into the 
temple,| E.g. as in Ex. xix. 21; Isaiah vi. 5, 


715 


716 


until the Divine wrath shall be appeased, 
and judgment accomplished, as the Seer 
proceeds to say,— 


tll the seven plagues of the seven angels 
should be finished.] As Bossuet writes: 


REVELATION. XVI. 





“While God strikes, man flies from His 
presence, or rather tries to conceal himself. 
When God ceases to send forth His plagues 
we may then again enter into His Sanct 

to consider there the order of His Judge 
ments.” 


ADDITIONAL NOTE on Chap. xv. 6. 


Note A on ver. 6.—ON THE READING Xidov. 


In Ezek. xxviii. 13, the Heb. text is. 
sn20D ApY yannos —LXX., wav déGov 
xenorov evdedera. Tischendorf (ed. 8") 
quotes Andreas (/.c. p. 85): Aivoy 7) AiGov Kaba-= 
pov, kaa Twa ToY aytiypdpay Exovar, did TE 
Tv THs Pioews ai’t@y Kabapornra Kal THY 
mpos Tov axpoywviaiov Aidov Xpiorov eyyiTyTa 
(1 Pet. ii. 6). 

“Compare also Haymo (as well as Beda 
and Ansbertus) : ‘ Vestiti lapide mundo et can- 
dido,’ i.e., ornati et amicti Domino Jesu Christo, 
fuxta illud: Omnes qui baptizati estis Christum 
induistis. Qui bene lapis dicitur, quo electi 
circumdantur, &c. Or if we read: vestiti 
lapidibus mundis sicut in quibusdam cdd. in- 
wenitur, per hos lapides designantur virtutes, 


CHAPTER XVI. 
2 Theangets pour out their vials full of wrath. 


&c. Alia translatio habet: vestiti lino mundo, 
per quod puritas vite,’ &c. (Tisch., ib,). The 
Coptic version has, “ circumamicti vestibus 
linteis splendidis ;’—the Vulgate, “vestiti lino 
mundo et candido.” In Matt. xii. 20, the 
only place in the New Test.—if we except 
this verse—where we find Awov, the words 
are: kal Alvoy ruddpevov ov oBeoe, “ and 
smoking flax shall he not quench.” The 
Greek word for “/inen” or “fine linen” is 4 
Biaoos, Luke xvi. 19; or Bvcowos, 7, ov, OF 
neut. Bicowoyr, scil. iuarcov (Winer, s. 522), 
Rev. xviii. 12, 16; xix. 8,14. In the LXX, 
for Hebr. yy, we have Bucaos Ex. xxviii. 6, 8, 
29, where the attire of the Jewish Priests is 
described and in’ver. 39 (35) moujoets xidapw 
Buocivny, “a mitre of fine linen.” on the 
word Cidaris, or Mitre, Note D on ch. ii. 10). 


6 The plagues that follow thereu 15 
Christ cometh as a thief. Frm pe they 


that watch. 





[Ver. 1 ras émra. Ver. 2 cis rhv yqv.—eni rots dvOp. Ver. 3 om. &yyehos.—Cans.—ra_ ev 


ty Oar. Ver. 4 om. ayyehos.—om. 2nd ecis.—[A reads éyévovro]. 


€adpevos read datos. 


Ver. 5 om. xupve.—[For 


Er. follows his codex in reading xai 6 jv Kat 6 d6ovos];—om. cai before 


6 dovos [with 8, P.—A,B,C omit kai 6]. Ver. 6 dé3axas.—om. yap. Ver. 7 2m. ad\ov ek. Ver. 8 
om. ayyedos. Ver. 9 rhv e€ova. Ver. 10 om. ayyedos. Ver. 12 om. adyyehos. Ver. 13 os 
Bdrpaxor. Ver. 14 Saipoviev.—a éxmopeverar [N,1 read onpeia exmopever@ar|.—om. THs yas 
xai.—rov 7odenov.—om. exeivns. Ver. 16 [S% reads cuvyyayov].—[For rézov, A reads worapdy 
—cf. Judg. v. 19, emi Sart Mayedda].— Appayedav. Ver. 17 om. ayyedos.—éemi.ex TOU 
pa0v.—om. Tov ovpavov.—| For dé tov Gpovov, N reads tov Oeov]. Ver. 18 aorpamal x. Pov. 


«. Bp.—om. oi [A reads avOpwmos éyévero].J 





THE SEVEN VIALS (1-21). 


As already stated (see the remarks introd. 
to ch. ii., and ch. vi.), the “ Seven Vials” which 
form the subject of this chapter are divided, 
like the Seven Epistles (ch. ii.; ch. iii.), into 
groups of three and four (vv. 2-4; and vv. 
8-17)—~vv. 13-16 forming an episode between 
the sixth and seventh Vials: (1) In each of 
the first three the preposition “ into” (eis) is 
used, as in ver. 1, to designate the object of 
“the wrath of God ;’—in the last four, the 
preposition “ upon” (emi) is used for the same 
purpose in each. (2) The ¢éird Vial is sepa- 
rated from te fourth by a formal conclusion 


consisting of two solemn. utterances in vv. 
5-7, lauding the righteous judgments of God. 
(3) The first three are marked by their short 
and sharp description, each Vial Scones 
but one verse (vv. 2-4); while each of the 
remaining four is described with much greater 
minuteness, notwithstanding the brevity of 
this entire Vision (wv. 8-21). (4) The 
JSourth Vial is connected with the group con- 
taining the fifth and the seventh, by the state- 
ment that under each of these Vials men 
“ blasphemed”’ God—see vv. 9, II, 21. (5) 
The fourth Vial differs essentially from the 
fourth Trumpet (ch. viii. 12 —for, though 
both affect the sun, “th sun” in ch. vill 12 


REVELATION. XVL 


epee eae Gosche hice a: coe 


aie 
an 
His 
at 
eri 


in we. o, 11. Disterd on the other hand 
concludes that there is no division 


that the Vik are all poured out at once. 
"The analogy of the Vials to th= Trumpets 
is obvious. This bas been noticed by so carly 


i As m the Esypt 
plagues, so in these Judements zo whet “God 
created to be ifal and pronounced to be 


ters of jJedement. Hemest. compares Ezek. 
ix. &, $>—see om Wer. I7- 

saying ie the sewer amgel:, Ge ye, and poor 
aut the sever vials of te crath af Gad] 
See we. JL; and compere ch. xv. 7- 


bomap race. . - . . The Seal correspond to 
the frst miracles of Moses before Pharaoh ;— 
the Trumpets to the ten plezsues ;—the Vinis 
to the disaster of the Red S-2” (Godet, Z «, 


77 


718 


angels, Go your ways, and pour out 
he vials of the wrath of God upon 
the earth. 

2 And the first went, and poured 
out his vial upon the earth; and 
there fell a noisome and grievous sore 
upon the men which had the mark of 


p.297). The “Vials” are introduced in ch. xv. 
1, as being the “ /ast plagues ;” they belong 
to the time when the End is near. The 
judgments accordingly fall, not on the fourth 
part of the earth, as under the “ Seals” (see ch. 
vi. 8); nor on the third part as under the 
“Trumpets” (see ch. viii. 7-12; ix. 15,18), but 
on a// created things. The events of the pre- 
ceding Visions are, as it were, taken up and 
completed :—thus the second, third, and sixth 
“ Vials” are analogous to the second, third, 
and sixth “ Trumpets” (ch. viii. 8, 9; ix. 14); 
and the seventh “ Vial” is parallel to the sixth 
“ Seal” (ch. vi. 12). We may also discern be- 
tween the sixth “ Vial” (ver. 12) and the seventh 
(ver. 17) an episode consisting of wv. 13-16; 
just as we noticed between the sixth and 
seventh “ Sea/s” (ch. vii.), and the sixth and 
seventh “ Trumpets” (ch. x.; xi. 1-14). The 
“ Vials” indeed to a great extent fall under the 
seventh “ Trumpet ;” and many writers consider 
that the “ Seven Trumpets” are contained in 
the seventh “ Sea/,”when “ the mystery of God 
is finished ” (see on ch. viii.). There is also in 
the “Vials” an anticipation of the End: e.g.after 
the sixth “‘ Vial” there is a gathering to battle as 
described in ch.xix.17—21, the symbolical battle- 
field being indicated; and under the seventh 
the judgment on Babylon is referred to before 
the event itself (see ch. xvii.; xviii; cf. 
ch. xiv. 8) :—ver. 20 points on to ch. xx. 11. 

Mr. Maurice (4c, p. 296) takes the 
Trumpets as pointing ‘to Jerusalem, and the 
Vials as pointing to Rome:—“ Both denote a 
crisis through which the two cities were 
passing within the same three or four years.” 

Godet, who takes the “Vials” to symbolize 
the judgments upon mankind enslaved to 
Antichrist, identifies the ee with 
the judgments spoken of in ch. xi. 5, 6 


THE FIRST THREE VIALS (2-7). 


2. And the first went,] In the Trumpets, 
as Bengel notes, the word “ Angel” is re- 
peated (ch. viii. 8, 9, 10, 12; ix. 1, 1435 XL 
15); now, such is the brevity of the style, 
the word is omitted throughout (see vv. 
4.):—“ The Vials make short work.” 

into the earth;] Asin ver. I. See vv. /l. 

—“into” (cis), not “upon,” the preposition 
being the same in each of the first three Vials, 
see vv. 3, 4. In the second group of four 


REVELATION XVI. 






[v. a—3. 


the beast, and upon them which wore 


shipped his image. 

3 And the second angel poured 
out his vial upon the sea; and it ae 
came as the blood of a dead man: 
and every living soul died in the 


sea. 


Vials, the preposition, in each case, is “ upom” 
(éxi)—see vv. 8, 10, 12, 17. 

and it became] As implied by A. V. 
in vv. 3,4; Or, “and there came”—nearly as 
A. V. in this place. 

a noisome and sore upon the men] 
(See vv. //.). The sixth plague of Egypt, 
Ex. ix. 8-12; see the note on Ex. ix.9. The 
word rendered “sore” is found elsewhere in 
the New Test. in ver. 11 and in Luke xvi 
21; compare Deut. xxviii. 27, 35; Job ii. 7 
(Hebr. 7’, LXX., as here, €Axos). Hengst. 
notes that it is “not without meaning that 
men and cattle were alike smitten with this 
distemper. Its nature was so noisome that 
the magicians could not ‘stand before 
Moses,’ Ex.ix.11.” Observe “sen” are smitten 
here, not the trees and grass as in the first 
Trumpet (ch. viii. 7);—and further “the 
men” now described, without exception, not 
“ the third part only. 

which had the mark of the beast,and wh: ch 
worshipped his image.) See ch. xill. 15, 16; 
xiv. 9. 

For examples of the various explanations 
of the “ Vial, ” see Note A at the end of this 
chapter. 


8. And the second poured out bis vial 
into the sea;| Omit “ Angel”—see vv. il. 

and it became blood as of a dead man; 
So A. V.; that is, “the sea became :” 
ver. 4, and Ex. vii. 20—the first E 
plague, as in ch. viii. 8. Or the meaning 
may be, “ the Vial became,” cf. vv. 2, 4. Or 
we may render, and there came, i.¢, 
“there was,” “ there resulted” blood. The 
intensity of the second “ Vial” above that of the 
second “Trumpet” (ch. viii. 8) consists not only 
in this that the whole sea is changed into 
blood, and that every living thing in it dies, 
but in this that the blood is not fluid, living 
blood—it is now that “ of a dead man,” and 
therefore tainted with corruption. 

and every living soul died,| Gr. “every 
soul of life”—see vv. //.; and cf. Gen. i. 20, 
30: not “ the third part” as in ch. Viii. 8, 9. 


[even] the things that were m the sea.] 
See vv. //.:—the art. referring to what is 
implied by “every living soul.” Cf. ch. viii. 
9, whence we might borrow the noun Signi- 
fying “creatures,” viz. [even] the [crea 
tures] that were in the sea”:—see also 


Vv. 4—5-] 


4 And the third angel poured out 
his vial upon the rivers and fountains 
of waters ; and they became blood. 


5 And I heard the angel of the 


REVELATION. XVI. 


waters say, Thou art righteous, 
O Lord, which art, and wast, and 
shalt be, because thou hast judged 
thus. 





ch. v. 13. The “sea” of “the nations” is 
to be understood, “the restless wicked 
world ” (Hengst.)—cf. ch. xvii. 15, and see on 
ch. xiii. 1. The “sea” (adds Hengst.) can- 
not be understood literally, for it cannot be 
the object of God’s wrath. A comparison 
with ch. viii. 8, 9 further shows that what is 
said here is symbolical. 

“ This is the fulfilment,” writes I. Williams, 
“of the second day of the Creation (Gen. i. 
6),—the dividing of the waters from the 
waters,—the sea of blood below, and the 
*sea of glass mingled with fire’ (ch. xv. 2) 
above, on which are standing the harpers of 
God.” 


4, And the third poured out his vial into 
the rivers and the fountains of the 
waters;| (See vv. //.). The frst Egyptian 
plague (Ex. vii. 20)—as in the preceding Vial 
and in the second and third Trumpets (ch. 
Vili. 8, 10)—is repeated here. ‘“ This corre- 
spondence between the second and third Vials, 
and the second and third Trumpets is de- 
signed. It furnishes a sort of finger-post for 
the internal connexion of the two groups” 
(Hengst.). In the first Egyptian plague 
there was a twofold symbolism, --the blood 
(2) denoted the slaying of the first-born, 
and the destruction of the Egyptian host in 
the Red Sea (Ex. xil. 29, 30; xiv. 28); and 
(2), it rendered the water of the Nile im- 
pure, denoting the loss of Egypt’s prosperity. 
The two emblems are combined in Ps. Ixxviii. 
44: “He turned their rivers into blood; 
and their floods that they could not drink.” 
And thus in“ the Trumpets” and “the Vials,” the 
symbolism exhibits both death and the result 
of the impurity of the waters. On this use 
of the same symbol under ¢qwo aspects, see 
the note on ch. vill. ro. 


and it became d/ood.| The A. V., either 
adopting the reading of the Codex Alexan- 
drisus (see vv. //.); or, taking “ the waters” 
—z neuter plural—to be the nom., renders 
“they became.” Asinvv. 2, 3, the sense may 
be and there came, i.e., “there was,” or 
“there resulted ” blood—the verb being in 
the singular. The third day of Creation is 
pointed to in this “ Via/,” when “ the waters ” 
were “ gathered together into one place.” 


THe MORAL OF THE FIRST GROUP (5-7). 


Here tollows the formal conclusion of the 
ing verses—the moral, as it were, 
drawn from them—separating the first group 


of three from the second group of fou 
Vials : see the remarks introd. to this chapter. 


5. And I heard the angel of the waters say- 
ing,] J. e., the “ Angel set over the waters.” 
Angels are set over the winds and over fire 
in ch. vii. 1; xiv. 18 (cf. ch. xi. 6); and hence 
we may infer that each of the Seven Vial- 
Angels is set over a distinct element. Or, 
the Angels who fill a special office in God’s 
presence, as in ch. viii. 2 (cf. the Angel-Princes 
in Daniel—see the notes on Dan. x. 13, 21; 
xii. 1). “Angels of the sea” are spoken of 
in the Rabbinical writings—see Bava Bathra, 
f. 84, 2, b, ap. Wolf; and cf. Schoettgen, 
p.1131,f. Diusterd. suggests that this Angel 
may simply represent the «waters, as the Four 
Living Beings (ch. iv. 6, &c.) represent the 
life of Creation. Grotius and Ebrard ex- 
plain that we have here a short description 
of the Angel who poured his “ Vial” over “ the 
waters,” and therefore has power over them ; 
just as the Angel in ch. xiv. 18 represents 
concisely the Angel mentioned in ch. xviii. 
4. Hengst. refers to John v. 4 in illus- 
tration,—but the genuineness of that passage 
is questionable. Stern notes that the “ Angel 
of the waters” might have complained to God 
at the change of the sea and rivers into blood, 
whereby an element essential to human life 
was tainted. On the contrary, the Angel 
confirms the justice of the punishment. 


Righteous art thou,] Omit “O Lord”— 
see vv. //, On the word “ righteous” see ch. 
xv. 3; and cf. ver. 7. 


which art and whichwast, thou Holy 
One,| See vv. //. The words in A.V., “and 
shalt be,” rest on no authority whatever. 
Griesbach, who notices the reading (écdpe=- 
vos) of the Textus Recepius, merely says: “ Cod. 
ap. Bezam.” Dr. Scrivener writes: “‘ érduevos 
(for éovos), a bold variation of Beza’s last 
three editions, is adopted in our Version, and 
the Elzevir text of 1633.”—Paragraph Bible, 
Intr., App. E, p.ciii. The Vulgate has “‘ gud es 
et qui eras sanctus,” with A, B, C (without the 
art.), which art and which wast holy. 


because thou didst thusjudge:| We 
may also render here: holy [art thou],— 
or [yea] holy,—betause” &c. These 
latter renderings, which regard “ 4o/y” as in 
apposition with “ righteous,” are supported by 
Diisterdieck and Wordsworth, but are not 
adopted by De Wette and Alf, who trans- 
late, with the Vulgate: “Thou art righ- 
teous who art and wast holy, because, 


719 


720 


6 For they have shed the blood of 
saints and prophets, and thou hast 
given them blood to drink; for they 
are worthy. 

7 And I heard another out of the 
altar say, Even so, Lord God Al- 
mighty, true and righteous are thy 
judgments. 

8 And the fourth angel poured out 





&o. Or a full stop may be placed at 
“judge.” 

The word “thus” (Gr. “these things”) 
iefers to the judgments described in vv. 2-4. 
For the word “ 4oly ” see on ch. xv. 4. 

For the title here given to God—“ Which 
art and Which wast”—see on Chis are 
xi. 17. 

In wv. 5-7 is given the reply to the appeal of 
the martyrs inch. vi. 9, 10, under the tA Seal. 


6. because they poured out] The 
former “ decause” is here repeated. 


and thou bast given them| The perfect— 
see vv. /I. 

blood to drink.| The sense being—‘ there- 
fore righteous art thou.’ Or there may be 
here a new clause: “Because they poured 
out.... thou hast given them blood 
also to drink”: ze. ‘the Vial is poured 
out, in retribution, on the waters.’ Hengst. 
notes that ‘to drink blood’ is mentioned 
not as a crime (see ch. xvii. 6), but as a 
punishment,—cf. Isai. xlix. 26. 


They are worthy.| Omit “ for”—see vv. 
jl. The contrast between this solemn decla- 
ration of “ the Angel of the waters,” and the 
same words used in ch. iii. 4, is expressed in 
Rom. vi. 23. 

Another voice is next heard in confirma- 
tion :—cf. ch. v. 9, 12, 13, 14. 

7. And I heard the altar saying,] 
Omit the words “ another out of”—see 
wv. i]. The great majority of writers see 
here a personification of the Altar,—including 
the souls of the martyrs beneath it, and the 
prayers of the saints offered on it (ch. vi. 9, 
10; viii. 3),—for which preparation was 
made in ch. ix. 13, 14; and which was further 
intimated in ch. xiv. 18. Words. would com- 
pare Gen. iv. 10; Heb. xii. 24; Luke xix. 40; 
as well as t Kings xiii. 2. Many, however, 
understand here (what the reading followed 
in the A. V. expresses) “the Angel of the 
Altar” —as in ch. viii. 3-5: “the Angel of 
the fire,” notes Zullig, “replying antiphonally 
to the Angel of the waters.” Burger refers, 
in illustration, to Josh. xxii. 26-29. 

Yea, 0 Lord God, the Almighty,] See 
on ch. i. 8. The word “Yea” expresses 


REVELATION. XVI. [v. 610, 






his vial upon the sun; and power 
was given unto him to scorch men 
with fire. 

g And men were sscorched with 74 
great heat, and blasphemed the name 
of God, which hath power over these 
plagues: and they repented not to 
give him glory. 

10 And the fifth angel poured out 


assent to what was said by“ the Angel of the 
waters.” 

true and righteous are] thy judgments.| See 
ch, xix, 2. 


THE LAST FOUR VIALS (8-17). 
8. And the fourth poured out bis vial] : 


See vv. //.; and on ver. 2. 


upon vay sun;| In this latter group ge 
the preposition is different :—“ 
“into” as in the former group of three. 


and it was given unto him] Or it 
was given unto it,z¢, “unto the sun,” 
on which the effect was produced, as on the 
“ sea,” and “ rivers,” vv. 3, 4—Sso De Wette, 
Bleek, Disterd., Words., Alf. The phrase “it 
was giyen” simply intimates that “the 
penal results are due to the permission of 
God” (Words.) :—cf. ch. ix. 5. Bengel and 
Hengst., however, more justly refer “unto 
him” to the Angel; see ch. vii. 2. 


to scorch men with fire.| Were the article 
before “ en” to be pressed, the sense would be 
“the men which had the mark of the Beast ” 
—ver. 2; cf. ch.ix.6 In this increased in- 
tensity of 4eat consists the plague :—for the 
contrast, see on ch. vil. 16; and cf. Isai. xlix. 
to. Under the fourth Trumpet, ch. viii. 12, 
there is merely a diminution of /ight¢ the 
sun being joined with the moon and stars. 
“The fourth Vial is on the sun; as the sun 
was created on the fourth day; and as the 
sun was stricken under the fourth Trumpet.” 
—I. Williams. 

As relating to “ the sun,” this “ Vial” also ree 
calls the zinth Egyptian plague —see Ex. x. 21. 


9, And men were scorched with great heat .} 
Or “the men,” “mankind” —the art. 
occurring here as well as in ver. 8: cf. 
ch, viii. 11; ix. 20. 


and they blasphemed] A note connect- 
ing this “Vial” with the fifth and seventh 
(vv. 11, 21), as one of the four “ Vials” of the 
second group. Men blaspheme, as being 
conscious that the plagues come from God ; 
they do not blaspheme under the sis “ Vial” 
(vv. 12-16) for there the judgment has not 
as yet fallen, but is merely prepared. 


v. 11—12,] 


his vial upon the seat of the bee; 
and his kingdom was full of dark- 
ness; and they gnawed their tongues 


r pain, 
11 And blasphemed the God ot 


the name of the God] Cf. ver. 11. 


which hath the power over these plagues ;] 
Gee vv. J/.). The words “these plagues 
are taken by some to mean the four “ Vials”; 
_ hence, they divide the Seven into four 

and three :—but see ver. 11, under the fd 

“ Vial,” which certainly refers back to ver. 2. 
All the “ Vials” are meant. 

I, Williams notes: “ Light without Love. 
The sun burns; life itself is as death . 


They are ‘tormented in the presence of the 
’ (ch. xiv. 10). ‘ Vident intabescunt- 
que.’”—p. 293. 


10, And the fifth poured out bis vial] 
See vv. //. With many writers, the second 
group of the Vial-Visions begins here :—The 
former group of four having been poured out 
on the earth and on the sun, the 7/4 Vial 
(wv. 10, 11) is poured out on the throne 
of the Beast ;—by the sixth, as the result of 
this, Satan (wv. 12-16) assembles the world 
for the last conflict against God ;—under the 
seventh (vv. 17-21), Babylon, the seat of the 
anti-christian World-power, is destroyed. 

upon the throne of the beast;| As ac- 
tually seen (ch. xiii. 2) when given by the 
“Dragon;’—upon the real centre of his au- 
thority (cf. on ch. ii, 13). Understanding 
by the Beast the ungodly World-power in its 
collective character, his “throne” is situated 
in different places at different perieds:—in 
Babylon of old (cf. Isai. xlvii. 1);—in Rome 
in the days of St. John;—and so on to the 
end of time: “This is as certain as that 
the Beast has Seven Heads” (ch. xiii. 1) 

. Wherever the throne may stand, it 


will be struck by the fifth “Vial” (Hengst.)— J 


see on ver.19. Ebrard here recalls the “ Angel 
of the Abyss” under the fifth Trumpet (ch. 
ix. 11),—“ the Destroyer ” who has given his 
“throne” to the Beast as the representative 
of the World-power. 


and bis kingdom was darkened;|] The 
ninth meee plague (Ex. x. 21) is more 
literally repeated here than under the fourth 
“Vial;’—see ch. vill. 12; cf. Ps.cv. 28. Wisd. 
Evil. 21 supplies the comment on this verse, 
“ Over them only was spread an heavy night, 
an image of that darkness which should after- 
ward receive them.” 
and they gnawed their tongues for pain,] 
(On the prep., éx, cf. ch. viii. 11,13). The 
word rendered “pain” (évos) is found only 
in this passage, in ch. xxi. 4, and in Col. iv. 


New Test—Vour. IV. 


REVELATION. XVI. 


heaven because of their pains and 
their sores, and repented not of their 
deeds. 

12 And the sixth angel poured 
out his vial upon the great river 


13:—see on ver. 11. 
“ pain ”or “ distress” as the result of darkness 
naturally leads to the symbolical in 
tion of tis “Vial” and also of the four 
previous “ Vials.” 

ll. And they blasphemed the God of heaven] 
A title found elsewhere only in ch. xi. 133 
in which place, in contrast to the present 


verse, repentance follows. To blaspheme 
God, as here, is the token of entire allegiance 
to the Beast—see ch. xiii. 6. 

because of their and their sores;| See 


ver. 2. Under this £4 “ Vial,” the judgment 
of the first—and doubtless, those also of the 
second and third “Vials”—continues: the 
fourth “ Vial” is but a different aspect of this 
plague. 

and they repented not of their works,] See 
ver. 9; an ix. 20, 21:—see also below, 
the note on ver. 21 as to the absence of any 
mention there of repentance. 


12. And the sixth poured out bis vial] 
See vv. Ul. 


upon the great river, the [river] Euphrates;] 
C£. the sixth “Trumpet,” ch. ix. 14; and see 
the note iz Joc. From beyond the Euphrates 
the hosts which invaded Palestine and ree 
sisted Israel used to come; and from that 
quarter Jerusalem, the type of the Church, 
was wont to be assailed; this imagery, there 
fore, symbolically represents the barrier, now 
to be removed, which opposed the progress 
of the ungodly World-power in its assault 
upon the Church. As to the source of 
the symbolism here, Hengst. strongly ob- 
jects to the opinion of Eichhorn, Ziillig, 
Heinrich, Stern, Hofmann, Ebrard, Words. 
(who gees the authority of the ancient 
expositor Haymo), viz. that it is borrowed 
from the capture of Babylon by Cyrus, who 
effected his conquest of the city by diverting 
the waters of the Euphrates. In support of 
his objection Hengst. (following Forbes) urges 
that the Apoc. does not borrow from Hero- 
dotus and Xenophon, but from Scripture. 
To this the answer is obvious,—‘ Prophecy 
does distinctly foreshadow the action of 
Cyrus.’ Of this there can be no doubt when 
one considers Jer. li. 31, 32, 36 (See the notes 
in Joc., and on Dan. v. 30); or compares Isai. 
xiii. (on which chapter see the concluding 
note). This historical fact, therefore, may 
safely be regarded as supplying the out- 
lines of the present imagery. Of course the 


ZZ 


723 


722 


Euphrates; and the water there- 
of was dried up, that the way of 





decisive war for which all the kings of the 
earth are gathered together (ver. 14) is not 
against a literal Babylon, but against the 
Church of God; and,.as Bengel notes, 
“ Ar-Mageddon lies in the land of Israel, and 
from the rising of the sun the way to it is 
over the Euphrates” (ver. 16). 


and the water thereof was dried up,| Re- 
ferring (see Jer. li. 36) to the means by which 
Fs captured the literal Babylon, A.D. 538 
(Herod. i. 191; Xen. Cyrop. vii. 5); see the 
notes on Dan. v.; and cf. Isai. xliv. 27, 28. 
Cyrus drained “the great river” from its 
bed, and thus prefigured the fall of the mys- 
tical Babylon. As further sources of this 
imagery the passage of the Red Sea, Ex. xiv. 
(cf. Zech. x. 10-12),—or of the Jordan, Josh. 
iv. 23—may be compared. The language of 
this verse, in fact, recalls more than one 
remarkable allusion in the former Scriptures 
to the people of God—e. g. Ps. cxiv. 3 ; Isai. 
xi. 15,16; li. 10; Jer. 1. 38. 


that the way might be prepared for 
the kings which [come] from the sun- 
rising.] See ch. vii. 2. That the destroyer 
of Babylon was to come from the East is con- 
stantly foretold—e. g. Isai. xiii—xiv.; xli. 2, 
25; xlvi. 11; and hence the imagery of this 
verse, whereby the destruction of the mys- 
tical Babylon is foreshadowed. 

As to the meaning of these words there is 
a great conflict of opinion :—(1) Beda, I. Wil- 
liams, Words., variously interpret that by 
“the Kings from the sun-rising” we are to 
understand the saints who are made “ kings” 
by Christ and form the armies of heaven that 
follow Him (ch. xix. 14);—who are spoken 
of by Isaiah (ch. lx. 3) ;—of whom the Magi 
from the East (Matt. ii.) were the first fruits ; 
—and-who are to contend at Ar-Mageddon 
with the antichristian powers of the world 
let loose trom the river Euphrates under the 
sixth Trumpet (ch. ix. 15, 16). With re- 
ference to’this interpretation see the notes 
on ch.i. 6 and ch. v. ro. 

(2) On the other hand, Bleek, Ewald, De 
Wette, Diisterd., Alf, include “the kings” 
here among “the kings of the whole earth” 
ver. 14; and, therefore, regard them as in- 
struments of the Dragon, and the Beast, and 
the False Prophet (ver. 13), in leading men 
to war not against Babylon but against the 
saints,—see ch. xii. 17; xiii. 7. 

(3) The rationalistic school, e. g. Bleek, 
De Wette, Dusterd., Reuss, Krenkel, identify 
these Eastern Kings with the “Ten Horns” 
or “ Kings” of ch. xvii. 12, who are intro- 


duced here by anticipation (as the Beast of 


REVELATION. XVI. 


{v. 12. 


the kings of the east might be pre- 
pared. 





ch. xiii. is referred to in ch. xi. 7), and whose 
fate is hinted at in ver. 16, but not fully 
described until ch. xix. 19, 20. Their re- 
lation to the Beast is not cleared up until 
ch. xvii. 12. This explanation connects itself 
with the notion that Nero (see on ch. xiii. 3) 
will return as Antichrist, with the Parthians, 
to destroy Rome. For this the way is now 
prepared. According to this interpretation, 
the plague of the sixth “Vial” consists in 
the assembling these kings, and annihilating 
them at Ar-Mageddon (ver. 16). 

(4) Ebrard interprets in a manner pecue 
liar to himself :—He identifies “the kings 
from the sun-rising ” with the “four Angels” 
in ch. ix. 14,15; they are here called “ the 
kings,” as being known to the Seer since 
the sixth Trumpet; and they are called 
“‘ kings” because Satan is so styled in ch. ix 
11 The host which follows these kings 
from tne East is related to the locust-host 
under the 7th Trumpet (ch. ix. 1-11), as 
the power of umdelief to the power of 
superstition. The difference existing between 
the fifth and sixth Trumpets, and the fifth 
and sixth Vials, Ebrard takes to be that in 
the former God’s judgments are inflicted on 
godless mankind as such; and that in the 
latter, they are inflicted on the kingdom of the 
Beast, or Babylon, the resuscitated Roman 
World-power (ch. xiv. 8). 

(5) Hippolytus takes these kings to be 
servants of Antichrist; and explains that God 
in His wisdom smooths the way for them to 
come and worship Antichrist, and be his allies 
(“ Ancolitus,” /.c., p. 27, see Note C on ch 
xii. 3). 

(6) Andreas makes the Eastern kings to 
be Gog and Magog (ch. xx. 8). 

The first of these interpretations may ap- 
pear to be the most probable, if we com 
the beautiful words of Isaiah (li. 10, 11):— 
“He hath made the depths of the sea a way 
for the ransomed to pass over. Therefore the 
redeemed of the Lord shall return, and come 
with singing unto Zion.” It is to be borne in 
mind, however, that the sixth Vial—and each 
“Vial” brings a “plague” upon the ungodly 
—is fully described in ver. 12, and is not 
continued in the verses which follow. In 
fact, as already observed, vv. 13-16 form an 
episode between the sixth and seventh Vials, 
herein resembling ch. vii. and ch. x.—xi. 14,— 
the shortness of this episode denoting the 
rapid approach of the End (cf. ch. x. 6, 7; 
see Hofmann, /. ¢., ii. s. 362). The conclu- 
sion then seems to be that the drying up 
of the Euphrates recalls the destruction of 
Babylon, the seat of the ungodly World- 


v. 13—14.] 


13 And I saw three unclean spirits 
like frogs come out of the mouth of 
the dragon, and out of the mouth of 


power, by Cyrus; and that this destruction 
bolzes the judgment for which prepara- 
tion is made under this “Vial.” 

Mr. Charles Maitland refers in illustration 
to the statement of the heathen historian 
Justin, that Alexander the Great “went into 
Syria, where he was met by many kings of the 
East with mitres” (Historia, lib. xi. 10). 
And Mr. Maitland adds that in 2 Esdras 
xill. 39-44 St. John’s expression seems to 
be applied to “the ten Tribes, which were 
carried away prisoners out of their own land 

. . over the waters.” ... “And they en- 
tered into Euphrates, ... for the Most High 
then shewed signs for them, and held still the 
flood, till they were passed over.”—School of 


Proph. Interpr., p. 70. 


THE EPISODE (13-16). 


13. And I saw] The formula introducing 
a new Vision (see on ch. xiv. 1; xv. 2). 


[ooming] out of the mouth of the 
dragon,| There is no participle here sig- 
nifying “ going forth,” “ proceeding,” and this 
Diisterd. supplies from the verb expressed in 
ver. 14. The Cod. Sinaiticus reads 666 
for cidSov: “And there were given from 
the mouth” &c. 

The Vision of ch. xiii. 2, 11 still continues: 
—see on ch. xx. 8, to which place this episode 
may look forward. 

and out of the mouth of the beast, and out 
of the mouth of the false propbet,| On the 
expression “out of the mouth,’ cf. “the 
rod of his mouth” (Isai. xi. 4). The 
“ False Prophet” —the second Beast of ch. xiii. 
11—appears for the first time in this place, 
under this name (cf. ch. xix. 20; xx. 10); 
he represents the power which, under the 
semblance of being Christ’s, really brings the 
Church under bondage to “the Prince of 
this World.” It is to be observed that as 
St. John elsewhere (1 John iii. 8) speaks of 
“many Antichrists;” andas “Antichrist” repre- 
sents “the Beast,” so he elsewhere speaks of 
“many false prophets” (1 John iv. 1): see 
Note A, on ch. xiii.; and the note on ch. 
sili. 11. 

three unclean spirits,| The epithet “un- 
clean” (cf. Matt. x. 1; Mark i 26; Luke 
iv. 33) implies their demoniacal nature as 
described in ver. 14; and also refers to the 
form under which they appear. 

as it were frogs:] (See vv. //.). Such 
was their form in the Vision: and to the in- 
tuition of the Seer these three forms have the 


REVELATION. XVL 


the beast, and out of the mouth of the 
false prophet. 
14 For they are tne spirits of 





same reality as those of the Dragon and the 
two Beasts from whcse mouths they proceed; 
or as the objects described in ch. ix. 1-11; or 
in ch. ix. 17 (Disterd.). There may be a ree 
ference here to the second plague of EeyPts 
Ex. vill. 1-14. If we except that plague, an 
the references to it, there is no other 
mention direct or symbolical of “frogs” in 
Scripture (cf. Wisd. xix. 10). Commentators 
quote profane authors who take frogs to be 
an emblem of garrulity and of uncleanness— 
e. g. Cicero (ad Aftic. xv. 16): see Zillig and 
Alf. in Joc. Stern quotes Eucherius Bishop 
of Lyons (Lid. form. spir. intell., c. 5) who ine 
terprets this verse of heretics “ who dwelling 
in the slime of sensuality cease not to croak 
with empty garrulity.” Frogs, notes Renan 
(p. 427), “ designate conjurors and harlequins 
(les prestidigitateurs et les arlequins,—Arte- 
mid., Oneirocr., ii. 15).” The frog, writes Volk- 
mar, is the symbol of “‘ magic.” And so Mr. 
Maurice, who specifies Simon Magus: see 
Note A at the end of this chapter. “ They seem 
to imply the pouring forth of wickedness of 
every kind, from the Devil and the world, and 
from that spiritual wickedness which usually 
attends on both.”—I. Williams (p. 304). 
To inquire who or what is to be understood 
historically by these three unclean spirits, 
Disterd. compares with the similar inquiry 
as to the “ four Angels” of ch. 1x. 14:—e. g. 
Grotius and Hammond apply to the cons 
test between Constantine and Maxentius; 
the “three unclean spirits” being the “ exstie 
spicium, auspicium, et libri Sibyllini, quibus 
fidebat Maxentius”;— Luther referred to 
Faber, Eck, and Emser “ who croaked against 
the Gospel;”— W olf and others to the Jesuits, 
Macchiavellists, and Spinozists;—Calovius to 
the Jesuits, Capucins, and Calvinists;—and 
so forth. 

Burger contrasts with these forms of the 
“unclean spirits,” the Dove, the form under 
which the Holy Spirit was beheld by John 
the Baptist—Luke ii. 22. 


14. for they are spirits of devils,] Gr of 
demons, see vv. //. See on ch. ii. 10; 
also the notes on ch. ix. 20; xviii. 2. 

The symbolism of ver. 13 is here explained. 
Hengst. however (and so Ebrard and Bleek) 
takes this to be “a parenthetical remark, 
translating: “For there are spirits” &e, 
the words being a solemn preparation for ver. 
15, as if it were “ Watch and pray; for:?— 
“ Nothing ” he adds, “ is better fitted to solve 
the enigma of the world’s history, or to stir 
us up to watchfulness and zeal than the cone 


ZZ2 


733 


924 


devils, working muracles, which go 


REVELATION. XVI. 


[v. 15—-16>— 


15 ‘Behold, I vome as a thief.‘ 


forth unto the kings of the earth and Blessed is he that watcheth, and 
of the whole world, to gather them to keepeth his garments, lest he walk 


the battle of that great day of God 
Almighty. 


naked, and they see his shame. 
16 And he gathered them to- 





viction that we have to contend not with 
flesh and blood, but against evil spirits (Eph. 
vi. 12),” 

working miracles;| Or signs—the word 
always used by St. John—a means of seduc- 
tion already ascribed to the “ False Prophet” 
(ch. xiii. 13), and now to each of the three 
enemies of God: cf. Matt. xxiv. 24 ; 2 Thess. 
iL 9. 

which go forth unto| See vv. il. for both 
the relative andthe verb. For the preposition 
—Gr. upon—cf. John xix. 33. From the verb 
here Disterd. supplies the participle omitted 
in ver. 13. 


the kings of the whole world,] (Omit 
“ of the earth and”—see vv. il.) The evil in- 
fluence falls upon the rulers of the “world” 
[Gr. “inhabited earth”] as representatives 
of their subjects who worship the Beast—see 
ch. xiii. 4, 8,123 xiv. 9, 11. 

Réville (/.c., p. 121) explains that St. John in- 
cludes under “the kings of the whole world,” 
the “ Kings from the Sun-rising ” (ver. 12), 
and the “Ten Kings” or “ Horns” of the 
Beast, ch. xvii.12. Reuss refers in illustration 
of this verse to 1 Kings xxii. 20-23. 

to gather them together to the war] See 
wv. /l.:—i.e., ‘in order to gather them to- 
gether.’ As to the constr., cf. ch. xii. 17. 

For the details of “the war” we must look 
to ch. xix. 11, &c: see especially ch. xix.19 ; and 
cf. Zech. xiv. 1-3. Two descriptions of this 
gathering are given, viz. in ch. xix. 17 and ch. 
xx. 8. For the relation of these “ dings” to 
the “Kings from the Sun-rising”’ see onver. 12. 
In ver. 12 the action of God preparing the 
way for His armies is symbolized (cf. Micah 
iv. 11,12): the means whereby the Dragon 
musters his hosts are described here. We 
are naturally led by the analogy of the influ- 
ence of evil spirits as described in the Gospels 
to compare the effect produced by the demons 
referred to in this verse, with the instances 
of possession of which we read elsewhere in 
the New Test. 


of the great day of God, the Al- 
mighty.] See vv. //. It is not stated by St. 
John against whom this war is waged ; but the 
reference to the drying up of the Euphrates 
indicates that it is directed against Babyton. 

Ebrard, from a comparison with Zech, 
xiv. 1-2 (“ Behold the day of the Lord cometh 
. . . - I will gather all nations against Jeru- 
salem to battle’) concludes “ that this last 


World-war, after the fall of Babylon, will 
seek to direct its power of destruction 
against Christ Himself and His Kingdom * 
(S. 437). 

On the “Great Day,” cf. Matt. vii. 22; 
Luke xvii. 24, 31; 1 Thess. v. 2, 4. 

We have to note throughout the Apoca- 
lypse a secret gathering of armies as for 
some great war ;—from the single mysterious 
Horseman in the frst Seal (ch. vi. 2), to the 
assembling of the fowls of heaven (ch. xix. 17): 
“ For the Lord God of Hosts hath a sacrifice 
in the North Country, by the river Euphrates” 
(Jer. xlvi. 10). The assemblage here is the 
signal for the Lord’s Coming ; and hence the 
exhortation in ver. 15, which is interposed 
parenthetically. 


15. I. Williams finely says: “ When the 
forces of good and evil are mustering for the 
last great conflict, in the midst of the sub 
lime description, ..... suddenly, for the 
pause and interval of one verse, the Spirit 
takes the reader aside and whispers ”— 


(Behold, I come as a thief.] See ch. iii. 3 ; and 
cf. Matt. xxiv. 42,44; 1 Thess. v: 2; 2 Pet. iii. 
to. Either Christ Himself is the speaker; or 
St. John breaks off his narrative to introduce, 
in Christ’s own words (see ch. xxii. 7, 12, 20), 
a word of consolation amid the terrors which 
the mention of the “ Great Day” excites:— 
compare ch. xili. 9; xiv. 12. 

keepeth his garments,| Compare ch. iii. 17, 


18; vii. 14:—the reason is stated in the 
words which follow. 


lest he walk naked,| On this figure see 
Isai. xlvii. 3; Ezek. xvi. 37 ; Hos. ii. 10; Nah, 
iii. 5. Hengst. explains the nakedness as de= 
noting not the gui/t, but the punishment ; the 
exposure to the world that men lack what 
constitutes the Christian state. 


and they see his shame).| Bleek draws atten- 
tion to the unauthorized procedure of Beza, 
who, against all external evidence, effaces this 
verse here, and transfers it so as to precede 
ch. iii. 18. Referring to the tendency to con= 
fine what we read in the Apoc. to time and 
place, I. Williams writes that this verse 
seems to say: “ Think not of this as of some 
great battle in which you are yourself uncon- 
cerned ; you are yourself, O reader, now in 
the midst of that conflict of which you read.” 


16. And he gathered them together] So A. V. 
Or, they gathered them together]. (1) Bengel 





v. 17.] 


gether into a place called in the 
Hebrew tongue Armageddon. 


takes the sixth Angel, ver. 12, to be the nom. 
here (cf. ch. ix. 14) ;—Hengst., Ebrard, Burger 
take it to be “ God, the Almighty,” ver. 14 (cf. 
Joel iii. 2) ;— Ewald takes it to be the Dragon, 
who comes forward as the head of the “ anti- 
christian trinity” introduced in ver. 13. 

The Vulg. renders “‘ et congregabit illos.” 

(2) Dusterd., Bleek, De Wette, Words., 
Alf., take “ the three unclean spirits” to be the 
nom. to the verb (“they gathered them to- 
gether”), a neuter plural to a verb in the 
sing., as in ver. 14— the same verb, too, being 
repeated, and his verse resuming the narra- 
tive of ver. 14, for ver. 15 is, as above, a 
parenthesis. This seems to be the true 
constr. 

(3) The Cod. Sinaiticus has the verb in 
the plural—see vv. //.; and so the writer in 
Schenkel’s Bibel-Lexicon understands “the 
Kings” of ver. 12 combined with the Beast 
whose wound was healed (ch. xiii. 3): these, 
in confederacy with the “ Ten Kiings” of ch. 
Xvii. 12 (explained to mean the Ten Procon- 
suls), now assail and destroy Rome (see the 
note on ch. xvii. 12). 

The aorist here is “ proleptic.” 

into the place] The Cod. Alexandrinus 
(see vv. ij.) reads “the river,” ie, the 
Kishon, Judges v. 19, 21 ;—see below. 


which is called in Hebrew] Cf. ch. 
ix. 11; John v. 2; xix. 13, 17, 20; xx. 16. 


4r-Mageddon| Inthe Vulgate Armagedon. 
Or Har-Magedon.] See vv. //. For the 
etymology see Note B at the end of this 
chapter. The name signifies The ‘ City’ or 
‘ Mountain’ of Megiddo. Bisping (reading 
Ar) understands the City ;—Bleek notes that 
the syllable Har refers to the position of Me- 
giddo at the foot of Mount Carmel ;—Reuss 
places it at the foot of Mount Tabor (Judges 
iv. 12)—see Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 
334. We read in the Old Test. of (not “the 
mountain,” but) the plain or valley (LXX., 
mediov, 2 Chron. xxxv. 22; Zech. xii. 11); or 
waters (Judges v. 19, see vv. //.) of Me- 
giddo, in the plain of Esdraelon,—“ the great 

lain of Esdraelon” of Judith i. 8—“The 
Battle field,” writes Dean Stanley, “of Jewish 
history, and the chief scene of our Lord’s 
ministrations. Bounded as it is by the hills 
ef Palestine on both north and south, it 
would naturally become the arena of war 
between the lowlanders who trusted in 
their chariots, and the Israelite highlanders 
of the neighbouring heights. To this cause 
mainly it owes its celebrity, as the battle-field 
of the world, which has, through its adoption 
imto the language of the Apocalypse, passed 


REVELATION. XVL 


17 And the seventh angel pcured 
out his vial into the air; and there 


into a universal proverb.” —Sinai and Palestine, 
ch. ix. 

The plain of Esdraelon “has been a 
chosen place for encampment in every con- 
test carried on in Palestine from the days 
of Nabuchodonozor, King of Assyria, unto 
the disastrous march of Napoleon Buonaparte 
from Egypt into Syria. Jews, Gentiles, 
Saracens, Christian Crusaders, and anti- 
christian Frenchmen, Egyptians, Persians, 
Druses, Turks, and Arabs, warriors of every 
nation that is under heaven, have pitched 
their tents on the plain of Esdraelon, and 
have beheld the banners of their nations wet 
with the dews of Tabor and Hermon.”’— 
Clarke’s Travels, 4th ed., vol. iv. p. 268. 

The plain of Esdraelon was of old the scene 
of four great battles, of which two (Judges 
iv.; vii.) were great victories, and two (1 Sam. 
XXxl.; 2 Kings xxiil. 29) were great disasters. 
Here in the remote past Deborah and Barak 
had annihilated the hosts of the Midianitish 
oppressors (Judges v. 19); and here in the 
latter days of the Jewish Kingdom, in battle 
with the overwhelming force of the Egyptians, 
Josiah received his death wound (2 Kings 
xxiii. 29; 2 Chron. xxxv. 20). 

As to the name “ Har-Magedon,” we know 
that Joel (iii. 2, 12) has described the scene 
of Divine judgments in imagery borrowed 
from Jehoshaphat’s victory recorded in 2 
Chron. xx. 22-26, although “the valley of 
Jehoshaphat—i.e., the walley of “the judg- 
ment of Jehovah”—is nowhere else spoken 
ofin Scripture: “ The name is coined by Joel 
on account of its meaning, and for the pur- 
pose of recalling the historical association” 
(see the notes on Joel iii. 2, 12). Here, 
accordingly, the plain of Esdraelon, and the 
scene of Josiah’s death, supply the symbol of 
the great final conflict, although Har-Ma- 
gedon” is nowhere else spoken of. So pro- 
found indeed was the impression made upon 
the Jews by the defeat and death of Josiah, 
that the Prophet can describe the deepest 
affliction of Jerusalem by no stronger similie 
tude than that of “‘the mourning of Hadade 
rimmon in the valley of Megiddon” (Zech. 
xii. 11). It is remarkable too that this v 
passage in the prophet (Zech. xii. 10) is 
expressly applied to our Lord (see ch. i. 7; 
John xix. 37), the meaning of the symbole 
ism, as Hengst. notes, being that what 
the enemies of the Church of old had once 
accomplished at Megiddo against Josiah, 
they would now again accomplish against 
Jesus. Hengst. also observes that this re- 
ference to the victory of Pharaoh over Josiah 
suits well the Egyptian character of the “Vals.” 


725 


726 


came a great voice out of the temple 
of heaven, from the throne, saying, 
It is done. 


“Tf,” as Godet interprets (see on ch. xi. 13), 
“the antichristian Jewish Monarchy is here- 
after to have its seat in the East, at Jerusalem, 
the rival of Rome, the choice of this battle- 
field, normal in Palestine, need not surprise 
us” (/. ¢., p. 381). 

Hengstenberg makes the sixth “Vial” break 
off “of necessity here”; the “ Seven Vials” 
forming of themselves a separate whole, and 
the battle in ch. xix. 11, &c., being not a 
continuation, but only a particular phase of 
the present conflict. 

Ebrard, after Bengel, concludes that the 
war, or great conflict with unbelief, now 
begins ; that it is continued under the seventh 
“ Vial” (ch. xvii. 14); and that it comes to an 
end in ch. xix. 19. 

On the other hand, the conclusion seems 
plain that a datile at “ Har-Magedon” is not 
described here; but, as in the sixt4 Trumpet- 
Vision, the gathering together of armies in 
preparation for a decisive struggle. The fact 
that St. John has employed a word (Har- 
Magedon) not found in connexion with any 
locality or historical event, of itself points 
to a figurative interpretation. Nor indeed 
are we to think of literal warfare. Under 
Judaism we read of a literal Egypt, of a 
literal Amalek, of clean and unclean animals ; 
—in other words, we recognize the outward 
sign, the corporeal type. Under Christianity 
we can only see the broad line which will 
finally separate the righteous and the wicked. 


17. And the seventh poured out his vial 
upon the air:| See vv. J). (For reading 
the preposition upon, ei, see the note on 
ver.2). ‘‘ The air,’ Bengel observes, is the 
laboratory of thunder, lightning, hail. We 
also learn from Eph. ii. 2, that ‘the air” isthe 
region of the power of evil. The seventh 
“ Vial” accordingly is poured out upon the 
throne of the “ Dragon” (Satan), as the fifth 
had been poured out upon the throne of the 
Beast (ver. 10). The Devil is cast into the 
ake of fire after the Beast and the “ False 
Prophet” —see ch. xix. 20; XX. Io. 


and there came forth a great voice out 
of the temple, from the throne,| (Omit of 
heaven, see vv. /l.); the Codex Sinaiticus 
reads, “of God,” in place of “from the 
throne,” —as in ch. xi. 1). Writers generally 
understand, the voice of God Himself, as in 
ver. 1: this, they think, the words “from 
the throne” confirm, as well as the brief and 
sharp import of the voice,—a result which 
may well be questioned :—see below. Burger 
suggests that the voice proceeded from that 


REVELATION, XVI. 


[v. 18 


18 And there were voices, and 
thunders, and lightnings; and there 
was a great earthquake, such as was 





Living Being who, placed beside the throne 
(ch. iv. 6), gave the “Seven Vials” to the 
Angels (ch. xv. 7). 


saying, It is done.| This announcement 
refers back to ver. 1,—‘ That is done which 
was commanded’: compare Luke xiv. 22; 
Ezek. ix. 11; Vulg. factum est; and also ch. 
xxi. 6, where the verb is in the plural. Ebrard 
regards the phrase “Jt is done” as parallel 
to the expression of ch. xi. 15 “és become,” 
under the seventh Trumpet, and as intro- 
ductory to the End. Hofmann observes that 
as the frst Vial was poured out upon the 
earth, so the /ast is poured out upon the air, 
denoting that the terrors of the revelation 
Christ will thus appear spread out over the 
universe; and he takes the words to signify the 
close of the Vision beginning with ch. xv. 1 
(ii. s. 363). Vitringa (p. 734) translates by the 
expressive term “ FUERUNT ”; the nominative 
to the verb being “the old heaven and the old 
earth which ignorance and superstition had 
brought into the economy of the Church ;”— 
similarly Beza. Grotius, applying to Rome, 
interprets ‘‘ Fuit Roma.” I. Williams refers to 
our Lord’s last words on the Cross, “It is 
finished,” John xix. 30. 

The “ Vials” run out quickly, notes Bengel : 
the “sores” under the Afth are the same as 
under the frst; and as the frst comes after 
the reception of “the mark of the Beast,” 
so the seventh introduces the judgment on 
Babylon. The “ Trumpets” affected temporal 
kingdoms; and here the “ Vials,” which are 
in the same order, affect the Beast now in- 
vested with power over those kingdoms. 


18. And there were lightnings, and 
voices, and thunders;] See wv. /. CE 
ch. viii. 5; xi. 19:—the order in the latter 
text is exactly as here; there is also the 
earthquake, and, as below in ver, 21, “great 
hail.” On this Hengst. notes, in opposition 
to the writers who find in the Apoc. a cone 
tinuous history: “The seventh Vial agrees 
exactly in its main features with the seventh 
Trumpet. Here again we have arrived pre- 
cisely at the same point at which we found 
ourselves there.” 


since there were men on the earth,| Of, 
since there was a man on—see vv. éi. 

so mighty an earthquake, [and| so great.] 
In the case of this earthquake there is no 
repentance such as followed that in ch, xi, 
13—see ver. 21. 

The action, notes Reuss (p. 383), now bering, 
and three conflicts follow: (1) The fall 
Rome (ch. xvii., xviii.) ; (2) The conflict with 








¥v. 19.} 


not since men were upon the earth, so 

mighty an earthquake, and so great. 
19 And the great city was divided 

into three parts, and the cities of the 


REVELATION. XVI. 


nations fell: and great Babylon came 


in remembrance before God, “to give = Jez. 98: 


unto her the cup of the wine of the ~ 
fierceness of his wrath. 





Antichrist (ch. xix. 11-21); (3) The defeat of 
Satan (ch. xx. 7-10). Hengst. observes that 
while the Seals and Trumpets have to do 
simply with godless men, the reference here, in 
WV. 19, 20, is to the God-opposing powers of 
the world. 


19. And the great ctty.] For this phrase see 
ch. xi. 8; xvii. 18. 

At this point there are different lines 
of interpretation:—(1) Dusterdieck writes: 
“From the connexion with ch. xiii., and from 
the context here, it undoubtedly follows that 
the Great City which is divided into three parts, 
is identical with ‘ Babylon the Great’ (ch. xiv. 
8), #.c., with the capital ofthe World-kingdom 
which appeared in ch. xiii. under the form 
of the Beast from the sea (cf. ch. xvii.) ”: 
to the same effect Burger, and Bisping ;—(z) 
Ebrard denies that the “ Great City” is the 
same as “Babylon the Great.’ We have 
here “ the Great City;” and we first read of 
“the Great City” under its symbolical de- 
scription as “ Jerusalem’’—although not “the 
geographical Jerusalem ”—in ch. xi. 8, where 
it stands for the godless world absolutely. We 
first read of “ Babylon” in ch. xiv. 8, where it 
stands for the W orld-power in its Roman form 
aisen again after its overthrow, and organized 
anew under the name of Babylon by the “ Fa/se 
Prophet ;’—(3) Alcasar, De Wette, Ewald, 
Alf., decide that by “the Great City” or 
“ Babylon” we are to understand Rome,—e.g. 
Alf. merely notes “ Rome.” Hengst. writes: 
“That Babylon denotes heathen Rome has 
already been proved at ch. xiv. 8.” “ Tavo 
Cities,’ he adds, “ have in the Revelation the 
name of ‘ Great,—Jerusalem in ch. xi. 8, and 
Babylon, that is Rome, in all the other pas- 
sages and very commonly, ch. xiv. 8 ; xvii. 18; 
xviii. 10, &c.”;—(4) Andreas, C. 4 Lapide, 
Bengel, Hofmann, Stern, &c. (appealing to 
ch. xi. 8, see the note in Joc.) identify “the 
Great City” with Jerusalem; I. Williams 
(p. 311), in the same sense, takes “te Great 
City” to be “ the Holy City” defiled, of which 
only a tenth part falls in ch. xi. 13. So too, 
according to (the Arabic) Hippolytus, Baby- 
lon is here the symbol of sinful Jerusalem ; 
and his entire explanation depends on the 
assumption that the destruction of Jerusalem 
is described (see Ewald’s account of his lost 
commentary, /.c., s. 10). Ribera (quoted by 
Stern, s. 362) notes that though this may seem 
to be said of- Rome, nevertheless the Apostle 
clearly icts in ch. xvii. that Rome is 
to be destroye: Dy the “Ten Kings” be- 


fore the beginning of the reign of Antie 
christ, by whose aid Jerusalem is to become 
“ Great.” 

The signification of this verse seems to 
be that, understood in the most general 
manner, “ the Great City” is the centre 
of the World-power where “the throne 
of the Beast” (ver. 10) is always to be found, 
whatever the forms of evil may be under 
which that power is exhibited—whether 
unbelief, or superstition, or sensuality; and 
that by “ Babylon,” i.e., the great World-city 
as represented in the language of prophecy, 
the particular locality is symbolized where 
the throne of the Beast may exist at any one 
period of history :—it may be Rome as in St. 
John’s day ;—it may be Jerusalem ;—it may 
be elsewhere at any subsequent time: see 
on ver. Io. ? 


was divided into three parts,| Gr. “became 
into three parts,’ from the effects of the 
earthquake—cf. ch. xi. 13. It is to be noted 
that this division “ into three parts” is spoken 
of, in connexion with Jerusalem, by Ezekiel 
(v. 2,12). The number three probably refers 
to the threefold exercise of Satanic agency 
spoken of in ver. 13—so Ebrard. Hengst. to 
the same effect understands the ¢4ree powers 
that bore rulein “ the Great City,” the Dragon, 
the Beast, “the False Prophet ;’ to each, as 
it were, a part. I. Williams takes the 
number “to indicate judgment on the 
Christian Church, inasmuch as the number 
three,and a third part, seems to mark the 
judgments on the Church under the Trum- 
pets” (p. 311). Andreas saw in the “three 
parts” the Jewish, the Samaritan, and the 
Christian dwellers in Jerusalem (/.¢., p. 95) ;— 
Hofmann (ii. s. 368) refers to the ¢4ree hills, 
Zion, Akra, Bezetha, on which Jerusalem was 
built: he seems to identify the earthquake 
here, with that in ch. xi. 13 ;—Beda under- 
stands heathens, Jews, heretics ;—and Bossuet 
the division of the Roman Empire under 
Honorius, Attalus, and Constantine, A.B. 
407-411. 


and the cities of the nations fell:| Not 
only the great centre of the World-power, 
but every lesser stronghold of evil. The 
“ nations” may mean the “Gentiles” (see 
ch. xi. 2), as opposed to the Church, “the 
Israel of God”: or, if “the Great City” is 
taken to be Jerusalem (ch. xi. 8), “ the cities 
of the nations” may be named in contrast to 
the City of the people of God. 

Hengst. thinks that ver. 19 should end here. 


729 


728 


20 And every island fled away, 
and the mountains were not found. 


REVELATION. XVI. 


[v. 20—a4. 


21 And there fell upon men 2 
great hail out of heaven, every stone 





At lexst, from here to the end of the verse the 
words are parenthetical; the fate of Babylon 
being reserved until ch. xvii.; xviii. Hengst. 
would extend the parenthesis to the end of 
ver. 20; perhaps rightly. 

and Babylon the great] Babylon the 
Great, already introduced in ch. xiv. 8, is the 
locality where, at this crisis, “ te throne of 
the Beast” is to be found. 

In the land of Shinar the attempt was first 
made to array a World-empire against God 
(see Pusey on Zech. v. 11). Babylon, in its 
first form on the plain of Shinar, was the 
standing type of the idolatrous City. Shinar, 
as an ideal land of unholiness, is contrasted 
with Israel, “the Holy Land” (Zech. ii. 
12). What was Nineveh under Sennacherib 
(2 Kings xix. 36) was Babylon under Nebu- 
chadnezzar (2 Kings xxv. 1). The type 
remains, whatever may be the site of the 
World-city. 

was had in remembrance in the sight 
of God,] Cf. Acts x. 31. Of this “the 
earthquake” was the token of warning. See 
ch. xvil. 1-5. 

to give unto her the cup of the wine of the 
fierceness of his wrath.| Gr. of the wrath 
of His indignation:—see ch. xiv. 8, 10; 


xix. 15. 

The fall of Babylon is, according to De 
Burgh, “the principal event of the seventh 
Vial”; and the mention of it in this place he 
regards as a mere reference to what was an- 
nounced already in ch. xiv. 8—the “ Vials” 
themselves with chapters xvii.—xix. being no 
more than a detail of the “ Harvest” in ch. 
xiv.; accordingly we find ch. xix. closing, 
like ch. xiv., with the Vintage, or “ treading 
of the wine press.” 

20. and [the] mountains were not found.] 
Compare the imagery under the sixth Seal, 
and especially ch. vi. 14. This verse may 
be taken as 1esuming the direct narrative 
in continuation of the words “the cities 
of the nations fell:” or, perhaps, it is to 
be included in the parenthesis — Babylon 
corresponding to the “ Great City,” and the 
islands and mountains to the “cities of the 
nations”; for islands like mountains (see on 
ch. vi. 14) denote kingdoms: ‘“ The difference 
is merely this, that, in the designation of 
kingdoms by islands, respect is had only to 
their separate existence ; while they are called 
mountains in so far as they exercise dominion 
over others” (Hengst.):—cf. ch. xvii. 9, 10, 
“ the Seven Heads are Seven Mountains,” and 
“ are Seven Kings.” 


“Iglands and mountains,” notes Burger, 


“ disappear, but the earth remains. The case 
is different in ch. xx. 11.” 


21, And great hail, [every stone] 
about the weight of a talent,] See 
on ch, xi. 19—the seventh Trum We 
can scarcely refer here (with Stern and Alf.) 
to the seventh plague of Egypt (Ex. ix. 18, 
&c.), which is renewed in the first “ Trumpet,” 
ch. viii. 7:—this hail is preternatural. Wet- 
stein, Disterd., and others refer to Diodorus 
Siculus (xix. 45) who speaks of hailstones 
each a mina in weight (an Attic mina is the 
sixtieth part of an Attic talent) as being 
something marvellous ; and also to Josephus 
(B. J., v. 6. 3), who tells of stones of the 
weight of a talent being hurled from the 
machines used in war. Hailstones are a 
symbol of Divine wrath (Isai. xxx. 30; Ezek. 
xiii. 11; cf. Josh. x. 11). This “ Vial” seems 
to include all “ the great tribulation” of ch 
vil. 14; Matt. xxiv. 21. 


cometh down out of heaven upon 
men:] Some press the article here, “the 
men,” as in vv. 8, 9,—viz., those who have 
“the mark of the Beast,” see ver. 2. 


and men blasphemed God| Or “the 
men,” as before; not “all men.” Bengel 
notes that in wv. 9, 11, where also men blas- 
pheme, it is added that they “ repented not.” 
Of this nothing is said here; and he thence 
infers that the men were killed by the hail 
as the Amorites in Josh. x. 11. Hengst. in- 
terprets: “They no longer have time to 
repent ; even when dying they can still blas- 
pheme.” This, however, scarcely follows 
from the text, which simply states that during 
this judgment men continued to blaspheme. 
Neither by the Vial-plagues here, nor by 
the Trumpet-plagues—see on ix. 20— 
are men moved to repentance. 

In ch. xi. 13, the effect of the judgment is 
different. 

because of the plague of the bail;| On 
the prep. cf. ch. vili. rr. 

is exceeding great.] From the fact that 
men continue to blaspheme; and also from 
the fact that in ch. xv. 1 we are told that 
with the “Seven Vials” the wrath of God 
shall be finished, Ebrard concludes that the 
seventh “Via/” does not end here. This Vial- 
plague he divides into two judgments: (a) 
The judgment on Babylon which occupies ch. 
xvii.-xviii—chapters which merely expound 
ch. xvi. 19; (4) The judgment recorded in 
ch. xix. 11-21 (which, regarded from an 
opposite point of view, Ebrard calls “the 
marriage of the Lamb,” ch. xix. 7), Be- 








Vv. 21.] 


about the weight of a talent: and 
men blasphemed God because of the 





tween these two separate Visions ch. xix. 1- 
1o is the interlude. Ebrard adds in con- 
firmation that as in ch. xvii. 1 it is “one of the 
Seven Angels which have the Seven Vials” who 
shows to the Seer the judgment on the Har- 
lot Babylon; so in ch. xxi. 9, it is, in like 
manner, one of the same Seven Angels who 
shows him “the Bride, the wife of the 
Lamb,” at the highest degree of her glory 
(A.c., SS. 453, 489, 528). e 
Burger considers that the events, which 
are comprehended with such brevity and in 
go summary a manner in vv. 18-21, are, on 
account of their importance, repeated and 


REVELATION. XVI. 


plague of the hail; for the plague 
thereof was exceeding great. 


again described more minutely in the chapters 
which now follow. Chapters xvii.—xix. are 
related to these verses, just as ch. xv.—xvi. are 
related to ch. xiv. 19, 20. This connexion of 
ch, xvii—xix. to ch. xvi. 18-21 explains why, 
in ch. xvil. 1, it is one of the Seven Vial- 
Angels who interprets for St. John ‘the 
events which are comprised under the 
seventh Vial-Vision. 

According to Reuss, Rome is punished 
provisionally, by the “ earthquake,” but its in- 
habitants persist in their impenitence. In 
ch. xvii. the closing scenes of the drama are 
exhibited. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Chap. XVI. 


Nore A ON CH. xvi—THE VIAL-VISIONS. 


The Ancient Expositors :— 

In the remarks introductory to ch. xvi., 
as also on ch. viii. 6, some notice has been 
taken of what St. Irenzus has said respecting 
St. John’s references to the Plagues of Egypt 
among the judgments announced in the 
Visions of the Trumpets and the Vials. He 
observes (iv. 30, p. 268) that the departure 
of Israel from Egypt “typus et imago fuit 
profectionis Ecclesiz, que erat futura ex 
Gentibus: . . . . siquis, autem, diligentius 
intendat his que a Prophetis dicuntur de fine, 
et quzcunque Joannes discipulus Domini 
vidit in Apocalypsi, inveniet easdem plagas 
universaliter accipere Gentes, quas tunc parti- 
culatim accepit gyptus.” 

For the reference of Victorinus to the 
Vials, sce Note A on ch. ix., the substance 
of his interpretation being that the Vials are 
a final and more intense pouring out of the 
Trumpet-plagues. On ch. xv. 1, he merely 
writes:—“Semper enim ira Dei percutit 
populum contumacem septem plagis, id est 

ecte, ut in Levitico (xxvi. 24) dicit, que 
in ultimo future sunt cum Ecclesia de medio 
exierit.” And of those who stand on the 
“Glassy Sea”: ‘“‘Id est, super baptismum 
suum stabiliter in fide constitisse, et confes- 
gionem in ore suam habentes, exsultaturos in 
regno coram Deo.”—/.c., p. 62. 

Prosper of Aquitaine (circ. A.D. 440, ap. 
Max. Bibl. Paitr., t. viii., De Dim. Temp. c. x1.) 
refers to ch. xvi. 13 :—the “ three frogs,” not 
mentioned by any earlier writer, he under- 
stands to be three unclean spirits, which will 
go through Asia, Africa, and Europe, “ qui 
et signis persuadeant Antichristum ipsum 
esse Christum.” 

Andreas makes the Vials to signify: (1) 


The ulcer of conscience—perhaps, too, an 
outward ulcer corresponding to that of the 
soul ;—(2) The wars of Antichrist will stain 
the waters with blood;—(3) The second 
Vial is repeated. The Altar (ver. 7) at times 
stands for Christ, at times for Angelic powers; 
—(4) They who delay to come to God are 
constrained by the burning heat to repent; 
—(5) The Kingdom of Antichrist will be 
darkened, and deprived of the Sun of Right- 
eousness; (6) Gog and Magog will come 
from Scythia; and Antichrist will cross the 
Euphrates from Persia to which the Tribe 
of Dan (whence springs Antichrist) was 
exiled, and with the aid of Kings and chiefs, 
will inflict on men bodily and spiritual death 
(The unclean spirits (ver. 13) are likened to 
“ frogs,’ —6ia TO todes avtav kai BopBopades, 
kat axa@aprov, Kat mpos tas divypous ndovas 
épmrvatikoy Tay movnpav Suvapéwy.) ;—(7) The 
Seventh Vial indicates convulsions, as once 
at Mount Sinai—Heb. xii. 27. “The Great 
City” is Jerusalem (modw Sé peyddny, ov 
mAnOet ... GAN év GeooeBeia . . . . THY 
‘lepovoadnp trodkapBavopev.—. ¢., P. 95). 

Modern Expositors :— 

Speaking generally the early writers had 
referred the Vials to the future times of Anti- 
christ. In more modern expositions we find 
the usual variety—“ Preterist,” “ Historical,” 
“ Anti-Papal,” “ Futurist,” and “ Allegorical.” 

I. (@) Ordinary “ Preterists” :— 

De Lyra saw in the Vials the events 
from the time of Hadrian to Godfrey of 
Bouillon (ob. A.D. 1100). 

Grotius placed under the first six the 
events from Trajan to Constantine, and under 
the seventh the conquest of Italy by the 
Ostrogoths :—e.g. he takes the darkness (ver. 
to) to mean the diminished splendour of 
the Roman Empire. The division of the City 


729 


3° 


into three parts (ver. 19) he explains to mean 
the demolition by Totila (A.D. 544) of the 
third part of the walls of Rome. 

Bossuet reads in the Vials the history of 
Valerian and Gallienus;—Wetstein that of 
Vitellius and Vespasian, applying ver. 2 to 
the sickness in the army of Vitellius; ver. 3 
to the revolt of the fleet; and understanding 
the “ three parts of the City ” in ver. 19 to be 
“ Vitelliani, Flaviani, et populus Romanus.” 

Stuart: “The persecuting power of the 
unbelieving Jews ceased in the main with 
the destruction of Jerusalem. Hence, the 
tempest and earthquake which lay that place 
in ruins are the finale of the First Cata- 
strophe” (ch. vi-ch. xi. 19). The Second 
Catastrophe, or the destruction of the Roman 
persecuting power is contained in ch. xii—ch. 
xix. The Vials in general follow the course 
of the Trumpets ; and all “is a succession of 
annoyances.” The tA Vial affects the throne 
of the Beast,—ie., his Capital; the sixth 
brings in an overwhelming foreign enemy; the 
seventh paralyses the power of the Beast,— 
i.e., persecution is arrested when Nero dies. 

(4) Rationalistic “ Preterists” :— 

Volkmar’s explanation rests on the Nero- 
Fable:—(1) The first Vial brought the 
pestilence in the time of Nero,—see Sueton. 
Nero, c. 39 ;—In (2) and (3) “the blood of 
saints and prophets” (ver. 6), is avenged ;— 
(4) The conception of an Oriental. The 
scorching power of the sun torments sin- 
ners ;—(5) This Vial is poured out on the 
throne of the Beast, the throne of Nero; the 
ee eet following whose death is typified 

y ‘“ darkness ”—“ Keiner vor sich sah, was 
kommen sollte”;—(6) The Kings of the 
Parthians combine with the returning Nero 
against Rome, in the first place (cf. ch. xvii. 
16), and then against Zion (ch. xix. 19). 
The “frogs,” by their seductive or magical 
words, urge on the world to acknowledge 
Nero as the sole possessor of the throne of 
the Cesars, viz. (i.) Satan offers the “Ten 
Kings” the sovereignty of the world (ch. 
Kill. 2; xvii. 16; Luke iv. 5, 6); (ii.) The 
chief Antichrist, the Beast, declares that he 
has received that throne as its sole legiti- 
mate occupier (ch. xili. 2), and allures the 
“ Kings” by the promise of glory to lend 
him their power (ch. xvii. 13); (iii.) The 
“ False Prophet” (who according to Volk- 
mar is St. Paul,—see on ch. xiii. 11), urges 
them, by an alleged doctrine as from God, to 
assist the returning Nero to destroy Rome, 
(ch. xiii. 15 ; Rom. xiii. 1-3) ;—(7) This Vial 
represents in symbol the final Judgment. 

Reuss (Crist. Théol.): The first four Vials 
are poured out on the four parts of the 
Apocalyptic universe—earth, sea, rivers, sky ; 
and this is summed up, as in the first four 
Seals and Trumpets, by describing the effect 


REVELATION. XVI 





upon men of these plagues, viz. unbelief; —The 

jifth Vial is poured upon Rome ;—The sixth 
on the Euphrates, making way “ for the armies 
of the East, led by the Emperor Antichrist 
against Rome ” (/.c., 379) ;—The seventh in- 
troduces the voice which proclaims that the 
time of waiting is passed. 

Renan adds nothing special to this exposi- 
tion of Reuss: “The cycle of preludes,” he pro= 
ceeds, “is completed: nothing more remains 
than to see the judgment of God unfold itself. 
The Seer makes us first assist at the judgment 
of the greatest of all the guilty—the City of 
Rome (ch. xvii.) ”—p. 429. 

Il. “ Historical” Expositors — 

According to Bullinger in the first ss 
Vials, the history is given of events from A.D. 
1494 to his own time, A.D. 1516 :—Brightman 
counted the first three from the date of Ferdi- 
nand and Isabella to his own time, A.D. 15903 
—Mede, considering the Vials to predict events 
by- which the Papal power has been dimi- 
nished, interprets the frst Vial as fulfilled 
in the history of the Waldenses and Albi- 
genses; and the second in the Reformation, 
There his exposition of this Vision ends; 
and he considered the remaining five Vials to 
be unfulfilled when he wrote, circ. A.D. 1600; 
—According to Bengel (see on ver. 17):—The 
Jirst Vial concerns Asia. The second Europe. 
The third, Africa, especially Egypt. The 
fourth, “upon the Sun,” the whole world. 
The jifth, “‘ upon the throne of the Beast,” 
affects the Beast’s devotees, apostate Chris- 
tians. The sixth affects the nations near the 
Euphrates,—_the Turks, if not already de- 
stroyed: the Mohammedan “ Kings of the 
East” do not bring the plagues but rush 
into them. By this time the Dragon and the 
Two Beasts are leagued together, and each 
sends forth a spirit of his own which ob- 
scures every idea of God and gathers “ Kings” 
to the service of their respective masters (ver. 
12). The seventh concerns Antichrist and 
is coincident with the great plague with 
which the seventh Trumpet ends. The last 
raging of Antichrist lasts for three and a half 
common years, from 1832 to 1836, the earth- 
quake of ver. 18 reducing the earth to a 
state fit for the good things which are to 
follow (see Introd. § 11, (b), IV.). 

III. “Anti-Papal” Expositors :— 

Vitringa: (1) In the frst Vial he sees the 
Waldenses detecting the ulcers of the Church; 
—(z2) In the second the wars of the Popes 
and the Emperors (A.D. 1211—A.D. 1506): 
but the age of Lewis the Bavarian (Cent. 
xiv.) is the time chiefly indicated, when God 
avenged “sanguinem innocucrum Albigen- 
sium . . non longe ante illud tempus 
effusum” (p. 705);—(3) Then comes the 
vengeance taken by Ziska and Procopius for 
the blood shed in accordance with the de 


REVELATION. XVI. 


crees of the Council of Constance (A.D. 
1414) ;—(4) The calamities inflicted on Italy, 
towards the close of Cent. xv., by Charles 
VIII., Lewis XII., and Francis I. ;—(5) The 
kness cast over the Papacy by the Re- 
formation; -(6) the Euphrates means the 
Kingdom of France exhausted or dried up 
by the wars of Lewis XIV., and the revoca- 
tion of the Edict of Nantes; so that oppor- 
tunities are given to “the Kings from the 
sun-rising,” i.e, kings of a purer faith, to 
complete the work of the Reformation (p. 
724); the “three frogs” signifying the Order 
of Jesuits (p. 728), and Ar-Mageddon, or the 
“ Mountain of destruction,” the scene of the 
Christ’s future conflict ;—(7) The effect of 
the sevent/ Vial on the air is not clearly 
told; but it doubtless has the same effects 
as the fourth and /ifth, and thus signifies the 
obscuration in the mystical heaven of that 
earth over which the Beast claims to rule. 
Bishop Wordsworth :—(1) The Vials of 
God’s wrath for the desecration of Holy 
Things [wiz. the enforced celibacy of the 
Clergy; the ministry of the Confessional ; 
&c.] have been poured on the Papal Empire, 
and have produced a loathsome disease like 
the boils of Egypt ;—(2) The second Vial is 
explained by ch. xvii. 1, the “sea” being “the 
many waters” of ch. xvii. 1, 15 ;—(3) The 
third “foretold calamities to be inflicted on 
the resources of the Papacy ;”—(4) ‘The 
meridian glory of this spiritual Empire has 
scorched the people of the Romagna and of 
Italy by the glare of its rays;”—(5) Asin the 
fourth Vial “the usurpations and corrup- 
tions of the Papacy have already produced a 
baneful harvest of Infidelity and Blasphemy,” 
so in the fftA, “ they did not repent from their 
deeds; but their hearts were hardened like 
that of Pharaoh, Ex. x. 27 ;”—(6) “ The tide 
of the Papal Euphrates, which has long im- 
peded the march of the Kings of the East 
[the Saints”—see on ver. 12], is already 
ebbing and will one day be dried up, and open 
a way for them;”—(7) The /ast Vial brings 
with it a judgment on the mystical Badylon, 
which is the Capital City of the Empire of 


Mede. 


A.D. 


1160 
[see above] 





R. Fleming.| Daubuz. 


the Beast. Yet the Beast stse/f, and its all 
the False Prophet, will not be destroyed wi 
the fall of Babylon; and will be arrayed 
against Christ, in the conflict of Ar-Mae 
geddon. 

Elliott :—(1) The jst Vial is the outbreak 
of social and moral evil which marked 
the French Revolution of 1789: this “sore” 
is traceable to the corruptions of the Papal 
system, the symbolic ulcer being a plague 
springing from the symbolic Egypt (ch. xi. 
8), Papal Rome ;—(2) As under the second 
Trumpet the Vandals fell upon the maritime 
provinces of Rome, so under the second Vial, 
England destroyed the maritime power of 
the countries of Papal Christendom ;—(3) 
The third denotes the French Revolution- 
ary wars along the rivers Rhine, Danube, 
Po;—(4) The darkening the Imperial sun 
of Papal Christendom by the abolition in 
1806 of the title “Emperor of the Holy 
Roman Empire ;”—(s5) The solution of the 
great question ‘when do the 1260 years (ch, 
xi. ,3) come to an end?’ is involved in the 
meaning of the 74 Vial (see Note B on ch. 
xi. 2). The Popedom-faveurimg Code of 
Justinian was first promulgated A.D. 529= 
533; and it was superseded by new anti- 
Papal Codes which originated from the French 
Revolution of 1789-1793 :—the full outpour= 
ing of the 7/4 Vial taking place when, in A.D. 
1809, the Pope’s temporal authority over the 
Roman States was abolished by Napoleon ;— 
(6) Under the sixth Vial, the Euphrates, 
representing the same Turkish powers as 
under the sixth Trumpet, (ch. ix. 13), is 
“dried up.” During the French Revolution 
the Turkish Empire remained comparatively 
uninjured; but in A.D. 1820 Moldavia, Wale 
lachia, Greece, emerged from it as Christian 
principalities; nor has the drying up yet 
ceased. The Future must interpret the 


prophetic words “that the way of the Kings 
from the East (perhaps the Jews) might be 
prepared.” 

At this point Elliott drops the veil. 

Tyso, as before, gives a list of “ Historical 
expositors of the Vials :— 





Keith. 





Began A.De 
1789 


1793 
1796 
1800 
1824 
3820 





731 


732 


Mr. Thos. Scott (on ch. xv. 1) writes 
thus : — 

“ This chapter introduces the Seven Vials, 
all of which fall under the seventh Trumpet, 
as the Seven Trumpets were included under 
the seventh Seal: for they contain ‘the seven 
last plagues’ in which the wrath of God is 
filled up .... These plagues must, there- 
fore, be coincident with the last Woe- 
Trumpet [ch. xi. 14], in great measure at 
least.” No writer, adds Mr. Scott, “as it 
appears to me, has yet (A.D. 1815) succeeded 
in fixing the time when the 1260 years of the 
reign of the Beast will end:” “None seem to 
have proved that they will terminate more 
early than A.D. 1840; while many think they 
will not end till A.D. 2000. But whether 
sooner or later, it seems probable that the 
time is not arrived: and, therefore, that ‘the 
pouring out of the Vials,’ has not yet begun.” 

IV. “ Futurist” Expositors :— 

Todd considers the Vision of the “Seven 
Vials” to be supplemental to that in ch. xiv., 
and to presuppose it. It begins after the 
beginning of the former Vision (see ch. xv. 2), 
and ends “ata period short of the termination 
of the former Visions, bringing us at its 
conclusion, not to the great Day of final 
account, but to the fall of Babylon, and the 
consequences of that event which are im- 
mediately to usher in the Day of Christ’s 
Coming ” (ch. xi. 19—21).—p. 75. 

De Burgh writes thus of the Vials: “I need 
not state that I consider them one and all as 
unfulfilled.”—p. 299. ‘The Kings of the 
East” in the sixth Vial are “the Jewish 
people.” “The event predicted is the general 
restoration which synchronizes with the 
Second Coming of their Messiah, and the 
downfall of the Anti-Messiah. One point, 
I think this mention of the Euphrates con- 
firms, namely, that the restoration from 
Babylon was never completed.” The people 
returned and the Temple was rebuilt, but no 
return was there of the things which alone 
constituted the boast of the nation; and yet 
this we are told is the restoration which 
forms the burden of prophecy ” (p. 303). As 
to the relation of the Vials to the preceding 
Visions, he agrees with Todd; and adds: 
“ And now at length [viz. at the seventh Vial] 
we are come to that place in this prophetical 
Book from whence all expositors are agreed 
(?) that the prophecy is as yet unfulfilled.”— 
® 307. 

V. “Allegorical” Expositors :— 

I. Williams: (1) As the first Seal called 
forth the elect from impenitent Jerusalem ; 
and as the first Trumpet called out the true 
Israel of God from the ruins of Israel and of 
Rome; so the frst Vial is poured on those 
Christians who had worshipped the Beast or 
his image ;—(2) The second Seal was on the 


REVELATION. XVI. 


lana of Judea, the second Vial is on the sea 
of the nations: there is a “ dividing of the 
waters from the waters” (Gen. i. 6);—(3) 
“The fountains of waters” are the Scrip- 
tures, “the rivers” are the doctrines that 
flow from them; but now (as under the third 
Trumpet Arianism turned the waters into 
“wormwood”) “the rivers and fountains 
are converted, like the river of E , into 
blood” (p. 290);—(4) As the fourth fester 
denoted the spiritual darkness which p' ed 
Mohammedanism, in the fourth Vial “ there 
is neither moon nor stars, neither Church 
nor saints, but the sufP with no genial, but 
burning heat:” “in systems of rationalism, 
socialism, and spiritual republicanism, the 
Author of life and healing is held in blas- 
phemy;”—(5) This cannot. be limited to 
heathen or Christian Rome, or to the mystic 
Babylon ; it may mean the Egyptian darkness 
on the throne and kingdom of the Beast. 
The period of the //t4 Vial is the more entire 
reign of Antichrist ;—(6) As the previous 
Vial was full of darkness, in the sixth Vial 
“is seen, as it were, a streak of Eastern 
light dawning upon that night: the Coming 
from the rising of the sun. But only faintly 
alluded to, for all the Vials speak of jud: 
ment ;"—-(7) The seventh Vial seems to be 
the utter overthrow of Satan: nothing is 
there stated but all is finished—yéyove. 


Norte B ON CH. xvi. 16.—AR-MAGEDDON, 
HAR-MAGEDON. 


“Appayedar, “ Har-Magedon,” Heb.393D "7 
i.e. “ Mountain of Megiddo.” The reading 
’Appayedav, Heb. 1739 1, gives “City of Me- 
giddo.” On 735 Gesenius notes, “ fort. 
locus turmarum, a 773, V3." The de- 
rivation given by Drusius is followed by 
many: “DIN = excidium, et }\N11 = exer~ 
citus, or turma illorum.” 

For the name Megiddo, standing alone, see 
Josh. xii. 21; Judges i. 27; 1 Kings iv. 1a; 
ix. 15; 2 Kings ix. 27; xxiii. 29. 

In the LXX. we find as follows :—Judges 
Vv. 19, emt date Mayeddo. In Zech. xii. 11 
(71739 Nypaa, fc, “in the valley of Me- 
giddon ”) év medio €xxomropevov ;—2 Chron. 
XXxv. 22 (the Hebrew again denoting “in 
the valley”) év ro medin Mayedda;-—2 
Kings xxiii. 30 (as the Res. ev and 
éx Mayeddo. St. John has given - Har- 
Magedon) the Greek equivalent of “ Moun- 
tain of Megiddo” (}1730 17, see Stanley, 
Sinai and Pal., ch. ix.'); or of “ City of Me- 


1 «‘ Even if the aspirate were omitted,” notes 
Dean Stanley (ééid.) ‘‘it is analogous to the case 
of Ar Gerizim.” And in his note on ch, v. he 
writes: ‘‘ The meeting with Melchizedek (Gen. 
xiv. 17, 18) is expressly stated in the fragment 








REVELATION. XVI. 


giddo” ie ay). The former of these 
two significations (which gives the sfiritus 
asper, dppayed@y) agrees with the interpre- 
tation given by Andreas (see also Arethas, 
ap. Cramer, Catena, pp. 420, 552), To dé 
“Appayedov Staxomy 7) dtaxontopern épunvev- 
erat (/.c.. p- 93). This falls in with the 
rendering by the LXX. of Zech. xii. 11; and 
means “the cutting off of an enemy,” agreeing 
with the derivation given above after Drusius. 
In that explanation, in place of 7N7N, the 
word pD7n is suggested—a word which 
is rendered in Mal. iv. 6, “a curse,” or, as 
Gesenius translates, “ devotio rei ad interne- 
cionem:” in Hab. i. 16, 17, it means “a net.” 
Referring to Judges v. 19, and 2 Chron. 
xxxv. 22, (LXX.) Grimm writes: “Verum 
enimvero quum ille duz clades facte esse 
dicantur emi ddart et ev Ta wedio, non intelli- 
gitur quid sibi velit ons Megiddo, qui alius 
esse non potest nisi Carmel. SSE ary 
equidem longe facilius et probabilius L. 
Capellum conjecisse censeo, ‘Appayedav = 
“Apuapeyedov compositum esse e€ ND, 
excidium, et }\130.” For other explanations 
see the Critici Sacri. 

Ewald (s. 293) considers it “beyond any 
doubt” that Rome is meant by Ar-Ma- 
gedon, for it is to Rome that the “ Kings” are 
gathered together (ch. xiv. 8; xvii. 16); and 
therefore, according to ch. xiii. 18, we must 
calculate by the Hebrew letters. Now the 
letters of Ar-Magedon (j}7307N) give as 
their sum 304, which number is also given 
by “Rome the great,” “ Romah hagedolah” 
(Adan AYN): “therefore every good thinker 
and calculator can most accurately (“aufs 
genaueste”) know what place is really 
meant” (s. 294).1 In proof he notes that 
the Rabbins count nbw x7) (Gen. xlix. 10), 
and find it equal to nw, or Messias, making 
up 358. Ewald is followed (with a differ- 
ence) by the writer in Schenkel’s Biéde/- 
Lexicon (art. Apokalypse) who writes: “ Ha- 


of Theodotus, preserved by Eusebius (Prep. Zz. 
ix. 22), to have occurred in ‘ Ar Gerizim,’ the 
‘Mountain of the Most High.’ It is clear that 
this, as in the analogous case of Ar-Mageddon, 
is simply the Greek version of ‘ the mountain of 
Gerizim.’” 


1 Ewald grants that the word may come from 

3D 1m, although the Mountain of Megiddo 

not found in the O. T. If so Mount Tabor 
would suit Judges v. 19. 


margedon, more correctly Hamargedol, for 
the word is a Cabbalistic anagram for ‘ Roma 
baggedola,’‘ Roma Magna.” 

Had the etymology of the word “ Har-Ma- 
gedon” any significance, it would doubtless 
have been translated now by St. John, as he 
has translated Abaddon in ch. ix. 11 ; although 
some writers think that the expression “in 
the Hebrew tongue” clearly refers us to the 
etymology:—Thus De Wette adopts the 
meaning assigned by Drusius, “the destruc= 
tion of their troop;’ and he supposes that 
ver. 12 is to be completed from ch. xvii. 16, 
the Kings of the East (z., of Parthia) march= 
ing with Nero to Rome, and after its de=- 
struction returning with the kings of the 
West to Palestine. To the same effect 
Renan (p. 428) :—In all this symbolism the 
Seer describes “an infernal plan (1 Kings 
xxii. 20, &c.) conceived between Satan, Nero, 
and that counseller of Nero who has already 
figured under the form of the second Beast.” 
In Har-Magedon Renan admits the refer- 
ence to Zech. xii. 11; but, he adds, “the 
particular enigma of the name Har-Magedon 
is for us undecipherable.” Ziillig sets aside 
the reference to the battle-field near Me- 
giddo (except as a paronomasia) ; he dwells 
upon the meaning of the syllable Har, which 
denotes a mountain, and he takes Magedon 
to signify “an assemblage of warlike hosts :” 
—he accordingly combines the Mount of 
Olives (Zech. xiv. 4) with (Joel iii. 2) “the 
valley of Jehoshaphat ;” and this scene beside 
the walls of Jerusalem (see 2 Kings xxiii. 13, 
Marg.), he takes to be “Har-Magedon ”— 
‘‘the mountain region, where these hosts 
assemble.” Nearly to the same effect is the 
explanation of Vitringa (p. 731). Dr. Pusey 
too (on Joel iii. 2, 12) comparing Matt. xxv. 
30, 31 with Joel iii. 12, and adopting the 
opinion that Christ is to descend to Judg- 
ment “over this valley of Jehosophat,” would 
place the valley between Jerusalem and the 
Mount of Olives, “ uniting as it were Mount 
Calvary and Olivet,”—in other words, under- 
standing Joel to mean the locality known in 
our Lord’s time as “the valley of Kidron.” 
It is to be noted, however, that not until after 
the time of Eusebius (Onomast., p. 52>— 
xowwas “lacagar) was this spot known in 
Christian literature as “the valley of Jehoso- 
phat.”—see Winer, R. WW. B., art. Josa-. 


phat. 





733 


734 REVELATION. XVIL 


beast, 5 which is great Babylon, the mother 


CHAPTER XVII. of all abominations. 9 The interpretation 





the seven heads, 12 and the ten horns. 
3, 4 A woman arrayed in purple and scarlet, The punishment of the whore. 14 The vit- 
with a golden cup in her hand, sitteth upon the tory of the Lamb. 





[Ver 1 om. pou.—emi idarwy woddav. Ver 3 yeyovru [or yéuov ra] dévduara.— After 
ver. 3 P inserts ver. 18 which is also retained in Scum ieee the oath be Ee 
the commentary of Andreas (/. ¢., p. 97) where ver. 18 is quoted]. Ver. 4 fv mepiBeBAnuévn, 
mop upovy k. KoKKivoy.—ta axd@apra ths tropveias av’rns [So 1. The form dxa@dprns in T. 
troubled Bengel, Wetstein, and Matthzi; but it is a formation of Erasmus without 
authority (Delitzsch, s. 42)]. Ver. 8 7d @npiov.—tA reads imayer, see ver. 11].—rd dvopa 
ch. xiii. 8].— BAerdvt@v.—sre hv.—kal rapéora [T. R. has xcatrep éotiv, and is iotocole 
A. V. (“‘ and yet is”); and by Luther, (“‘ wiewohl es doch ist ”): but this reading has no autho- 
rity. It results from Er. having so printed the text of 1 which distinctly exhibits kai rdpeors, 
this accentuation rendering the reading of Er. impossible. The Vulg. seems to omit the 
words, merely giving, ‘“‘ Videntes bestiam quz erat, et non est;” but it continues at ver. 9, 
“ Et hic est sensus,” there being no kai in the text. Griesbach notes, “‘xat rapéora. &Sde 6 
vous. Et hic est sensus, Vulg. Aeth.” Mede on kai mapéora says: “ Sic lego cum ed. Com- 
plutensi, Primasio, et Syro interprete” (p. 524). Bengel notes that xaimep is nowhere used by 
St. John; and never elsewhere in the N. T. except with a participle]. Ver. 10 om. xai before 
6 els, Ver. 13 duddacw. Ver. 16 kai 7d Onpiov [So 1 reads; but Er. changed this into the 
émi rd Onpiov of the T. R., after the Vulg. “én bestia”). Ver. 17 reXeoOnoovrat oi Aéyor [SO 1 


reads; but Er. without any authority changed his text into the rekeo 67 ra pyuara as adopted 


in T. R.}.] 





The Seventh chief Vision of the Revelation 
Proper (ch. xvii. 1—xxii. 5) begins here :— 
see the remarks introductory to ch. xv. 

This series of Visions extends to ch. xxii. 
5; and now takes up the Vision of the “ Seven 
Vials” (ch. xv. 1-xvi. 21) where the seventh 
Vial seemed to close. The appearance on 
the scene in the first verse (as in ch. xxi. 9) of 
“¢ one of the Seven Angels which had the Seven 
Vials” (see on ch. xvi. 21) connects this 
Vision with that which precedes; just as the 
introduction of one of the Four Living 
Beings in ch. xv. 7, when the “ Seven Angels” 
enter, connects the Vial-Visions with ch. 
1v. 1—the Vision with which the Revelation 
Proper opens. Again, as the seventh Trumpet 

ch. xi. 15-19) is followed in ch. xii.—xiii. by the 

isions which exhibit the history and cha- 
racter of the ‘“ Woman ”—i.e., the Church, the 
Dragon, the Beast, and the “ False Prophet,” 
so now the seventh Vial is followed by a Vision 
in which the Seer beholds the destruction of 
the Harlot (ch. xviii.)—introduced in direct 
contrast to the Church—and of the same 
three enemies of God (ch. xix. 20; xx. 10). 
This enmity had been manifested in blood- 
shed, persecution, seduction, and blasphemy 
(see ch. xvi. 6; xili. 7, 12; xiv. 8; Xvi. 9, II, 
21): and here, in ch. xvii.,—a chapter which is 
introductory, and which alone in the Apoc. 
is of direct interpretation,—this enmity is 
represented, in ver. 3, under the two con- 
nected forms of the antichristian World- 
power or Beast, and the antichristian 
World-city or Harlot—the seat of the 
Beast’s authority. 

Babvlon had already been introduced in ch. 


xiv. 8, and ch. xvi. 19; but not until now is 
the import of the symbol explained. In vv, 
15-18, the Angel unfolds why, and by what 
means, the Harlot receives the judgment 
which is described in ch. xviii. The Beast had, 
in like manner, been already introduced in ch. 
xi. 7 and ch. xiii. 1; and now, in this intro- 
ductory chapter, the import of this symbol 
also is declared (vv. 8-13), as well as why 
and by what means (ver. 14) the destruction 
of his power is to be accomplished. And 
thus the sequel is described of the “Seven 
plagues which are the last,” wherein “is 
finished the wrath of God ” (ch. xv. 1). After 
the destruction of the three great enemies of 
God, follows the universal Judgment (ch. xx. 
11-15); and then—announcing that evil shall 
not triumph for ever—follow the glories of 
the New Jerusalem (ch. xxi. 1-xxil. 5). 


Cuap. XVII.—THE HARLOT AND THE 
BEAST. 


For the meanings assigned to Babylon or 
the Harlot, viz. I. (@) Rome Pagan, as in St, 
John’s day; (4) Rome which shall become 
Pagan hereafter ;—II. Rome Papal;—IIlI. 
Jerusalem ;—IV. the World-City or seat of 
the World-power, wherever that power may 
be concentrated at any period of history,—see 
on ch. xiv. 8; xvi. 19; and Note B at the 
end of this chapter. For the meanings as- 
signed to the Beast, viz. (1) The Roman 
Empire in St. John’s day ;—(2) The Papacy ;— 
(3) The World-power of which Rome is the 
symbol ;—(4) The World-power, all reference 
to Rome being excluded ;—(5) The fulfile 


¥v. 1.] 


REVELATION. XVIL. 


ND there came one of the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto 
angels which had the seven me, Come hither; I will shew unto 





ment of the symbol by Nero,—see the 
remarks introductory to ch. xiii.; and also 
Notes D and E at the end of this chapter. 

According to Ebrard (in Herzog’s Real- 
Encycl.) it is not until now that Babylon— 
the false Lamb of ch. xii. 11, or the Papacy 
in its ecclesiastical character—is presented as 
the Harlot, or Apostate Church: see the 
remarks introductory to ch. xiii. The 
Reformers, Ebrard thinks, were in error 
when they identified this Babylon with the 
Antichrist of Daniel (ch. vii.), and of St. Paul 
(2 Thess. ii.) ; because Antichrist (see vv. 
8, 11) is rather identical with a kingdom of 
open apostasy wherein even the semblance of 
Christianity is cast off,—an infidel ruler who 
is to execute judgment on the Harlot, or 
Babylon :—see vv. 13, 16, 17. 

As Bengel notes, ch. xvii. is divided into 
three parts by the three addresses of the 
Angel, vv. 1, 7, 15: (1) The Harlot and the 
Beast ;—(2) The signification of the symbol- 
ism ;—(3) The Judgment of the great Harlot 


THE HARLOT (1-6). 


1. And there came one of the seven angels 
which had the seven vials,| See ch. xv. 1, 7. 
Which of the “Seven” is left undetermined, 
cf. ch. vi. 1:—Eichhorn decides that it is the 
first; others say the seventh, as Babylon, 
under the seventh Vial (see ch. xvi. 19), is 
here the theme. As the judgment on Babylon 
is now minutely described, one of the Angels 
who have the “Vza/s” is, not unnaturally, 
the ministering Angel employed ; but it does 
not thence follow whether the Vision of this 
chapter, which is altogether explanatory, 
comes after, or precedes, or synchronizes 
with the Vial-Visions:—see on ch. xv. 1; 
“xi. 9. Bengel decides that the “ Vials” have 
now been poured out ;—Hengst. decides that 
the “ Vials” are still full. 

It is also to be noted that as one of the 
“ Seven Angels” now shows to the Seer the 
“Harlot;” so, in ch. xxi. 9, one of the same 
group shows to him the “ Bride.” 

and spake with me, saying,| Omit 
“ unto me”—see vv. Il. 

_Come hither,] As in ch. xxi. 9 (cf. John 
xl. 43) the adverb (dcdpo) is here used, not 
the verb “ Come,” as in ch. vi. 1, 3, 5. 

I will show thee the judgment] As Diis- 
terdieck points out, “the judgment” is not 
described in this chapter—nay, in ver. 16 
we are clearly told that it is still future. 
It follows in ch. xviii. The “Harlot” is 
nere exhibited, not as judged, but as existing 
in her antichristian form : and this is required, 


because the special Vision of the World-city, 
as distinguished from the World-power in 
general, is a new revelation. 

Hengst. would regard the judgment of the 
“Harlot,” as the proper theme of ch. xvii., 
where the “wilderness” (ver. 3) denotes her 
desolation, and where the symbol is explained 
in ver. 16. Her guilt had been already told, 
not only in ch. xiv. 8, but in ch. xii. 7, 8 
where the Church is persecuted by the 
Roman power—the sixth Head of the 
Beast: “The great Harlot is only so far 
different from the sixth Head, as this Head 
denotes the Roman poaer, while the Harlot 
is the City of Rome.” 


of the great harlot| Je., Babylon (ver. 5) 
which had been already referred to in ch. 
xiv. 8; xvi. 19; and which, as explained in 
ver. 18, is “the Great City,” or heathen 
Rome personified,—in other words, the chief 
centre of the God-opposing World-power, 
“the throne of the Beast” (ch. xvi. 10). Why 
Babylon, Rome, the World-city of any 
period, is called “the great Harlot” is clear 
from ch. xiv. 8. This idea is expressed more 
fully in ver. 2. 

We are to observe that St. John does not 
introduce here the idea of “ adultery,” which 
is founded on the fact of “marriage” (cf. 
Ezek. xvi. 38; xxiii. 37, 45), Or covenant- 
relationship. In Scripture, indeed, the term 
‘adultery’ is never applied to a heathen kings 
dom” (see on ch. il. 22):—in such a case 
the term “harlot” is used, signifying that 
seductive influence or crafty policy which 
seeks to draw others into subjection. The 
expressions “harlot” and “fornication” are 
used in this sense in the Old Test. with ree 
ference to World-cities—e.g. in Isai. xxiii. 15— 
18 to Tyre; and in Nah. iii. 4 to Nineveh. 
On this latter text Dr. Pusey writes: 
“Mostly, idolatries and estrangement from 
God are spoken of as whoredoms, only in 
respect of those who, having been taken by 
God as His own, forsook Him for false gods. 
But Jezebel, too, of whose offences Jehu 
speaks under the same two titles [‘ witch- 
crafts’ and ‘whoredoms’] (2 Kings ix. 22) 
was a heathen.... Of this sin, World- 
Empires, such as Nineveh were the concen- 
tration. Their being was one vast idola 
of self and of the god of this world” (I. t., 
p. 387). As to St. John’s usage, the words 
of Rev. ii. 14 are decisive; and so is his 
further use of the word “fornication” in 
connection with Jezebel in ch. ii. 20, 21. 
Hence it follows that there is no difficulty 
whatever in applying the term “harlot” to 
the world at large; or to a Pagan city; or, 


735 


, 


736 


thee the judgment of the great whore 
that sitteth upon many waters : 


REVELATION. XVII. 


Lv. @ 


2 With whom the kings of the 
earth have committed fornication, and 





aS stated above, to the godless centre of the 
World-power—the World-City. 

This result nevertheless is warmly contested ; 
and the chief reason assigned is this, that 
“harlotry symbolizes uniformly the apos- 
tasy of God’s Church” (Auberlen, /. ¢., p. 279). 
The word “harlot,” writes Words., is used 
“at least fifty times to describe the ’ spiritual 
fornication, that is, the corrupt doctrine and 
practice of the Churches of Israel and Judah ;” 
or as Alf notes: “In eighteen places out of 
twenty-one where the figure occurs, such is its 
import,” viz., to be the prophetical emblem 
of “ God’s Church and people that had for- 
saken Him.” . . “In three places only is the 
word applied to heathen cities: viz. in Isai. 
xxiii. 15,16 to Tyre; and in Nah. iii. 4 to 
Nineveh :”—see also I. Williams, pp. 314- 
320. 

The general use of this figure in the O. T. 
is not disputed. The question merely is, what 
is the sense here? and to this an answer has 
been given above. Auberlen indeed asserts that 
“ ¢ Harlot’ means, in the whole Old and New 
Test., the apostate Church of God” (p. 278); 
and again: “It is not only a church here, 
and a church there; but Christendom as a 
whole, even as Israel, as a whole, had become 
a Harlot. The true believers are hidden and 
dispersed ; the invisible Church is within the 
visible” (p. 290). 

It is hard to understand how such state- 
ments can be made in the face of the Lord’s 
promise, “ Lo, I am with you alway even unto 
the end of the world,”—especially hard is it 
if we remember how the Church is de- 
scribed when she appears again after ch. 
xii., as the “ Bride,” as the “ New Jerusalem ” 
(ch. xix. 7, 8; xxi. 2, 9, 10; xxii.17; cf John 
ili. 29). Nor does the imagination of an 
“invisible” Church get over the difficulty,— 
“The Woman is the invisible Church; the 
Harlot is the visible Church” (Auberlen, p. 
276); for our Lord has also said “Ye are 
the light of the world. A city that is set 
on an hill cannot be hid” (Matt. v. 14). 

By applying this passage to ‘a Christian 
church’ (I. Williams, p. 318 ; Words.), or to 
‘an apostate and faithless church’ (Alf.), 
such contradictions may, of course, be avoided. 
The possibility of an application to some 
section of the Christian body is at once to be 
admitted—in the sense of Matt. xiii. 47-50: 
and thus Words. contrasts what he regards 

as adescription of “ @ faithless Church” (ch. 
Xvii. 1, 3), with “the words which describe 
the faithful Church in glory (ch. xxi. 9, 10).” 
As stated on ch. xvi. 19, the forms of evil 
symbolized by the World-city or “ Harlot” 


may be unbelief, or superstition, or sensuality ; 
in any of which sins a section of the Church 
Catholic may share with the God-opposing 
world :—but it is not in accordance wi 
Scripture to speak, with Auberlen, of “the 
apostate Church of God.” 

Burger mentions this singular misapprehen- 
sion, merely for the purpose of indicating 
“to what arbitrary interpretations want of 
attention to the connexion of the Apocal 
symbols, and the prepossessions of a lively 
imagination can lead” (s. 263). 


that sitteth on many waters;| (Seevu 
i.)._ This is said of Babylon in Jer. li. 13. 

The wealth of Babylon was caused not 
merely by the Euphrates, “but by a vast 
system of canals” (see on Jer. li. 13). Hengst. 
points out that “waters” “in the symbolical 
language of Scripture are an image of pros- 
perity” (Hos. xiii. 15) ; and in Ps. cvil. 33, 34, 
it is “ said in reference to Babylon, he causes 
the waters of her well-being and prosperity 
to become dry :”—for an allusion to this type 
see ch. xviii. 17. 

The meaning which the imagery of this verse 
symbolizes is explained inver. 15 :—the “Har- 
lot” “sitteth on many zations,” cf. ch. xiii. 
3, 7, 12,16. Nah.ii.8 is usually explained to 
mean the large population of Nineveh. Bleek’s 
comment on this place, however, is that as 
the site of Babylon was on the Euphrates, so 
that of the “ New Babylon,’ Rome, is on the 
Tiber. And this, he adds, excludes the 
opinion of Zillig that Jerusalem is meant. 


2. with whom the kings of the earth com- 
mitted fornication,|] The “kings” repre- 
sent their subjects (as in ch. xvi. 14) who 
yield to the seductions of the great World- 
city. 

Ante ade the passage literally, writers 

e. g. Vitringa, p. 752; Words.; &c.) often 
ask, “If this be pagan Rome, who and what 
are these ‘ dings,’ and what is indicated by her 
having been the object of their lustful desires?” 
Alford answers for this school: “I do not 
hesitate . . . . to maintain that interpretation 
which regards papal and not pagan Rome as 
pointed out by the Harlot of this Vision.” 
On a different principle, Renan replies: “The 
Herods, Tiridates king of Armenia, &c., all 
eager to visit Rome, there to give festivals, to 
pay her their court” (p. 430); and to the 
same effect, Hengst. concludes: “ Rome [the 
pagan city of Rome] is ‘the great Harlot’ 
that allures the dings into this commerce, as 
it is said of Tyre in Isai. xxiii. 17.” See 
Note B at the end of this chapter. 


and they that inhabit the earth were 


v 3-] 


the inhabiters of the earth have been 
made drunk with the wine of her 
fornication. 


REVELATION. XVII. 


3 So he carried me away in the 
spirit into the wilderness: and I saw 
a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured 





made drunken} (The verb, carouxéw, with 
an accus. and without a preposition follow- 
ing, is found only here in the Apoc.; cf. Acts 
xix. 10, 17 :—for the usual form, viz. emi 
ths yns, see ch. iii. 10. The verb i is placed 
absolutely in ch. ii. 13). The imagery of 
this passage is applied to Babylon in Jer. li. 
7; see ch. xiv. 8. Both clauses of the verse 
are combined in ch. xviii. 3. 


8. And he carried me away] Cf. ch. xxi. 
To. 

in the Spirit] See on ch.i.10. The Vision 
of ch. xvi. 19 is now to be explained; and 
for this end a new spiritual condition of the 
Seer, and a new scene are required; com- 
pare ch. iv. 2. 


into a wilderness:| So Wordsworth and 
Diisterd. render with due attention to the 
absence of the article. 

Many (e. g. Andr., Ewald, De Wette, 
Ficsact. Bleek, Disterd.) see in these words 
a reference to the approaching, but still future 
(see on ver. 1) desolation of the “ Harlot” 
(Epnuov, npnpoperny, ver. 16; ch. xviii. 2, 
17,19). Hence we can understand why the 
“ Harlot,” inall her magnificence, is beheld by 
the Seer in “a wilderness.” In Jer.1., li., it 
is denounced that Babylon shall “become 
a desolation.” In Isai. xxi. 1, Babylon, on 
account of her approaching desolation, is 
called “the desert of the sea.” What is said 
here of Babylon, holds substantially in respect 
to every World-power that is opposed to 
God, and treads in her footsteps (Hengst.). 
It is to be observed, also, that in this single 
instance in the New Testament, do we 
find the word signifying “ wilderness” with- 
out the article (cf. ch. xii. 6, 14). This fact 
indicates that we cannot identify this locality 
with the wilderness in ch. xii. 6, 16; and also 
proves (see below) that the “ Woman” of ch. 
xii. is not to be identified with the ‘‘ Harlot” 
here. On the other hand, Alford maintains that 
“ the wilderness” is the true rendering, obser- 
ving that “it may be questioned whether the 
expressly indefinite rendering, ‘a wilderness’ 
is ever justifiable.” 

By the word “wilderness” in this place 
Beda understands “divinitatis absentia ;’— 
Cocceius that part of the world where, in St. 
John’s day, persecution and idolatry pre- 
vailed ;—Vitringa (p. 755) sees a reference 
to Isai. xxi. 1, “the desert of the gea,” and also 
to ver. 15, where the “awaters” of ver. I are 
explained to mean “‘peoples ;” and he takes 
the word to signify, as in Ezek. xx. 35, “the 
wilderness of the people;”— Bengel notes : 


Lew Test—Vou. IV. 


“Europe, especially Italy ;"— Words.: “She 
is a Great City, and yet in a wilderness,” 
literally, the Roman Campagna; spiritually, 
“Rome is not likea fruitful field of the Lord, 
but may be compared to a wilderness.” 


and 1 saw awoman| ‘The absence of the 
article here, and its insertion in ver. 15 (“ the 
Harlot”) are parallel to the absence of the 
article in ch. xii. 1, and its insertion vv. 4, 6, 
13, 14, 15, 16,17. In fact the “woman” or 
“Harlot” here is not to be identified with, but 
is rather to be contrasted with, the “ Woman,” 
or the Church, in ch. xii.,—just as a “ wilder- 
ness” in this verse is not “the wildere 
ness” in ch. xii. 6, 14. Auberlen, however, 
as already stated, "regards the “woman” in 
both places to be the same: “ The Hate 
he writes, “as described in ch. xvii... .. 
identical ‘with the Woman who, we saw ie 
ch, xii., is a symbolical representation of the 
Church of God in the world. This Woman 
has become a harlot” (p. 274). And he would 
explain the omission of the article before 
“ Wilderness,’ “Woman,” “ Beast,” by say= 
ing that while identical with “tse Wilder- 
ness” (ch. xii. 6, 14), tHe “ Woman” (ch. xii. 1) 
and the ‘“‘ Beast” (ch. xiii. 1), yet, in a sense, 
these terms are not identical: —‘“ The heathen 
world, the Church, and the World-power, 
have undergone great changes, so much so 
that John can scarcely recognize them, and 
sees ‘a Beast,’ ‘ a Woman,’ ‘a Wilderness’ ” 
(p. 277). As to this result see on ver. 13 
where the restriction to “a Church” has 
been noticed :—e.g., I. Williams says: “To 
the wilderness the Apostolic Woman had 
fled, and now we are carried there and see 
her not; but instead the purple Harlot” 
(p. 321): he also notes that “the Apocalypse 
carefully abstains from using the name of 
‘ Jerusalem ’ for this false Church ” (p. 320). 


sitting upon a scarlet-coloured beast,| The 
Beast now presents some features different 
from those described in ch. xiii., because the 
“Harlot,” or World-city, is expressly to be’ 
distinguished from the Beast, or W orld-power. 
“This Beast is introduced as if a new ap= 
pearance: but its identity with that men- 
tioned before, ch. xiii. 1 ff., is plain as the 
description goes onward” (Alf). Hencefore 
ward he is always spoken of as “the Beast :” 
and the war in vv. 12-14, is evidently that 
which is described in ch. xix. 19; and ch. xix. 
20 can refer only to ch. xiii. There is no 
foundation for the opinion of Ebrard and 
Zullig—summed up in Note C on ch. xi. 7 
—that the Beast of ch. xiii. 1 is not the Beast 


AAA 


737 


738 


beast, full of names of blasphemy, 
having seven heads and ten horns. 


REVELATION. XVII. 


[v. 4. 





4 And the woman was arrayed in 
purple and scarlet colour, and decked oe 





of this chapter. The differences in the de- 
tails depend on the circumstances peculiar to 
each description ; and a formal identification 
is omitted here because the Seer dwells in 
this clause not on the Beast, but on the 
“woman” who sits upon him. The Beast is 
now indicated in a cursory manner, though 
in terms sufficient to mark the connexion 
with ch. xiii, The full description is re- 
served for ver. 8, &c. 

“ Scarlet-coloured:”—The three colours of 
the Tabernacle were due, purple, and scarlet 
—see the note on Ex. xxv. 4. 

The word xéxxwos is derived from coccus, 
the Kermes berry (as it was supposed) ; but the 
Kermes (Arab. iittle worm) was an insect found 
in Asia, the Coccus ilicis of Linnzus. They 
were long taken for the seeds of the tree on 
which they live; and before the introduction 
of cochineal, Kermes was the most esteemed 
drug for dyeing scarlet—See Brande and 
Cox, Dict. of Science, art. Kermes; Pliny, 
HON. 13a aT XVI. 8: 

The description of the Harlot’s attire in 
ver. 4 (cf. ch. xviii. 16) suggests the choice of 
this colour. Grotius, De Wette, and Zillig 
refer the colour not to the Beast itself but to 
its trappings. Many identify this colour with 
that of the “ Dragon,” “red as flame” (zuppés, 
ch. xii. 3; cf. ch. vi. 4), whom the Beast 
serves: they see in it a symbol of the blood 
which he sheds (ch. xi. 7; xvi. 6)—a sacri- 
ficial colour: compare Heb. ix. 19. 


full of names| Either a case of irregular 
apposition (cf. ch. iv. 1); or (taking the 
participle as a neuter sing.), full of the 
names—a note of identification with ch. 
xiii. 1; or again we may render, names full 
of blasphemy: see vv. //, For the con- 
struction (which differs from the usage else- 
where—see ver. 4; ch. iv. 8; xv. 7). Diisterd. 
refers to Phil, i. 11; Col. i. 9, and on this 
latter text Professor Moulton (/.¢., p. 287) 
motes: “ This constr. of wAnpotoGa is fol- 
lowed by yéyoy in Rev. xvii. 3,4. In modern 
Greek, words of fulness may take an accus.” 


of blasphemy,; See on ch. xiii. 1, where 
the Beast bears the “‘ names” merely on the 
“Seven Heads :” the “ names” have now spread 
over the whole body, doubtless owing to the 
fact that the influence of the “Harlot” is 
superadded. Zullig considers that the “zames” 
were embroidered on the scarlet cloth which 
covered the Beast. 


seven heads and ten borns.| Here and m 
ch. xiii, 1, the Beast presents the character- 
istic features of the “ Dragon” in ch. xii. 3. 
The “ Heads” are now seen without diadems ; 


a circumstance which supports the explanation 
that rejects the application to nal “ Kings.” 
An old writer has o that the Beast 
reappears from the Abyss (see on ch. xi. 7) 
without his diadems, as though, in this last 
stage, he would symbolize rather the violence 
of popular rage, than the prescriptive sanctity 
of monarchical supremacy. Dusterd., who 
upholds the twofold reference to “mountains” 
and to literal “4ings,” considers that this omis- 
sion is supplied by the royal attire of the Harlot 
(ver. 4) who is seated on the Beast (see on 
ver. 10): and he attaches no definite historical 
meaning to the number Ten of the Horns 
in ¢4is chapter, explaining their introduction 
now as merely intended to identify the Beast 
here, with the Beast of ch. xiii. 1:—see on 
ver. 7. 

Dante applies vv. 1-3 to the Church of 
Rome under Nicholas iii. (A.D. 1277), Bonie 
face viii. (A.D. 1294), and Clement v. (A.D. 
1305). Pope Clement transferred the Papal 
See from Rome to Avignon, where it ree 
mained in what Italian writers call its “ Babpe 
lonian Exile” (A.D. 1309-1378) -— 


“*The Evangelist you Pastors had in mind, 

When she who sitteth upon many waters 

To fornicate with kings by him was seen ; 

The same who with the Seven Heads was 

And power and strength from the Ten Horns 
received, 

So long as virtue to her spouse was pleasing.”— 
prow xix. I106—I Sy Longines transl, 


Avignon is here the seat of the Papacy; 
and Dante—so his commentators tell us— 
understood by the “Seven Heads,” the Seven 
Sacraments (or Virtues) of the Church, and 
by the “Ten Horns” the Ten Commandments 
—see Note B at the end of this chapter. 


4. arrayed in purple and scarlet,| The 
colours significant of sovereign rule; and 
thus the colours of the robe of mockery in 
John xix. 2; Matt. xxvii. 28; cf. ch. xviii. 1a, 
16. The “scarlet” may also indicate her 
“blood-stained ” garments—see ver. 6. The 
form of the word rendered “purple” (see 
vv. /].,—an adject. for a subst.) is peculiar to 
St. John, and is found in the New Test. only 
in ch, xvil. 4; xviii. 16; John xix. 2,5. The 
form generally used occurs in ch. xviii, 12. 

The Tyrian purple dye (Ezek. xxvii. 7, 16) 
“‘ was obtained from two little shell-fish, the 
Buccinum and Murex—the former being found 
on rocks near the shore, and the latter in 
deeper water—on the Pheenician coast.” 
(Brande and Cox, art. Murex). Purple was 
one of the three colours of the Tabernacle- 


¥ 5.) 


with gold and precious stones and 
Is, having a golden cup in her 
and full of abominations and filthi- 


ness of her fornication: 


—see the Note on Ex. xxv. 4; and Note A 
on ch. xxi. 20. 

and decked| See Margin :—the participle 
is carried on to the nouns which follow. 

precious stones and pearls,| Gr. “precious 
stone,” in the sing.; see the note on ch. xv. 6. 
Cf. the description of the king of Tyre, Ezek. 
xxvili. 13; and also what is said of Jeru- 
salem, Ezek. xvi. 10-18. On the word “gearl” 
here, and in ch. xviii. 12, 16; xxi. 21, see 
Note A at the end of this chapter. 

having in her hand a golden cup| Cf. 
the application to Babylon of the phrase 
“a golden cup,” Jer. li. 7; and the note 
cn ch. xiv. 8. 

Jull of abominations, and of the unclean 
things] (As to the accus. after ycuor, see 
on ver. 3). The accusative “the unclean 
things” is coupled with the genitive “abomi- 
nations,’ “after the Hebrew idiom, in order 
to avoid the threefold genitive :’—so Ewald, 
Hengst., and De Wette. Liicke (s. 461), 
ana Diisterd. take the accusative, “the un- 
clean things,” to be parallel to the accusative, 
“a golden cup,” both depending on “ daving” 
(cf. ch. xviil. 12), viz. even the unclean 
things:—see vv. //. So also Stuart and 
Zillig, who translate—‘even the impuri- 
ties.” Alf. thinks that the constr. is changed 
in order to mark a difference between the more 
abstract designation of the contents of the cup 
as “abominations,” and the specification of 
them in the concrete as “the unclean 
things.” 

All actions to be condemned are called 
“ abominations,’—cf. ch. xxi. 27; Luke 
xvi. 15. 

of ber fornication,| Cf. ch. xviii. 3. Hengst. 

ds not the abominations of idolatry, 
but only political enormities,—that artful 
policy by which Rome reduced the nations 
to impotence. 

I. Williams would unaerstand “false 
and hypocritical Christianity” (p. 324): the 
generation against which our Lord testified 
as “adulterous” (Matt. xii. 39) had no idol 
worship; the “idolatry” spoken of by St. 
Paul (Eph. v. 5) is “ covetousness.” 

5. and Ser forehead a name 
written,| ‘ Le., “having (see ver. 4) a name 
written; ” as was customary with harlots— 
see Wetstein and De Wette (“ Nomen tuum 

dit a fronte."—Seneca, Controv, i. 2; 
ef, Juv. Sat. vi. 123). Hengst., however, says, 
“Not a title, but the expression of her na- 


REVELATION. XVII. 


5 And upon her forehead was a 
name written, MYSTERY, BABY- 
LON THE GREAT, THE MO- 


THER OF 'HARLOTS AND Long 


ture. The mame consists of a whole sen- 
tence, to which, substantially though not 
formally, ver. 6 belongs.” For the contrasted 
name borne by the servants of God,see ch.xiv. 1. 


MYSTERY,] Or, as explained below, A 
mystery.| Asrendered in A. V., MYSTERY is 
the first element of the proper name, and so 
C. a Lapide, Vitringa, I. Williams, Hengst., 
Bleek, Words., Alf. The name on the fore- 
head of the High Priest (Ex. xxviii. 36, 37)— 
the ineffable NAME-—was a mysterious 
secret; so here the Harlot’s characteris known 
to God only. Her name is “ Mystery,” and 
“ Confusion ”—so “‘ Babylon” is interpreted ; 
a character now added to the “ zames of blas- 
phemy” borne by the Beast. Words. notes: 
“ Her title is Mystery, a secret spell, bearing 
the semblance of sanctity.” 

Onthe other hand, Zillig, De Wette, Ebrard, 
Disterd., Auberlen interpret A mystery,— 
the word standing in apposition to “ zame,” 
and denoting the enigmatical sense in which 
the title that follows is to be taken—as if 
‘*a preliminary nota bene” (Diisterd.): it may 
be compared with the word “ spiritually,” 
in ch. xi. 8, or with the note of attention, 
“© Here is wisdom” (ver. 9; ch. xiii. 18). The 
three ideas—“ mystery,” “ spirituality,” “ wise 
dom”—are combined in 1 Cor. ii. 7, 10, notes 
Auberlen (p. 275); and he adds that the 
word Mystery (used on one occasion only by 
Christ, Matt. xiii. 11) “always, and without 
exception, designates a subject which is hid- 
den to the unassisted reason and eye of man, 
and can only be seen by a special Divine 
revelation (cf. Rom. xi. 25; xvi. 25; 1 Cor. 
ii, 7-10; xv. 51; Eph. iii. 3-5). See on ch 
i. 20, x. 7:—in fact “ mystery” is the anti- 
thesis to “ revelation,” see ver. 7. 

Reuss, referring to ch. xi. 8, explains the 
Harlot’s name of “ Mystery” as meaning 
‘ allegorically, “ because it is to her that the 
prophecies of the Old Test. against Babylon 
are referred: by her proper and historical 
name she is called Rome.” To thesame effect 
Burger, who explains that her name is said 
to be “a Mystery,” in order that we may not 
think of the historical Babylon on the 
Euphrates. 

Stuart notes: “Why not translate ‘a name 
written mysteriously,’ accus. adverbial ?” 
—viz., ‘BABYLON THE GREAT (the mother 
of harlots and of the abominations of tne 
earth) :’—the parenthesis being “an exclama 
tion of the author, and not a part of the 
inscription.” 

AAa2 


739 


740 


ABOMINATIONS OF THE 
EARTH. 

6 And I saw the woman drunken 
with the blood of the saints, and 


REVELATION, XVII. 





[v. 6-—9. 


with the blood of the ot 
Jesus: and when I saw her, 1 won- 
dered with great admiration. 

7 And the angel said unto me, 





BABYLON THE GREAT,] See ch. xiv. 8; 
xvi. 19, where this, the Harlot’s, title has been 
already introduced as the concrete repre- 
sentative of the collective W orld-kingdom. 

Babylon is a mystery, notes Hengst., as 
still continuing “ Great” after Christ appeared, 
and still retaining power to persecute the 
Saints—see ver. 6. 

See Note B at the end of this chapter. 


THE MOTHER OF the HARLOTS] This 
titlerepeats, in another form, the imagery of ver. 
4. Dtsterd. observes that the word ‘“ Mother” 
signifies that she has made her daughters— 
“the cities of the nations” (ch. xvi. t9)—to 
become Harlots also, and drunken with her 
cup, thus filling the world with her cruelty 
(ch. xiii. 7,14; xiv. 8,11). I. Williams, who 
refers the prophecy to Jerusalem, writes: 
“ Aretas, in speaking of the City of Rome as 
signified by Babylon, adds, ‘In all this the 
prophetic saying is suitable, ds is the mother, 
so is the daughter’ (Ezek. xvi. 44). But it is 
remarkable that the proverb which this Greek 
writer refers to is spoken, not of Babylon, 
but of the Ancient Jerusalem, in that very 
chapter which forms the basis of this analogy 
or figure in the Apocalypse” (p. 329). 

Zillig regards Nineveh as the type here of 
the Harlot—see Nah. iii. 4-7 ; and he notes: 
“In the Apoc. a name, by a favourite usage, 
is divided into several words. Cf. ch. ili. 14, 
and especially ch. xix. 11.” 


AND of the ABOMINATIONS OF THE 
EARTH.] De Wette explains that the Harlot 
is the type of all nations which practise 
idolatry. Hengst. understands “ political 
enormities ;’ “not false religious zeal, but 
despotism,” see ver. 6. The sins of the 
World-city—unbelief, superstition, sensual- 
ity—are all included under the Harlot’s title. 


6. drunken with the blood of the saints,] I. e., 
“by reason of (ex) the blood ”’—see ch. viii. 
II; xvi. ro, 11. To this corresponds the 
scarlet colour of the Beast, and of the Harlot’s 
attire—vv. 3, 4. For the metaphor, compare 
“Ebrius jam sanguine civium, et tanto magis 
eum sitiens ” (Plin. H. N. xiv. 28, ap. Wetst.). 
For the fact, cf. ch. xvi. 6; xvili. 24. 


of the martyrs of Jesus.) Cf. ch. ii. 13. 
‘The Saints” do not really differ from the 
witnesses, or “ Martyrs of Jesus;” but the 
latter description states more plainly that 
the testimony of Jesus which the Saints have 
borne has been the cause of their death: cf. 
ch i. 2, 9; vi. 9. The language, notes 


Hengst., is changed in order to heighten the 
guilt of Rome. Of course “the Two (ty- 
pical) Witnesses” of ch. xi. are not meant. 


and when I saw her, I wondered with 
a great wonder.| For the idiom, cf. ch. xvi. 
g. The reason for the Seer’s “ wonder” the 
Angel explains, in ver. 7, to be “ the mystery of 
the Woman and of the Beast that carrieth her. 

Writers explain these words variously. 
Bengel: Because so powerful a Beast carries 
and serves a woman ;—De Wette and Ziillig: 
Because St. John, as in ch. v. 4, did not un- 
derstand the symbolism ;—Hengst.: Because 
the Roman power remains still unbroken 
after Christ has come, see on ch. xiii. 3 ;— 
Ebrard (comparing the “ wonder” in ver. 8): 
Because the Beast, already seen in ch. xiii., 
reappears in a form so different ;—Auberlen : 
Because a change so extraordinary has 
over the Woman; “the impression made on 
John may be expressed by the words of Isai. 
1. 21: ‘How is the faithful city become an 
harlot !’” (p. 277); and he contrasts with this 
feeling of ‘“‘ wonder” which the Seer exhibits 
nowhere else [but see ch. v. 4], the expres- 
sion of gratitude and joy manifested in ch. 
xix. 9, 10; xxii. 6-8. To the same effect, 
I. Williams. Alford, also, for the most part, 
adopts this opinion of Auberlen; but he al- 
together fails to answer the objection of 
Diisterd. that neither in the text itself, nor 
in the Angel's explanation (ver. 7), is an allu- 
sion made to the identity of the “ Woman” 
of ch. xii. and the “ Harlot”; or to this as 
the reason for St. John’s wonder. Alf. replies 
that the silence of the Angel is “ just what we 
might expect, if the fact of identity were 
patent :”—but that the identity does not exist 
has been already shown on ver. 1. Words- 
worth (after Vitringa, p. 764) explains,—Not 
because Heathen Rome persecuted the Saints, 
but because a Christian Church calling herself 
“the Mother of Christendom,” z.e., the Church 
of Rome, should be “ drunken with the blood 
of the Saints.” 

The Seer is now to behold the mystery of 
evil more closely; and the continued con- 
flict of the Church with the “ Prince of this 
world” is to be more distinctly revealed. 
Daniel (vii. 1-7) had already symbolized, 
under the image of four Beusts, the four 
successive World-empires: and, borrowing 
from Daniel’s figurative language, St. John 
has composed the symbol of one Beast, with 
“ Seven Heads” and ‘“‘ Ten Horns,” designed to 
typify, throughout all time, the antichristian 





v. 8.] 


Wherefore didst thou marvel? I 
will tell thee the mystery of the 
woman, and of the beast that carrieth 


World-power. This form, Satan, in his 
tharacter of “Prince of this world,” has 
assumed in ch. xii., where his hostility to the 
Church of God is described ; and under this 
form, as the actual World-power, the em- 
bodiment of Satan’s influence is represented 
in ch. xiii. In ch. xvii. is added, as the contrast 
to the Church, the symbol of the “ Harlot” 
representing the local centre, or World-city, 
whence the antichristian spirit is to be 
diffused at any particular period ;—and the 
special features of this symbolism are now 
developed by the Angel. 

It is to be noted that up to this point the 
Seer beholds in a Vision the actors in the 
events that follow. The events themselves 
are not presented here in a Vision: the 
Angel predicts them. 


THE ANGEL INTERPRETS (7). 


7. The interpretation given by the Angel 
(see ver. 1), like the Vision itself which is to 
be interpreted (vv. 1-6), is directed to the two 
chief figures—to that of the Beast in vv. 8- 
14, and to that of the Harlot in vv. 15-18: 
the latter interpretation is divided from the 
former by the customary formula “ And be 
saith unto me,” ver. 15. 


Wherefore didst thou wonder?] See ch. 
vii. 13,—the Angel does not now pause for a 
reply. Hengst. compares Matt. xiv. 31: he 
regards these words as a reproof to St. John 
who is prone to dwell upon what is visible; 
see also Mark vi. 6, and the verb in John vii. 
21. This may well be doubted,—see on ver. 


the mystery] The mysterious signification 
of the symbolism:—cf. on ver. 5; and ch. 
i. 20. 

of the woman, and of the beast| Note the 
articles—* the Woman,” “ the Beast, of ver. 3.” 

We have here the two chief forms intro- 
duced in this section (wv. 7-18) which, though 
typifying different objects,—the World-city 
and the World-Aingdom,—are essentially con- 
nected together (cf. ver. 3). Hence St. john 
speaks of but oe mystery—the mystery of the 
Woman and of the Beast ; treating in the first 
place of the more general subject, “ the mys- 
tery of the Beast” (wv. 8-14); and then of 
the more special subject, “the mystery of the 
Woman” (vv. 15-18). 

Hengst. would explain :—“ The mystery of 
the Harlot is that she is made desolate (ver. 
15); of the Beast that it goes into perdition 
(wv. 8-11). The mystery of the Beast is in- 


REVELATION. XVII 


her, which hath the seven heads and 
ten horns. 
8 The beast that thou sawest was, 


dicated here rather than fully disclosed, this 
being reserved for ch. xix. 20... . We have 
properly to do in this place only with the 
judgment on the Harlot—see ver. 1.” 

I. Williams observes that it is rather of the 
Beast on which the “ Woman” sits than of the 
“ Harlot” that the Angel speaks; as if this her 
connexion with the Beast, was what explained 
“the mystery.’ St. John does not wonder at 
all at the Beast, but much at the Woman: 
and it is twice repeated that all but the elect 
snall wonder at the Beast—ch. xiii. 3; xvii. 8. 
To wonder at the Beast is the part of the 
wicked ; to wonder at the Woman is the part 
of the Seer himself (p. 332). 

that carrieth her,| The token of the inti- 
mate connexion between the two forms 
already represented in ver. 3. On the verb 
here, see on ch. ii. 3. 

the seven heads| To the “ Seven Heads” 
two interpretations are given by the Angel :— 
(1) They are “ Seven Mountains” on which 
the Woman sits (ver. 9); (2) They are “ Seven 
Kings” (ver. 10). 

and the ten horns.| See on vv. 9, 124. 
The imagery of ch. xiii. is resumed. There 
is no mention here of diadems as in ch. xiii, 
1, where the Beast is seen in the full exercise 
of his demonic power. The “Ten Horns” 
have not yet—so far as ¢4is Vision has pro- 
ceeded—surrendered their kingly power to 
the Beast (see vv. 12, 13), and, hence, the 
diadems are absent. 


THE MYSTERY OF THE BEAST (8-14). 


8. was, and is not;| This fact is three 
times insisted upon—here; at the end of this 
verse; and in ver. 11. The words “ts not” 
are generally allowed to signify the reception of 
the deadly wound by one of the “ Heads,” as 
stated in ch. xiii, 3. Observe,—what the 
Angel here explains refers to the Beast, not 
to the wounded “ Head,’ which, indeed, in 
ch. xiii. is put for the whole Beast: see the 
note on ch. xiii. 3. 


and is about to come up out of the 
abyss,| This fact is implied in the last 
words of this verse; and isalso implied in ver. 
II, where it is said that the Beast will re= 
appear in the person of an eighth “ King.” It 
is thus that the Aealing of the “death-stroke” 
(ch. xiii. 3) is now expressed,—the wound of 
one “ Head” being ascribed to the whole Beast, 
because, as Litcke notes, the antichristian 
character of the Beast culminates in this one 
“ Head”—cf, ch. xili. 3, 12. 14 (see, however, 


741 


942 


and is not; and shall ascend out of 
the bottomless pit, and go into per 
dition: and they that dwell on the 





the objection of Ebrard quoted in the note on 
ch. xiii. 3). The Beast—the symbol of the 
unzodly World-power in its universal form— 
is here the symbol of the Roman Empire. 
The paganism of the world had received its 
fatal wound from the sharp sword of the 
Archangel (ch. xii. 7), and absolutely from— 
the Cross of Christ (Col. ii. 15). The ma- 
terial fabric of the Empire had already been 
rudely shaken. Tacitus (Hist. i. 11) describes 
the year 69 as full of the gravest dangers,— 
as being “annum reipublice prope supre- 
mum ;” and then the torrent of the barbarian 
hordes broke in. ‘“ The shattered, pillaged, 
dilapidated Empire,” however, as Sir F. Pal- 
grave writes (see on ch. xiii. 3), “ was still 
one state, one community:” and thus the 
godless World-power, as especially neted in 
ch. xiii. 14, still “/ived.” Heresy and unbelief 
and worldliness, moreover, sprang up to 
trouble the Church also:—and so time has 
gone on; and never has revived paganism 
been more combative than in the nineteenth 
century. 

Here it is to be further observed that St. 
John speaks in this passage of the revival 
of the Beast as about to be, not as present 
when he wrote. The “ot being”—which 
has “its ground in the atonement of Christ” 
—is to be regarded, notes Hengst., as con- 
tinuing during the coming again and re- 
newed Jeing: this may be inferred from ver. 
11. The Beast now returns, not only from 
“ the sea” but “out of the Abyss” (see on 
ch. ix. 1), whence it has drawn new anti- 
christian strength—see ch. xi. 7. He now 
appears scarlet-coloured, a symbol of blood- 
guiltiness; and the “ames of blasphemy,” 
formerly written only on his “ Horns” (ch. 
xiii. 1), now cover his whole body (ver. 3). 

Wordsworth notes: “The Beast was, 
in its Imperial form, and exists no longer in 
that shape; having received a deadly wound, 
and being 4i//ed in that respect ; and is about 
to ascend out of the Abyss; i.e.,in this new 
form in which it wil) be described” (see on 
ch. xiii. 3). Ebrard, on the other hand, 
argues that the Angel speaks as in ver. 10 
from the standpoint of the time in which 
he converses with St. John—“the Beast 
qwas, and is not:” he, therefore, speaks of a 

wer which, in the days of St. John, 

longed to the past, and consequently not of 
the Roman power which did exist in the 
days of St. John: whence it follows that the 
Beast of ch. xvii. typifies a power different 
from that typified by the Beast of ch. xiii. 
(see on ch. xi. 7; xiii. 1). The latter, or 


REVELATION. XVII. 


[v. 8 


earth shall wonder, whose names 
were not written in the book of life 
from the foundation of the world, 


World-power in its Roman form, has arisen 
from “the sea” of the nations—from the 
commotions of the world’s history; and, 
although taken into the service of Satan in 
his character of “Prince of this world,” has 
not been directly produced by Satan. The 
Beast of ch. xvii., on the other hand, ascend- 
ing “out of the Abyss,” is the type of a 
World-power whose origin és directly and 
immediately the work of Satan, and there 
fore a result of direct demoniacal influence 
(s. 458 ff.) :—but see above on ver. 3. 

According to Andreas (4. ¢. p. 99) the 
Beast is Satan, borne from the Abyss by 
Antichrist to destroy men. Beda takes the 
Beast to be Antichrist, who is to reign at 
the end of the world. 


and to go into perdition.| See vv. il. If 
we read as in ver. 11, the translation is, 
and he goeth into perdition (cf. John 
xvii. 12; 2 Thess, ii. 3)—to return whence he 
came forth. Ch. xix. 20 is the commentary. 

These words seem to be added 
thetically, in order to support the children of 
God under the prospect to which they must 
look forward. 


shall wonder,| Namely at the reappearance 
of the Beast just described (cf. ch. xiii. 3, 8, 
12),—as stated more fully at the end of the 
verse, “ when they behold.” 


[they] whose name hath not been 
written in the book of life] See wv. UL; 
Gr. upon [evi] the book [or roll] of life: 
see ch. xiii. 8, where we have “in [ev] the 
book of life ;’ and where the parallel with 
ch. xxi. 27 is more exact. 

For “the book of life” see on ch. iii. 5. 


from the foundation of the world,| See 
Matt. xxv. 34; a text which supports the 
natural connexion of these words with the 
verb “ qritten,’—the article which should 
regularly connect them with “the book of 
life” not being inserted. Alf., however, notes: 
“Tt is by no means certain, in the 
Greek of the Apoc., whether these ac- 
curacies must be insisted on ;” and, relying 
on ch. xiii. 8, he connects with the words 
immediately preceding. 

when they behold the beast,| The participle 
in the genitive; see vv. //.:—“ Perhaps” 
an “example of the gen. absolute with the 
subject omitted ;” cf. Matt. i. 18 (Moulton’s 
ed. of Winer, p. 736);—or the gen. con- 
structed with the relative clause (De Wette); 
—or a case of attraction agreeing with 
“ quhose.” 








| 
: 


¥. 9.] 


when they behold the beast that was, 
and is not, and yet is. 
g And here zs the mind which 


REVELATION. XVII. 


hath wisdom. The seven heads are 
seven mountains, on which the 
woman sitteth. 





The cause of the Seer’s “ wonder” is now 
explained 


how that he was,] Asin John ix. 8; not 
“awhich was” as A.V. Words. notes that the 
neuter (6, rc) is not used by any writer of the 
New Test. as a relative, except when followed 
by av—cf. Luke x. 35; John ii. 5; Col. iii. 
17, Winer (s. 44) gives as doubtful cases 
John viii. 25 ; Acts ix. 27; 2 Cor. ili. 14: see 
also on 1 Cor. xvi. 15 Moulton’s ed. of 
Winer, p. 781. 


and is not, and shall come.] (See vv. //.). 
The Cod. Sinait. reads “shall come again,” 
matw. Gr. “and shall be present”— 
words which are equivalent to “is about 
to come up out of the Abyss.” Note 
that the other words of the first clause, 
“ was andis not,” are repeated. Bengel points 
out the contrast between this title of the 
Beast, and that of our Lord in ch. i. 4, 
“Which is and which was, and which is to 
come” (see in Joc.) ; and also notes the corre- 
spondence of the verb “shall come” (zapé- 
oraz), with the established expression (zap- 
ovoia) of the Evangelists (Matt. xxiv. 3); 
of St. Paul (2 Thess. ii. 1, 8); of St 
James v. 7; of 2 Pet. ili. 4—to denote the 
Lord’s Second Coming. The same term 
is likewise used to denote the coming or 
presence of the “man of sin” in 2 Thess. ii. 
3, 9- This correspondence Disterd. denies, 
because the term zapovgia does not occur in 
the Apoc.:—but seer Johnii. 28. That Pre- 
sence of Christ is described in ch. xix. 11. 

Differently: —_Men wonder, continues 
Ebrard (s. 460), that this World-power de- 
stroyed long before the time of St. John is to 
reappear. The Beast from the “sea” existed 
during the mystic three and a half years after 
the Ascension (ch. xii. 5, 6); consequently it 
existed in the time of St. John; and the 
wounding of its sixth Head the Seer beheld 
as still future. On the other hand, this Beast 
of ch. xvii. had already gone “into the Abyss” 
when St. John lived, and was to reappear 
long after St. John’s time. 4is reappearance, 
accordingly, has nothing to do with that 
healing of the Roman “ Head” of the World- 
power in ch. xiii. 

Godet admits that his interpretation which 
places Israel as one of the “ Seven Heads” of 
the Beast (see on ch. xiii. 1, 3) does not suit 

litical history ;—but that it suits “the re- 
a history of humanity, which is that of 
John” need not be proved. Until its dis- 
persion by the Romans, A.D. 70, Israel “was” 
the first of peoples; but then it suddenly 


disappeared from the rank of nations—it 
“was, and is not ;” but it “qwil] come again:” 
“This Israel, to human eye annihilated, will 
yet revive to be the supreme expression of 
the revolt of humanity against God the 
Creator” (pp. 365-367)—to be Antichrist. 
For the interpretation which applies the 
lism to Nero, see below on ver. 11, 
and above on ch. xiii. 3. 

Marlorat (A.D. 1550) and other Protestant 
writers, adopting the reading of the Textus 
Receptus (see vv. /j.), interpret : Heathen 
Rome is passed away ; and, although Papal 
Rome # there (xairep eoriv), its world-rule 
is nothing in itself (ovx €o7r1) :—see Intro- 
duction, § 8. Zitllig also retains the i 
of T. R.,—which has no authority whatever,— 
and gives as the solution of the enigma (“das 
Lésewort des Rathsels”) the word Edom 
(ii. s. 319): see on ver 9, and Note D. 


9. Here is the mind which hath wisdom] 
(The “ And” of A. V.—and of Wiclif, Tyne 
dale, Cranmer, but not Geneva—does not 
exist in the Greek: it is perhaps taken from 
the Vulg.: see vv. //. on ver. 8). 

Or render, Here is the meaning (6 vois), 

That the explanation itself is a “ mystery” 
is clear from this formula, which is to the - 
same effect as that which introduces “the 
number of the Beast,” ch. xiii. 18:—the sense 
being that the interpretation of what follows 
belongs only to an understanding gifted with 
wisdom. Ewald explains, “ Here is the 
meaning of this enigma ;”—others (Grotius, 
Herder, &c.), “ Here is the sense full of 
wisdom, the deep mysterious import of the 
symbol ;’—Stuart thinks that this verse should 
end at the word “«qwisdom:” he refers 
“ Here” to what precedes—special sagacity 
is required in order to understand what the 
writer has said about the Beast. 


THE SEVEN HEADS (9-11). 


The seven beads\ See ch. xii. 3; xiii. 1. 

The absence of “ diadems” in ch. xvii. may 
be explained by the following reference to 
“ mountains.” ‘The reference to “ kingdoms” 
or royal powers is supplied by the descrip- 
tion in ver. 4 of the regal magnificence of the 
“Harlot.” Kingly rule was symbolized by 
“ diadems” in ch. xiii. 1. 

are seven mountains,| I.c., signify, represent 
“ seven mountains ” :—cf. on ch. i. 20. 

It is important to observe the merely 
passing notice, in this one place, of the “ Sever 
Mountains.” It is thus indicated in the 
slightest manner how Rome, the “ Urbs septi- 


743 


744 


collis” of the period (‘Septem urbs alta 
jugis, toto que presidet orbi,” Propert. iii. rr, 
§7—a line which combines the statements of 
ev. 9, 18), was the City in which the World- 
powe: was concentrated in the days of St. 
John. The obviousness of this allusion sup- 
plies an answer to the assertion, often made, 
that St. John always veils under obscure 
language (e.g. ‘the number of the Beast”) 
his references to Rome and her rulers, for the 
purpose of avoiding the hostility of the heathen. 
The hills here are doubtless real hills, while 
the “ qwaters” in ver. 15 are symbolical: but 
this isno reason why the hills or ‘‘ szountains” 
should not have a further meaning. A 
reference so slight as this cannot possibly be 
looked upon as exhausting the proper or full 
meaning of the Apostle’s words; and the in- 
terpretation of this most obscure passage 
depends on our fully understanding the 
symbol. It requires no divine “ wisdom” to 
see in this place the City of Rome on the Seven 
Hills; nor can a geographical notice so 
common (see Note C at the end of this 
chapter) come up to the sense of the words, 
“Here is the mind which hath wisdom.” 

Now it is contrary to the analogy of Scrip- 
tural symbolism to understand by “heads” 
itera] “mountains.” A “mountain” is re- 
garded (like the expression “sea,” or “ earth,” 
in Ps. lxv. 6-9 ; Hab. iii. 10) figuratively, as 
the seat of power. In Dan. ii. 35 the “stone” 

omes “a great mountain ;’—-Babylon is so 
described in Jer. li. 25;—-and both stone and 
mountain are prophetic names of Christ, see 
Gen. xlix. 24; Isai. xxviii. 16; Zech. iv. 7 
(cf. Matt. xxi. 44). Mountains generally 
signify in symbolical language the seats of gods 
and kings, especially of false gods and godless 
potentates who require to be humbled (see 
the note on Isai. ii. 2). The overthrow of 
the World-kingdoms by the Kingdom of 
God is represented by the same image in 
Isai. xli. 15. In Hab. iii. 6 the “ mountains ” 
are compared to the “nations.” The hill 
or mount is often the symbol of a place of 
strength :—e.g. the Mountain’ of holiness, the 
Mount of God, Mount Sinai, Mount Zion. 
In fact, to suppose the coincidence of a 
seven-hilled city to be the primary meaning 
here, would not suit the style of the 
Apocalypse. 

And thus two explanations are given by the 
Angel : “‘ Mountains,” as symbolizing seats of 
wer; and “ Kings,” as representing what 
ings represent, #.e., kingdoms—the former ex- 

lanation being given first, inasmuch as the 

gure “‘ Mountains” was more familiar to the 
ceaders of prophecy; and then both figures 
are identified as “ Kings” in ver. 10. “The 
§ Mountains’ stand in the same relation to the 
§ Kings,’ as, inver. 15, the ‘ waters,’ where the 
Harlot sitteth, stand to the ‘ peop/es :'—as little 


REVELATION. XVJI. 





as the ‘ waters’ are to be taken literally, so little 
are the ‘mountains’” (Auberlen, p. 270). 
This remark answers the objection of Diisterd. 
that, on the interpretation here adopted, one 
symbol, “ Heads,” first typifies another symbol, 
“* Mountains ;” and that thus by a double 
process we attain to what is properly intended, 
viz. “ Seven Kings.” The symbolic reference, 
however, to Rome preserves the natural import 
of “ Mountains ;” while “the many waters” 
(ver. 1), and the “Seven Heads” or “ Moun- 
tains” (vv. 3, 9) on which the Harlot sits 
receive their respective explanations in vv, 
15, 10. The difficulty has arisen from not 
bearing in mind that two symbols, the Beast 
and the Harlot, are here intermingled; and 
that what is now to be explained is their 
mutual relation. That the expression “Seven 
Mountains” points to the City of Rome, 
seated on the Palatine, Quirinal, Aventine, 
Celian, Viminal, Esquiline, and pepe hills 
—in St. John’s age the capital of the Universal 
World-empire to which the imagery points— 
need not be questioned. This result, indeed, 
is plainly indicated in ver. 18. 

Wordsworth observes that the drawing 
together of the ‘Seven Mountains” into the 
circle of the Roman city is combined by 
Roman Poets with the drawing together of 
the World’s kingdoms into the domain of 
the Roman Empire :— 


‘* Scilicet et rerum facta est pulcherrima Roma, 
Septemque una sibi muro circumdedit arces.” 


Georg. li. 534- 


This interpretation, however, of the “ Sewen 
Mountains” is not undisputed :— 

I. Williams observes that as the per 
the Jerusalem, the Sodom and Egypt of the 
Apoc., and also the Mount Zion and moun- 
tain of Jerusalem (ch. xiv. 1; xxi. ro) are 
not to be taken literally but spiritually, it 
might seem that Rome too, or the City on 
Seven Hills, is also to be so taken. We 
should thus understand, not the local city of 
Rome, but the principle of worldly greatness 
and ambition. “The Harlot sits on seven 
hills and on many waters: as the waters are 
not literal, why should the 4i//s be?” The 
Greek interpreters conclude that “the 
Seven Heads and Seven Hills on which the 
Universal Babylon is seated are seven places 
pre-eminent in power, on which the kingdom 
of the world is established,—Nineveh, of the 
Assyrians ; Ecbatana, of the Medes; Babylon, 
of the Chaldeans; Susa, of the Persians; the 
kingdom of Macedon; the ancient Rome; 
and the new Rome.” With these they 
connect as Kings,—Ninus, Arbaces, Nebu- 
chodonosor, Cyrus, Alexander, Romulus, and 
Constantine (p. 337). While I. Wifliams, 
however, argues that “there would be no 
reason, according to the analogy of the 








¥. 10.] 


ro And there are seven kings: five 


REVELATION. XVII. 


are fallen, and one is, and the other is 





Apocalypse, to conclude that Rome is here 
literally intended,” he nevertheless adds: “ Still 
it must be allowed that the Lagos Dee 
in some awful manner hover, as with boding 
raven wing, over Rome ” (Zé.). 

Ziullig (s. 319 ff.) gives the meaning “in 
these two words,—The City is Jerusalem, 
its Kingdom is Edom” (see Note D). Every 
scholar knows that Rome was built on Seven 
Hills and was the mistress of the world: but 
Rome is nowhere thought of in the Apoc.; 
while everything in it revolves round Jeru- 
salem. The proof rests on Ps. Ixxxvii. 1: “His 
foundation is in the holy mountains.” Many 
towns besides Rome can boast of their seven 
hills—Constantinople, Scutari, Brussels, Bam- 
berg, &c.; but Jerusalem especially can boast 
of the sacred number Seven—four larger and 
three smaller groups, viz.: (1) The highest 
and greatest, to the south, Zion; (2) to its 
north, through the Tyropceeum, Akra; (3) the 
Temple-mount, Moria, on the East; (4) to 
the north of Moria, Bezetha. Among these 
larger lay the group of three smaller hills— 
the four and three of the Apoc.: (5) Ophel, 
Neh. iii. 26, 27; [see the notes on 2 Chron. 
xxvii. 3; Isai. xxxii. 14, and Smith’s Bible Dict. 
in voc.]; (6) the hill of the Castle Antonia ; 
(7) the hill of the three towers, Hippicus, 
Phasael, and Mariamne. 

Lakemacher (quoted by Bleek, /. c., s. 89) 
names, Zion, Akra, Moria, Bezetha, and the 
three points ofthe Mount of Olives. Abauzit, 
Hartwig, Harenberg, Herder, &c. also under- 
stand Jerusalem,—see Bleek, s. 88. 

Krenkel (/. ¢., s. 75) expresses concisely 
the usual opinion :— Where, he asks, was there 
a city which, in Cent. i, united all these 
tokens, but Rome? The purf/e (ver. 4) de- 
notes her Imperial power ;—the scarlet her 
thirst for blood ;—she is styled a “ Harlot” 
after the manner of the Old Test. Prophets 
(see Isai. xxiii. 15, 17) ;—-she is called spiritu- 
ally Babylon (ch. xiv. 8), as Jerusalem is 
called Sodom and Gomorrah (ch. xi. 8), so far 
as she vies with her elder sister on the 
Euphrates in hatred towards the people of 
God. What, then, can the Beast on which 
she sits denote but the Roman World-power? 

on which the woman sitteth:] Gr. “where 
the woman sitteth on them”—a Hebrew 
union of the relative “where” with the de- 
monstrative “on them:” cf. the use of the 
“ relative pronoun,” in ch. <ii. 6, 14. 

10. And they are seven kings;| As well 
as “Seven Mountains”;—see on ver. 9, where it 
shewn that “ mountains” symbolize seats of 
power, a fact which connects the symbol 
“mountains” with the symbol “kings.” 
“Kings” again (cf. ver. 12) represent not 


individual rulers, but “kingdoms.” See 
Dan. ii. 38: “Thou [viz. ding Nebuchad- 
nezzar| art this ead of gold;” on which 
follows: “And after thee shall arise another 
kingdom ?’—cf. Dan. vii. 17, 23, where sings 
and #ingdoms are used as equivalent. See 
also Jer. xxv. 11: “ These nations shall serve 
the ing of Babylon seventy years,’—viz. 
Nebuchadnezzar and his four successors (cf. 
the note on Jer. xxvii. 7). And thusa “ ding ” 
represents a “4ingdom,’” and does not, in 
prophetical imagery, denote an individual 
“king.” In 2 Esdras xii. 22, 23 there is an 
instance of this ;—and we may also refer to ch. 
Xili. 1, where the explanation is given of the 
“ Seven Heads.” Hereaccordingly, the “ Seven 
Heads.” of the Beast signify (i.) the Seven Hills 
of Rome,—which are introduced both to in- 
dicate the then existing embodiment of the 
W orld-empire and to render more clear the re- 
ference to World-kingdoms,—and (ii.) Seven 
great World-monarchies, each in succession 
impersonated as a “ King,’ who in his day is 
representative of the antichristian World- 
power. All this might and all this energy are 
now beheld concentrated —under the mystic 
signature “ Seven”—in the one symbol of the 
Beast ; and this, it is important to bear in 
mind, is not Rome, nor the Roman Empire, 
but a general symbol of secular antichristian 
power. (We may also render as A. V.). 

With reference to the opinion that the 
“ Seven Kings” are personal rulers it is to be 
noted once more that the symbolism of 
ch. xvii. cannot be understood apart from 
the symbolism of ch. xiii, Now in ch. xiii. 1 
the “diadems” form one of the most pro- 
minent features of the description; while 
the exclusive application of the diadem to 
signify singly authority—as proved in the 
supplementary Note D on ch. ii. to—pre- 
cludes any reference in the Apocalypse to the 
Roman Cezsars before the time of Diocletian. 
Indeed the applicability of the title “zing” 
(8acxXevs), in any form, to the early Roman 
Emperors is contrary to all history. 

Some account of the various interpretations 
assigned to the symbol of the “ Seven Kings” 
is given in Note D at the end of this chapter. 


the five are fallen,| I.e., the five World- 
empires anterior to Rome. As Alford notes. 
“ Feypt is fallen, the first Head of the 
Beast that persecuted God’s people (Ezek. 
Xxix.; xxx.) ;—ineveb is fallen, the bloody 
city (Nah. iii. 1-19) ;—Badylon is fallen, tie 
great enemy of Israel (Isai. xxi. 9; Jer. L: 
li.) ;—Persia is fallen (Dan. x. 13; xi. 2y:— 
Grecia is fallen (Dan. xi. 3, 4).” 

According to Rationalists the jve fallen 
“ Kings” are the five Emperors beginning 


745 


746 


not yet come ; and when he cometh, 
he must continue a short space. 


with Augustus and ending with Nero;— 
Galba, Otho, and Vitellius, come between 
Nero and Vespasian whom Diisterd. makes to 
be the sixt4 Head ; and these three he indicates 
by three of the “Ten Horns,” cf. ch. xii. 3; 
xii. 1;—Renan, counting from Julius to 
Claudius, considers Nero to be still alive 
(“ Néron, qui est 4 la fois la Béte et un des sept 
rois, n’est pas mort en réalité,”—p. 433). 

Others interpret allegorically; or under- 
stand the successive forms of government 
over Rome, &c. In no case, however, do 
such interpretations preserve the natural 
Meaning of the verb in this passage; as it 
becomes necessary to assign to it the forced 
sense “have passed away,” or “are dead,” for 
which it would not be easy to find aprecedent. 
In Scripture “‘ fallen” is said of cities or king- 
doms; as, e.g. in ch. xiv. 8; Isai. xxi. 9; Jer. 
li. 8; Amos v. 2. 


the one is,] (Omit “ and”—see vv. //.). 
T.e., the sixth World-Empire, or the Imperial 
power of Rome, as it existed in the days of 
St. John. So Hengst., and Auberlen; and so 
even Godet, who makes the f/th “ Head,” 
now fallen, to be Israel (see on ch. xiii. 1). 

Accordmg to Stern the sixth “ Head” is the 
Roman Cesar, when St. John wrote; and this 
Head bore the “ death-stroke” (ch. xiii. 3) 
which Christianity inflicted ;—according to 
Vitringa, this sixth “Head” is Pope Paul 
III. (A.D. 1534-49) ;—according to Mede, the 
form of government by Emperors ;—according 
to Rationalists, generally, Galba ;—according 
to Renan, Nero, whom St. John erroneously 
believed to be still alive ;—according to Liicke 
and Disterd., Vespasian;— according to 
Ztllig, Herod of Chalcis, who received back 
the dignity of king from Claudius, A.D. 44. 

From this interpretation Ztllig concludes 
that the date of the Apocalypse is to be 
placed under Claudius, between A.D. 44 and 
A.D. 47, the year when Herod of Chalcis died : 
and so Lakemacher, Oés. P&il., x. 5,6: see 
Introd., § 4,a. Similarly the rationalistic school 
regards this verse as fixing the date under 
Galba, A.D. 68; just as ch. xi. 2 is taken to 
prove that it was written before the destruc- 
tion of Jerusalem (see Scholten, /.c., s. 44)— 
the Head “smitten unto death” of ch. xiii. 3 
being Nero, the 4/#4 Czsar. 


the other is not yet come;| (Omit “and”). 
I. e., the seventh, or antichristian World- 
power which is to succeed to the power of 
yn Rome:—in other words the World, 

the broadest sense of the word, as opposed 
to the Church. The principle of Auberlen 
has been already discussed on ver. 1,—namely 


REVELATION, XVII. 





{v. a2. 


11 And the beast that was, and 


is not, even he is the eighth, and 





that the Head of the Beast which had been 
“smitten unto death” (ch. xiii. 3) was this 
seventh “ Head,” and that it “represents the 
Christian State and its Christian civilization” 
—‘“ Christianity has become worldly, the 
world has become Christianized ; this is the 
fundamental type of the Christian era” 
299). Alford accepts this result: he call 
“this seventh ‘Head’ as the Christian Empire 
beginning with Constantine.” If, as his agreee 
ment with Auberlen implies, he regards the 
Empire, so far as it was Christian, as repre= 
senting the existing form of Antichrist, this 
conclusion is self-condemned. 

Wordsworth (see on ch. xiii. 3) takes this 
seventh Head to be the Imperial power of 
Germany “ which rose upon the ruins of the 
Italian kingdom ;” and so Burger, who illus- 
trates by the title “the Holy Roman Em- 
pire” ;—Launoy and others understand the 
Papacy as succeeding the Empire ;—A school 
of Roman Catholic writers (cf. Stern above) 
understand ‘A new heathen power to rule in 
the last age of Christianity from Rome as a 
centre ;’—According to Vitringa, it is Pope 
Paul V. (1605-1621). 

The seventh World-empire, notes Ebrard 
(s. 468), which is to come between the Roman 
Empire and Antichrist, is made up of the 
“Ten Kings” or Kingdoms of ver. 12;— 
Godet (see on ch. xiii. 1) takes the seventh 
“Head” to be a new power which is here- 
after to absorb all the fragments of the Roman 
Empire ;—Keil (/. ¢., p. 279) concludes that 
if the sixth sovereignty is the Roman, then 
by the seventh we may understand the World- 
powers of modern Europe that have come 
into its place. 

According to the rationalistic school gener= 
ally, this “ Head” is Otho or Vitellius;—Ac= 
cording to Lticke and Dusterd., Titus;— 
According to Renan, Galba, “ who is old and 
feeble; he will soon fall” (p. 432). 


and when he cometh, he must continue @ 
little while.] Je., “must needs” “by God’s 
decree,”—see on ch. i. 1, On the phrase ‘*a 
little while” (oA‘yov—cf. on ver. 12), 
observe that there is no noun here expressive 
of “ time,” or “ season ” as in ch. xii. 12 ; XX. 35 
the language is indefinite, the words “ ust 
continue” alone being emphatic. The stress 
is laid on the fact of some endurance, not on 
its being but short (see 1 Pet. i. 6; v. 10). 
Ebrard refers to the “one hour” of ver. 12;— 
and the rationalistic school apply the phrase 
to the short duration of the reigns of 
Galba, or Titus. There is however good 
reason in the opinion of Hofmann and Hengst. 





v. 12.] 


is of the seven, and goeth into per- 
dition. 


that we are to understand a duration such 
“that by means of it the Church should be 
exercised in patience.” 

Auberlen, carrying out his idea of the apos- 

of the Church (see on ver. 1), con- 
siders that it is only the seventh Kingdom 
(or the Empire springing from the Germanic 
Tribes) which became a Christian World- 
kingdom, and that this is meant by the 
“ death-stroke” in ch. xiii. 3: “ This expres- 
sion, combined with 4e must continue a little 
while, reminds us that the Germanic na- 
tions were to remain only for a short space 
heathenish, beast-like, anti-christian ; that the 
seventh Head was soon to receive its wound.” 
But “the Christian Germanic world aposta- 
tizes from Christianity. . . . A new heathen=- 
ism breaks in upon the Christian world” 
(/. c., p. 300). In other words, the wound 
which the Beast had received when the Ger- 
man Tribes were converted to Christianity, 
has now been 4ealed by their apostasy. 

The explanation of the “Seven Heads” 
given in ver. 9 referred merely to the re- 
lation of the “Harlot” to the Beast; the 
explanation here concerns the “ Heads” them- 
selves, but says nothing as to the judgment 
of the “Harlot” in the last times :—ver. 10 is 
the preface to ver. 11, which tells “ who the 
Beast is, and specially, how he is related to 
the Seven World-kingdoms ” (Ebrard s. 463). 


ll. And the beast that was, and is not,] 
As spoken of in ver. 8, and as seen in ver, 3. 
Neither here nor in ver. 8 do these words 
indicate the age of St. John: they merely 
serve for a token of the Beast at the time of 
his appearing. 

The beginning and the end of this descrip- 
tion, taken from ver. 8, point attention to the 
fact that the subject of both verses is the 
same. 


is himself also an eighth,] The ab- 
sence of the article gives the sense, “an 
eighth,” not “ #4e eighth,”—not one of a series 
already named; and therefore not, as Ra- 
tionalists insist, “‘ one of the Seven.” Further 
still, as the gender of the numeral proves, 
he is “an eighth King ;” not one of the Seven 
Kings, but the result, as it were, or outcome 
of them—see below. In the person of this 
eighth “ King” the Beast himself is embodied. 
It is he in whom the Beast from the Abyss 
(ch. xi. 7), which now “is not,” will appear 
again. 
‘There is considerable difficulty in deter- 
mining who this eighth “ King” is to be; and 
we may notice a similar ambiguity in the case 
of the “ Little Horn” in Daniel. Rationalists, 


REVELATION. XVII. 


12 And the ten horns which thou 
sawest are ten kings, which have re- 


who see in the eighth “ King” the returning 
Nero, triumph especially in their interpre 
tation of “the number of the Beast,” ch. xiii. 
18,—“ Nero-Cesar ;” and on the “Nero- 
Fable” see Note E at the end of this chapter. 
Ziillig, who would fain apply the Nero-fable 
to his theory of the Edomite kings, admits that 
history affords no trace of an expectation of 
the return of one of the banished Herods, as 
an eighth, after Agrippa II.:—see above on 
ver. 10, and Note D at the end of this chapter. 

On the “ eighth” King, see Note F at the 
end of this chapter. 


and is of the seven ;| Cf. John xv. 19 ; xvii. 
14; 1 Johniii. r2—“cometh of the seven;” 
not, “is one of the seven,” as Mark xiv. 
69; Luke xxii. 58; Acts xxi. 8; Col. iv. 9, 
to which meaning St. John’s usage is directly 
opposed. In such a sense he always prefixes 
the numeral (eis) which is wanting here— 
see ver. 1; and also ch. v. 5; vi. 1; vii. 13 
(cf. vv. 4-8); XV. 7; xxi. 9; John i, 413 VL 
8, 70; vii. 50; Xi. 493 Xii. 43 xiii. 235 xx. 

24. This fact removes another foundation 
from the rationalistic argument for the reap- 
pearance of Nero. 


and he goeth into perdition.] The fate or 
the Beast in ver. 8 is again denounced ; and the 
language of 2 Thess. ii. 3 is again recalled. 

The object of the rationalistic interpre- 
tation, under its most moderate form, may 
be stated thus after Dusterdieck :—Assume 
ing that St. John did write the Apoc., Rae 
tionalists seek (1) to prove, from internal 
evidence, that the Fourth Gospel was not 
written by the same author; and they seek 
(2) to disecealt the whole Christian Revela 
tion by representing an Apostle of Christ, in 
this his acknowledged work, as a political 
partizan (see Renan passim), and a myth-be= 
wildered fanatic (see Note E). Dusterdieck, 
indeed, refuses to allow that St. John bes 
lieved the Nero-fable; but he explains with 
care that he regards the prophetical element 
of the Apocalypse to contain “nothing mae 
gical,” “no mantik ” element, but to be merely 
ethical :? —“ The natura’ assumption,” he 
writes, “for the ethical genesis of the pro= 
phecy, was, in the case of John, the same as 
in the case of Josephus, when the latter pro- 
mised the Empire to Vespasian and his son 
Titus, before Vespasian had himself resolved 
to assume the Imperial power (B. J., iii. 8).” 
The British and Syrian campaigns had proved 
to all how superior were Vespasian and his 
sons to men like Otho and Vitellius. That 
Titus (“the seventh King”) should reign but 
for a short time; and that his brother Domi- 


747 


748 


ceived no kingdom as yet ; but receive power as kings one no.r with the beast. 


REVELATION. XVII. 





tian, “ proceeding from the Seven” (and the 
eighth), should appear as an incarnation of the 
Beast from the Abyss, easily followed from 
natural reasons. The character of Domitian 
was well known: in the words of Eutropius 
he proved himself to be “ exitiabilis tyrannus ” 
(4H. R., viii., 1); and St. John might “ naturally 
expect” that the danger always at hand 
while Titus reigned (“fratrem insidiari sibi 
non desinentem,”—Sueton., Titus, 9) would 
be realized in his being dethroned by his 
brother. Further still:—While the Apostle’s 
common sense “ naturally ” led him to predict 
that the reign of Titus was to follow that of 
Vespasian, and to be of short duration, “ John 
has been mistaken,” adds Dusteid., “ when 
he expected that the Roman World-empire 
would come to an end with Domitian. This 
singular error undoubtedly proves a certain 
imperfection of prophetic genius in the author 
of the Apocalypse, but does not in any way 
deprive him of it altogether ” (s. 514). 

Volkmar (s. 251) justly scoffs at this idea 
of “ethical Inspiration” as a defence of 
“‘the canonical character” of the Apocalypse. 
Admit, indeed, under any form, the rational- 
istic interpretation of the Book, and, almost 
before the ink was dry with which St. John 
wrote, the facts of history had falsified his 
predictions. 


THE TEN Horns (12-14). 


12. And the ten horns that thou sawest 
are ten kings,| On the meaning of the word 
“ Kings,” see on ver. 10; and on the symbol 
“ Horns,” as well as on the symbolical signifi- 
cance of the numbers “Seven” and “Ten,” 

—the former denoting fofa/ity in the abstract, 
the latter completeness as regards the world,— 
see on ch. xii. 3; xiii. 1; and Introd. § rz, a. 

The “ Horns” are probably to be regarded 
as borne by the seventh “Head” (see on 
ch. xii. 3), or seventh phase of the godless 
World-power. The ‘“‘ Zen Kings” symbolize 
the collective powers of the earth. 

Burger suggests that if Sewen expresses pro- 
gressive development in time, Ten expresses 
con:emporaneous perfect‘on: —the “ Ten 
Kings” therefore are to be contemporaneous. 

Hengstenberg takes the number Tez, applied 
here to “ Kings” or Kingdoms, to be a round 
number :—they are not individual Kings, as is 
plain from the whole character of the Apoc., 
which never deals with individuals, but always 
represents the future in its most general 
features. The“ Heads” denote World-mon- 
archies, of which there was always but one at 
a time. 

The Roman Empire, writes Dean Vaughan, 
1s the Beast’s sixtH Head ; and like the former 


will pass away. The seventh Head is a mere 
cluster of Ten Horns. The end of Rome shall 
be not a conquest, but a dismemberment—not 
one Kingdom, but Ten Kingdoms (ii. p. 166). 
The Horns (he adds on ch. xix. 11) denote 
division, not concentration; this power is 
known by a plurality, not by a unity of 
crowns and thrones. To the same effect 
Bossuet, “C’est un caractére assez re- 
marquable, que d’un seul empire il se forme 
tant de grands royaumes.” On this prin- 
ciple the “‘ Jen Horns” denote the kingdoms 
of the earth,—be their number what it may,— 
ending in the State-system of “the Last 
Times,” which is completely under the rule, 
and at the command of Antichrist. 


which have received no kingdom as yet ;| 
Hengstenberg would render “had not yet 
received kingdom,” or “dominion;’—the 
matter in hand concerns not nations with 
their respective governments, but the com- 
bination of the Jen as the reigning power on 
the theatre of the world’s history ;—Ebrard 
explains not yet by the existence, when St. 
John wrote, of the Roman Empire, the sixth 
World-power, on the fall of which the 
“Horns” become the seventh: see on ver. 
10;—Grotius understands “ not as yet within 
the limits of the Roman Empire;” but this 
restriction is not mentioned in the text. 

The words “‘no kingdom as yet” may intimate 
that what is spoken of is a something to 
arise subsequent to the ten horns on the 
Beast in Daniel, with which the “ Ten Horns” 
here have been erroneously identified: “ For 
the Beast itself is the ‘ Little Horn’ that arises 
among those ten of Daniel (vii. 8), uprooting 
three, and therefore not co-existent with the 
Ten”( I. Williams p. 346). 

Andreas, however, recognized here the 
ten horns, or Kings whom Daniel also saw. 
Of these Antichrist will slay ‘Aree, and reduce 
the rest to his rule. 

Bengel, with the codex A, reads “not” 
(ovx for ovaw); and explains, save not re- 
ceived, because they have given it to the 
Beast (ver. 17). Burger (see above) also 
favours this reading: and he would interpret 
in connexion with the words, “for one hour,” 
which follow:—‘ They are ings, indeed, 
but vassal-kings merely, dependent on the 
Beast ;—Aings, for they are clothed with 
royal power ;—but o1 'y “as Aings,” for they 
have not received an .ctual kingdom. They 
enjoy their authority, moreover (see below), 
for a very short time—the 34 years of Anti- 
christ’s supremacy ; see Dan. vii. 20-25. 


but they receive authority as kings,] By 
the expression “as Kings,” Hengst. undere 





REVELATION. XVII. 749 


Vv. 13—14.] 
14 These shall make war with the 


13 These have one mind, and 
Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome 7:Timé 


shall give their power and strength ra 


unto the beast. 


stands the plenitude of regal power:—“as 
Kings that reign, not merely over their own 
subjects, but over the world ;"—-Words., onthe 
contrary, takes it to denote “the precariousness 
of their power ;”—and so Disterd.: ‘‘ Their 
Kingdom is not real, full, regal power ; but as 
being transient, is represented as if ‘it were 
royal power” (cf. ch. ix. 3);—AIf. thinks it 
represents “the reservation of their kingly 
rights in their alliance with the Beast ;’— 
Auberlen would refer it to the absence of the 
“ diadems” in ver. 3, indicating “that the Ten 
Kingdoms into which the Germano-Sclavonic 
world is to be divided, will lose their mon- 
archical form in the end” (p. 302). 


for one hour,| (On the accus., cf. ch. ix. 5» 
and also Matt. xxvi. 40). Shortness of dura- 
tion (see ver. 10) is denoted here :—“ espe- 
cially” writes Words. as “ compared with the 
power of the Beast’s contrast, the Lamb, which 
is not for an hour, but for ever. On this use of 
‘ our, cf. 2 Cor. vii. 8; Gal. ii. 5; 1 Thess. 
ii. 17; Philem. 15.” See also ch. viii. 1; and 
cf. ch. xviii. 10:—-why their authority is thus 
brief is told in ver. 14. Hengst. notes that 
history confirms this sense of sort duration ; 
for the first appearance of the German Tribes 
almost coincides, with their conversion to 
Christianity. 

Vitringa and Elliott give a different ex- 
planation—“at one and the same time 
with:” see ch. iii, 3, “thou shalt not 
know what hour (sroiav &pav) I will come 
upon thee.” If St. John had meant “a short 
time,” notes Vitringa (p. 776), he would have 
written zpos épav (John v. 35; 2 Cor. vii 
8; &c.), or mpos Karpov &pas (1 Thess. ii. 17), 
or xpdévov dhcyoy (Acts xiv. 28):—compare 
too ch. xii. 12. I, Williams also suggests: 
“ They shall come into existence together with 
the Beast, as they enter into the description 
of the Beast when St. John first sees him rise 
from the sea (ch. xili. 1).” The Vulg. renders 
“una hora accipient post bestiam.” 

It seems more natural to understand “a 
short time,”—it may be the brief duration of 
Antichrist’s reign at the End: cf. Matt. xxiv. 
22. In ver. 17 the duration of their authority 
is limited to the time required for fulfilling 
“the words of God.” 

Volkmar as a Rationalist thus explains this 
verse: “They have not yet received Imperial 
power; they are at present, under the sixth 
(and seventh) “Head,” merely simple Prefects 
of the Provinces; but—united to the ffs 
“ Head” (Nero) when he returns to Rome as 
the cighth—these provincial rulers will exer- 


them : “for he is Lord of lords, and i 


cise authority similar to the Imperial, though 
but for a short time,” when the Empe-zor 
avenges himself on Rome (ver. 16) ;—and 
Renan: “The limited period for which the 
Proconsuls and Imperial Legates of the Ten 
chief provinces, who are not true Kings, 
receive their power from the Emperor” 
(Pp. 433). 

with the beast.) I. e., in alliance with him. 
As to the meanings assigned to the “Tem 


Horns” see Note D at the end of this 
chapter. 

18. These have one purpose;] Or “ome 
mind,” as A. V. 


and their power and authority they 
give unto the Beast.| See vv. /j., and note 
the present tense, though the future is 
signified :—cf. 1 Macc. viii. 4. (On the read- 
ing of T. R., dradsdacoverw, see Introd, 
§ 8). The expression of ver. 12, “ with the 
Beast” is enlarged upon in this verse; and 
then the unity of purpose of the “Ten 
Kings” and the Beast is referred to in ver.17: 
—they are to war (1) with the Lamb, and 
(2) with the Harlot (wv. 14, 16). 

Ewald notes, “ the Satanic Nero-purpose ;” 
—Renan writes: “If we could admit a re- 
touching of the Apocalypse after the event 
(‘des retouches post eventum’) we might 
suppose a reference here to the attempts of 
the generals to re-establish the Neronian 
régime (Tac., Hist. ii. 71, 95; Sueton., Vitell. 
11; Dion Cass. Ixv. 4, 7). I have made 
many efforts to see whether Otho might 
not be the second Beast (ch. xiii. 11), or 
‘False Prophet, which would explain ch. 
xiii. 12, 16, 17; but vv. 13-15 resist such 
an interpretation” (p. 488). 

Ebrard anticipates an objection: —“ How 
can the Ten Kingdoms receive power ‘ with the 
Beast’ and yet, as the seventh World-power, 
precede the Beast who is the eighth”? The 
answer is to be found in the Book of Daniel. 
As in Dan. vii. 8 the ‘Little Horn’ arises 
among the other ten (and therefore while they 
exist), so the Beast rises, in his inchoate state, 
while the “Ten Horns” rule. They rule “for 
one hour with the Beast,” who then appears 
alone and independently as an “eighth” 
World-power (s. 470). 

14. These shall war with the Lamb, and 
the Lamb shall overcome them,| This result 
is the reverse of that stated ch. xi. 7; xiii. 7. 
It points, by anticipation, to ch. xix. 11-21 

Lord of lords, and King of kings ;| Cf. ch. 
xix. 16; 1 Tim. vi. 15; and also Deut. x. 19; 


75° 


King of kings : and they that are with 
him are called, and chosen, and faithful. 

15 And he saith unto me, The 
waters which thou sawest, where 
the whore sitteth, are peoples, and 
multitudes, and nations, and tongues. 


Ps. lxxxix. 27; Dan. ii. 47; vii. 14. Not the 
Lamb only, “shall overcome them ;” the same 
verb is to be carried on to the next clause,— 


and they [also shall overcome] that 
are with him, called and chosen and 
faithful.| I. e., the armies in heaven are to 
share in overcoming the “Ten Kings” (ch. xix. 
14). “The armies which are in heaven” 
consist of those who, having been “called 
and chosen” on earth, in their Baptism, “to 
fight manfully under Christ’s banner,” have 
continued His “faithful soldiers and servants 
unto their lives’ end:’—cf. on ch. iil. 22. 
Hengst. considers that the mention of “ the 
called,” &c., as instruments of Christ’s victory, 
proves that the victory can be no bloody and 
destroying one; but one to be gained, 
through the peaceful mission of the Church, 
by the weapons specified in Eph. vi, 11-17. 
See on ch. xix. 14. 

Bengel renders as does A. V.: “ they that are 
with Him are called,” &c. There seems, how- 
ever, no reason why such a statement should be 
made here; the other rendering, too, is far 
more natural:—The Redeemed are repre- 
sented as sharers in the victory; they must 
also be represented as sharers in the conflict : 
cf. Eph. vi. 10-17. Indeed these words supply 
a distinct echo of Pauline doctrine. In its 
theological sense—“‘nemo vocat nisi Deus” 
—‘“ called” is found in the writings of St. 
John only here and in ch. xix. 9; “chosen” 
only here and 2 John 1, 13; and for “ faith- 
ful,” cf. ch. ii. 10; John xx. 27; 3 Johr.s. 


THE MYSTERY OF THE WOMAN (15-18). 


15. And be saith unto me,| A new clause; 
see on ver. 7. The judgment of the 
“Harlot,” the chief figure in this Vision (see 
ver. 1), is now to be set forth. This judg- 
ment could not be comprehended without a 
previous insight into the relation between the 
“Harlot” and the Beast ; and without under- 
standing what the Beast symbolizes. 

The waters which thou sawest, where the 
harlot sittetb,| On the Beast beside the 
waters. 

are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and 
fongues.| ‘This authoritative explanation of 
the symbol of “ the waters” is in strict har- 
mony with Isai. viii. 7; cf. Ps. xviii. 4, 16; 
cxxiv. 4. All inhabitants of the earth are thus 
symbolized (cf. ch. xiii. 3, 8, 12, 16), for all 


REVELATION. XVII. 


16 And the ten horns which 
thou sawest upon the beast, these 
shall hate the whore, and shall 
make her desolate and naked, and 
shall eat her flesh, and burn her with 
fire. 


serve the “Harlot”—see ver. 18. In such 
enumerations as this the number four is 
employed—“the signature of the carth”=— 
see ch. V. 9; Vil. 9; X. II; Xi. 9; xiv. 6. 

Ebrard interprets: The Angel of ver. 1 
gives this explanation, because the same 
Rome, which now appears as a “Harlot,” 
had appeared in ch. xiil. 1 as the from 
the sea; and hence, the meaning of “ the sea™ 
or “the waters” from which that Beast 
arose is now added. On this interpretation 
of Ebrard, see Note C on ch. xi. 7. 

16. And the ten horns which thou s. 
and the beast,] (See vv. //.). The alliance 
of the “Ten Kings” with the Beast—of the 
collective powers of the earth with the embodi- 
ment, at this particular time, of the principle 
of evil—is described in vv. 12,13. (A mom. 
absolute: as persons are intended, the pronoun 
which follows (otror) is masculine). 


these shall hate the harlot,| The reference 
is to what is still future :—the moving cause is 
God (ver. 17), the immediate occasion is not 
revealed, but the World-city, in which the 
resources of the godless World-power are 
concentrated, is to become an object of hatred 
to the former subjects of the “Harlot.” “TI 
will raise up thy lovers against thee” (Ezek. 
Xvi. 37; Xxili. 22) was of old the denunciation 
against spiritual faithlessness: and subsequent 
history affords many an example of the enmity 
that arises at times between World-rulers 
and World-cities Cf. Zech. i 19: “These 
are the horns which have scattered Judah, 
Israel, and Jerusalem.” 


and shall make her desolate] See on ver. 3 
Note the contrast to ver. 4, and to ch. xviii. 16, 


and naked,| ‘This symbolism is based on 
Ezek. xvi. 35-39; xxiil. 22, 29:—“and shall 
leave thee naked and bare.” 

and shall eat her fiesh,| The token of 
extreme hostility—see Psalm xxvii.2; Micah 
iii. 3; cf. Jas. v. 3. Dtsterdieck explains this 
figure as referring to the symbol of the 
Harlot; and the burning, in the next clause, 
as referring to the symbol of the Ciéty in ver. 
18. Wordsworth understands the carnal 
element of her power, as distinguished from 
the spiritual. 

and shall burn der utterly with jire.] 
See ch. xviii. 8, 18; and c£ Gen. xxxvii. 24; 
Ezek. xvi. 41. 


uf 
(v. 15—16. 





v. 17.) 


REVELATION. XVII. 


17 For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, 


Alf. considers that the distinction drawn by 
Disterd. cannot be pressed; cf. Lev. xx. 14; 
xxi. 9 :—it cannot positively be said that no- 
thing more than the burning of the City is 
now intended. 

We thus see the severance of the World- 
power from the World-city, together with 
the destruction of the latter by the former— 
an event which marks the beginning of God’s 
judgments on the antichristian World- 
power. So important a feature of the Divine 
scheme is this event, that ch. xviii. is devoted 
to the unfolding of its details. 

I. Hengstenberg interprets :—The nations 
of the Germanic race are intended “who 
were destined by God to avenge the cause 
of Christ upon the persecutor Rome;” and 
he quotes St. Jerome in proof of the suffer- 
ings which Rome endured at the hands of 
Alaric, and the Barbarian invaders gene- 
rally. So Grotius, Bossuet, Elliott and, 
generally, on the same principle, Dean 
Vaughan, who writes :—‘‘ The wild beast has 
Seven Heads, and Rome is the sixth. Rome 
therefore will pass away. But how? The 
prophecy answers, The seventh Head is a 
mere ciuster of Jen Horns. The Roman 
Empire will have no one successor. Its end 
shall not be a conquest, but a dismemberment 
- . -. not one kingdom, but Jen Kingdoms. 
Diverse in all else, these Jez Kingdoms shall 
make common cause against their one prede- 
cessor. The very Beast on which Rome 
has for so long triumphantly ridden shall 
shake her off, shall turn upon her, shall aid 
the Jen Kings in her spoliation and destruc- 
tion. Thus in this form . .. . shall the last 
of the Seven Heads rise into vitality, and the 
last of the Seven Empires begin its reign. 
And there shall be none later than that 
seventh: there shall be no more World- 
Empires. Six single powers, and then Anti- 
christ, and then the End:—see 1 Thess. ii. 
3, 8” (ii. p. 167). 

II. On the other hand Words. uses this 
passage as another proof that the “ Harlot” 
cannot be Heathen Rome; for it is certain that 
the Heathen City of Rome was not destroyed 

any powers that grew out of the Empire 
ofRome”.... ‘‘ The Horns of the Beast, i. e., 
some Powers that have grown out of the 
Roman Empire, will one day be alienated from 
the Papacy:”—“The Harlot City,” writes 
Tertullian, “is to receive its deserved retri- 
bution from the Ten Kings, which will grow 
out of the dismemberment of the Roman 
Empire” (De Res. Carn. 25). ©The ruin 
of Papal Rome will not be effected by Pro- 
testant Nations, but by Papal Princes and 
People rising against her.” To the same effect 


Vitringa (p. 780). I. Williams interprets 
generally of “a Christian Church, not keep- 
ing her faith :’—“‘ Rome and Jerusalem,” he 
adds, “were united in putting Christ to 
death, and in persecuting His Church; but 
Rome rose against Jerusalem, and burnt it 
with fire—itself surviving ; so the Beast and 
the Ten Kings are combined with the Harlot 
in persecuting Christ’s witnesses and saints 
for a time, but rise afterward against her 
and destroy her with fire... .. Ancient 
idolatrous Rome slew Christ and his saints, 
and then proceeded to make desolate, destroy, 
and éurn the harlot Jerusalem” (p. 354). 
And more generally still, Auberlen : “ The 
Church which, instead of witnessing against 
the apostate World-power, committed forni- 
cation with it, shall be judged by that very 
World-power. The time will come when 
worldly rulers . . . . shall make the Harlot 
desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh 
and burn her with fire, to designate the 
fulness of carnality into which the Church 
is sunk” (p. 318). See above on ver. 1. 

III. Godet writes :—Babylon is the capital 
of the universal monarchy which Antichrist 
will found (see on ver. 11). Seated on 
Seven Mountains it is certain that Babylon 
denotes Rome. It is then at Rome that the 
residence of the Jewish Monarch is first to 
be: “But how can a Jew forget the mortal 
blow that his nation has formerly received 
from Rome?....God has made use of Rome 
to chastise Israel; He is about to make use of 
Israel to judge Rome. It is the old antago- 
nism between Jew and Pagan—the most pro=- 
found antithesis of history—which now at- 
tains to its supreme crisis. Rome is reduced 
by triumphant Israel to the actual state of 
Nineveh or of Babylon. After this act of 
vengeance, Antichrist will go to establish, as 
we have seen (ch. xi. 7, 8), at Jerusalem, his 
natural capital” (p. 374). Here takes place 
the struggle of the Beast with the “Tavs 
Witnesses,” and the conversion of Israel, 
already restored politically. This is what is 
revealed in the “ Little Book,” in ch. xi. 

IV. Rationalists in general interpret this 
passage as referring to the return of Nero 
and his allies to take vengeance on Rome. 
E.g. Reuss (Hist. of Theol. p. 383): “ Heaven 
will not defile itself by direct contact with 
‘the mother of Harlots,’ the modern Babylon, 
This shall be chastised by the king it has 
rejected—by Nero the Antichrist returning at 
the head of the armies of the East.” Renan 
seems rather disposed to ascribe what St 
John writes here (“le pamphlet du chef des 
Eglises d’Asie”) to his having witnessed the 
submission of the generals of the armies in 


75! 


752 


and give their kingdom unto the 


REVELATION. XVII. 


[v. 28 
18 And the woman which thou 


beast, until the words of God shall be sawest is that great city, which 


fulfilled. 


reigneth over the «ings of the earth. 





the different provinces—Vindex, Galba, Otho, 
Vitellius, Mucianus, Vespasian, &c.—to the 
central authority in order to reconstitute 
the Empire. They humiliated Rome by de- 
priving her of the sole right of disposing of 
the Empire (‘“‘ evulgato imperii arcano posse 
principem alibi quam Rome fieri ”—Tacit. 
Hist. i. 4) ; and they went so far as to threaten 
to stop her supply of food,—see Joseph. B. J. 
iv. x. 5, &c. (p. 434). 

17. For God did put in their hearts} The 
aorist is proleptic:—cf. ch. xvi. 16. The 
moving cause of the unexpected fact predicted 
in ver. 16 is now assigned: the immediate 
cause is not revealed. Here the influence 
proceeds from God, see ch. xviii. 8;—in ch. 
xvi. 14, 16, it proceeds from the “‘ three un- 
clean spirits.” 

to perform his purpose,] The Vulgate 
[“ Deus enim dedit in corda eorum ut faciant 
quod placitum est illi”], Stuart, Zilllig, 
Hengst., Words., Alf., Burger, understand 
“to perform unconsciously God’s purpose, 
while they appear to accomplish their own” 
—see ver. 13. Bengel, De Wette, Disterd., 
Bisping, understand “the Beas?’s purpose,’— 
it is God who has impelled them to unite with 
and serve the Beast. Appeal is made to the 
expression “ until the words of God,” &c., be- 
low; and also to the unsuitable connexion 
of the “ Divine purpose” and the “human 
purpose” in one clause :—we might, however, 
rather expect to read “the Beast’s,” not “ His 
purpose,” if such a meaning were intended; 
see the repetition of the word “ Beast” 
below. Reuss does not decide: Ils feront 
son dessein (de Dieu ou de la béte.”).” 


and to perform one purpose] Or 
translate “to do his mind, and to come 
to one mind,]. The words of ver. 13 
repeated. 


and to give their kingdom unto the beast,] 
For the interpretations which have been 
assigned to these words, see on vv. 13, 
16, 


until the words of God should be accom- 
plished] See wv. //. This clause corre- 
sponds to the first words of the verse. “The 
words of God” in this place may be come 
pared with “the mystery of God” in ch. 
x. 7. According to Burger, “The words of 
God” here signify, “the prophecies which in 
the Old and in the New Test. treat of these 
Last Days.” The action of the “Ten Kings” 
has not only its end in the fulfilment of “ the 
qwords,” i.¢., the expressed will of God; but 


also its /imit :—when they have thus acted their 
power is over, see ver. 12. Ebrard on ch, 
xix. 9 expounds: Antichrist, the Beast from 
the Abyss, allied with the “Ten Kings” shall 
exercise unlimited rule, as the “eighth” 
World-power (ver. 11), until the “words of 
God” shall be fulfilled through the Marriage 
of the Lamb. 

The mighty influence of the world-ruling 
City becomes oppressive to Antichrist. He 
will be sole ruler: ‘“ World-ruler and World- 
city must always be found together; the 
despotic military influence of the one, and 
the democratic commercial influence of the 
other—Communism and Czsarism—must 
always be united, if there is to be one form of 
World-power. But if this result is attained, 
the internal contrast between both regularly 
emerges. World-ruler and World-city part 
in twain, from the very nature of things, and 
in the first instance to the disadvantage of the 
World-city. Historical examples of how 
results of this nature come to pass are con- 
spicuous in ancient and modern times: e.g. 
the conflicts between the Emperors and the 
Urbs,—between Paris and its Czsars” (Klie- 
foth, iz /oc.). 


18. the great city, that reigneth]- Gr. 
that hath a kingdom] The present tense 
defines the period to be the time when St. John 
wrote. Expositors of every school generally 
agree that Rome Pagan, or Rome Papal, or 
Rome under both aspects, is intended here,— 
see on ver. 9. Whatever applications may 
be made of this prophecy, and wherever the 
concentration of the World-power may be 
placed at any period of history, it is plain 
that when St. John wrote Pagan Rome was 
such a City as this verse describes. Here we 
have one of the leading subjects of modern 
controversy ; and some of the results may be 
mentioned in this place :— 

“Papal Rome,” writes Hengst., “has never 
had for the Papacy the same importance 
which heathen Rome had for the Roman 
Empire. The Pope has never been, like the 
Emperor, only the representative of Rome, 
so that the dominion might be attributed 
not to him but to Rome, as is done here.” 
He quotes in proof :-— 

“*Terrarum Dea gentiumque Rorna, 

Cui par est nihil, et nihil secundum.” 
(Martial.) 

“Per omnes quotquot sunt partes terrarum 
et Domina su et regina” (Amm, 
Marcell.). So too the same Temple was 
erected to Rome and to Augustus; Hadrian 





REVELATION. XVII. 


erected a Temple in the city to Rome 
herself; &c 

Ebrard ecplains:—Not “the Great City” 
of ch. xi. 8; for that was destroyed by the 
earthquake (ch. xvi. 18, 19), before “ the one 
bour” of ver. 12. Inch. xi. 8; xvi. 19, “the 
Great City” is a type; here it is the expo- 
sition of a type, being what the “ Woman” 
signifies ; and a type cannot be explained by 
atype. The actual “City” here corresponds 
rather to one of the three parts into which 
that typical City was divided by the earth- 
quake—see on ch. xvi. 19 ; for the “ Woman” 
—Babylon, or the City of Rome—is become 
in these last times, since the earthquake, no 
longer a Kingdom, but the seat of the power 
of che “ False Prophet” (s. 474-) 

Dean Vaughan writes: “ The Babylon of 
St. John’s time, the Babylon to which this 
prophecy primarily refers, was the great 
Roman Empire . . . . One of the chief uses 
of Prophecy would have been lost if that 
application had not been thus clear and 
decisive . . . . To promise the Church 
under Domitian deliverance from the yoke 
of the Papacy, would have been to mock, 
and not to console ” (ii., p. 201). 

Bishop Wordsworth argues that the full 
extent of the prophecies of the Apocalypse 
here, and in ch. xviii., concerning the fall of 
the Great City, were not fulfilled by such 
events as the capture of Rome by Alaric, 
or the assaults of the different Barbarian 
nations. Nevertheless, when the Imperial 
power of Germany was broken, and the 
Bishops of Rome after Gregory VII. acquired 
a spiritual and temporal sway under the titles 
which the Popes now “ assumed of Sovereign- 
Pontiff and Supreme Head of the Universal 
Church, Vicar of Christ upon Earth and ‘ Ruler 
of the World, he stood in a more lofty emi- 


nence than had ever been attained by the’ 


Czsars”: “‘ Therefore,” he concludes, “ since 
it is generally agreed that these prophecies 
concern Rome, and since they were zoz ful- 
filled in Heathen Rome; and since they 
concern Rome as she was to become after 
she had ceased to be Heathen; and since, 
after she had ceased to be Heathen, she be- 
came in course of time subject to the Bishop 
of Rome, and has continued to be subject to 
him for many hundred years; therefore, our 
conclusion is, that they concern Rome as the 
capital City of the Bishop of Rome, and of 
he Papal World” (p. 251). 


In order to repel the application to the 
Papacy, many Roman expositors also apply 
what is said of the destruction of Rome, 
to the future—to Rome again become Pagan: 
“This is the hypothesis,” observes Bishop 
Wordsworth, of “Suarez, Viegas, Ribera, 
Lessius, Menochius, C. a Lapide, and others, 
particularly Dr. Manning in our own day ” 
(#b.). Thus Stern (s.374) writes :—“ Babylon 
is really the City of Rome, not only, however, 
according to the old-heathenish, but also 
according to the new-heathenish signification 
of the World’s history. So long as Rome 
maintains Christianity, so long God forgets, 
humanly speaking, her ancient guiltiness, 
But in the last times of the New Test. World- 
history, many inhabitants of the Roman 
obedience will abandon their holy Catholic 
faith; will unite with the revolutionists of 
all lands; nay, unmeasured wickedness will 
rear its throne in Rome, after the Holy 
Father with his faithful Bishops and Priests and 
the pious believers shall have been hunted into 
the desert.” And Bellarmine (De Rom. Pont. 
iv 4.): ““Tunc etiam summus Pontifex Roe 
manus Pontifex dicetur et erit, licet Rome 
non habitet, sicut accidit tempore Totilz.” 
It is irrelevant to urge in reply to such 
an interpretation the discordance between 
it and the conclusions of other schools 
of Roman theologians who consider that 
these prophecies were fulfilled in ancient 
Heathen Rome:—it can only be said that, 
like all Futurist expositions, its acceptance or 
non-acceptance rests on some preconceived 
theory. 

The use of the present tense in the expres- 
sions “ The Woman is,” “ which reigneth,” is 
urged by many (e.g. De Wette, Disterd.) 
as proof that, by “the Great City,’ Rome 
only—the capital, when St. John lived, of the 
World-empire typified by the Beast—can be 
meant. But, as Bengel notes, we must rather 
interpret these present tenses from the stande 
point of the Vision (cf. ch. iii. 12; xi. 7), as 
signifying, not the City which now rules the 
world in the days of the Seer, but as the seat 
where the World-power is concentrated at 
each crisis of history ; especially in the days 
of Antichrist—to which time, however, the 
words need not be restricted. How the 
World-ruling City may be called in the last 
times, we do not know; how at any pres 
vious time, we need not absolutely deter- 
mine. 5 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Chap. XVII. 


NoTE A ON VER. 4—ANCIENT PEARLS. 


Pearl—Mapyapirns: Margarita: and later 
Margaritum—seems to have been known 


New Test. Vou. IV. 


from the earliest times to the Asiatic 
Greeks in consequence of their intercourse 
with the Persians, ever its greatest admirers, 
Among the motives impelling Cesar to 


BBB 


753 


754 


attempt the conquest of Britain was the 
fame of its pearl fisheries. Pearls in the 
ancient world held the highest rank among 
precious stones, and for an obvious reason 
—their beauty is entirely due to Nature, 
being susceptible of no improvement from 
art 


As no two Pearls were ever found exactly 
alike, this circumstance gave origin to the 
name ‘Unio’ (unique). But in Low Latin, 
6 Margarita(um)’ and ‘ Perla’ became a generic 
mame; ‘Unio’ being restricted to the fine, 
spherical specimens—see King, The Natural 
Hist. of Precious Stones, pp. 258-267. “Unio,” 
used as a noun masc., denotes a single large 

arl (pearl in Hoch-deutsch is perala), see 

liny, ix. 35, 112, 123 ;) Senec. De Ben. vii. 9; 
Mart. viii. 81, 4; xii. 49, 13. Shakspere uses 
union for pear] in Hamlet, v. 2. 


NoTE B ON VER. 4—BABYLON (p. 469). 


Tertullian seems to have been the first 
of the Fathers who transferred the name 
Babylon to Rome:—“ Sic et Babylon apud 
Joannem nostrum Romane urbis figuram 
portat, proinde et magne et regno superbe et 
sanctorum debellatricis.” Adv. Jud. c. 9 j— 
see also Adv. Marc. iii. 13. “ Et prostituta 
illa civitas a decem regibus dignos exitus 
referat."—De Resurr. c. 25. “Illa civitas 
valida, que super montes septem et plurimas 
aquas prasidet, cum prostitute appellationem 
a domino meruisset, quali habitu appellationi 
suze comparata est? Sedet certe in purpura 
cum coccino et auro et lapide pretioso.” De 
Fem. Cult. c. 12:—cf. Scorp. c. 12. 

St. Irenzus understands by Babylon the 
Roman Empire which is to be divided among 
the Ten Kings :-— 

“ Manifestius adhuc etiam de novissimo 
tempore, et de his qui sunt in eo decem 
regibus, in quos dividetur quod nunc regnat 
Imperium, significavit Joannes Domini dis- 
cipulus in Apocalypsi, edisserens que fuerint 
decem cornua, que a Daniele visa sunt... . 
et reliqui subjicientur ei et ipse ‘ octavus’ in 
eis; et ‘vastabunt Babylonem, et comburent 
eam igni, et dabunt Regnum suum Bestia.” 
Adv. Har. v. 26, p. 323. 

St. Jerome styles Rome, though Christian, 
Babylon :—“ Cum in Babylone versarer, et 


1 Pliny writes : The worth or quality of Pearls 
lies wholly ‘‘in candore, magnitudine, orbe, 
levore, pondere, haud promptis rebus in tantum 
ut nulli duo reperiantur indiscreti, unde nomen 
unionum Romane scilicet imposuere deliciz.” 
He tells of one Clodius, who ‘‘singulos uniones 
convivis absorbendos dedit;” adding how 
“¢ #lius Stilo Jugurthino bello unionem nomen 
eo maxume grandibus margaritis pro- 


REVELATION. XVII. 





purpurate meretricis essem colonus, et jure 
Quiritum viverem,” &c.—Lib. Didymi de 
Sancto, Pref. t. ii. p. 105. 

On Isai. xxiv. 7, 8, he also writes :—“ Atte- 
retur .... spiritualis Babylon, que sedet 
in septem montibus purpurata, cujus sup- 
plicia in Apocalypsi Joannis legimus.” t. iv 
Pp. 332. 

And on Isa, xlvii. 1 (4b, p. 549)s— 
“ Licet ex eo quod juxta LXX scriptum est, 
Jilia Babylonis, non ipsam Babylonem quidam, 
sed Romanam urbem interpretantur, que in 
Apocalypsi Joannis et in Epistola Petri, Baby- 
lon specialiter appellatur.” 

And once more writing to Marcella:— 
“ Lege Apocalypsin Joannis, et quid de muliere 
purpurata, et scripta in ejus fronte blasphemia, 
septem montibus, aquis multis, et Babylonis 
cantetur exitu, contuere. ‘ Exite,’ inquit 
Dominus, ‘de illa, populus meus,” &c. (Rev. 
xviii. 4). Epist. 46, t.i. p. 206. (The obj 
of this Epistle is to persuade Marcella to 
leave Rome, and to take up her abode in 
Palestine). See on 1 Pet. v. 13. 

In the Middle Ages Rome is not seldom 
styled “the Western Babylon” (see the 
references to this fact by Mr. Chas. Mait- 
land, /. c., p. 299, &c.). As already stated the 
Papacy, while in Avignon, was regarded by 
Dante as fulfilling Rev. xvii. He is followed 
by Petrarch, who writes: “ Babylon, feris 
Rhodani ripis imposita, famosa dicam an in- 
famis meretrix, fornicata cum regibus terre ? 
Illa quidem ipsa es quam in spiritu sacer vidit 
Evangelista. Illa eadem, inquam, es, non alia, 
sedens super aquas multas, sive ad littora 
tribus cincta fluminibus,” &c.—Epist. sine 
Titulo, xvi. (xx.)—See Cary’s note on the 
Inferno, xix. 106-111. 

It was a principle with the later Re- 
formers to identify Babylon, in the c 
of the Harlot, with the Apostate Church. 
Calvin (Institt. iv. 2, 12; vil. 21, 253 9, 4) 
concluded that all the notes of Babylon, whi 
he identifies with Antichrist, were to be found 
in the Papacy. Nevertheless he distinguished 
(iv. 2, 12) Roman Catholic Christendom from 
the Papacy existing in it. He concedes as to 
the former, “ecclesias apud eos esse non 
inficiamur ;” maintaining, however, that the 
Papacy itself was an antichristian institution. 

Among the Lutherans it is a recognized 
doctrine that the Pope “is the veritable Anti- 
christ” (Art. Smalc. iv.). And Turretin 
(A.D. 1703) writes: “Constans est omnium 
Reformatorum et Protestantium fides Anti- 
christum illum magnum esse Papam Roma- 
num.”’—Comp. Theol. 16, 15, Contr. 1. 

In opposition to this Protestant interpreta- 
tion there arose in the Church of Rome a 
school of expositors (Ribera, 1591; Viegas, 
1601; Alcasar, 1614; &c.) which adopted 
the formal principle of the Reformers, viz. the 


REVELATION. XVIL. 


identification of Babylon with Rome, but who 
inferred from 2 Thess. ii. that Antichrist will 
be a man living in the last times, and who is 
symbolized by the Beast of ch. xiii, This 
school assumed that the interval between the 
Ascension of Christ and the appearance of 
the personal Antichrist is passed over in the 
Apocalypse, which only contains a prophecy 
concerning “the three and a half years” be- 
fore Christ’s Second Advent; and by this period 
they understood three and a half common 
years. Turretin (/. c., 16, 15, 1) thus cha- 
racterizes this school :—‘ Pontificii Anti- 
christum fingunt hominem singularem et 
unicum, ortum ex tribu Dan, qui se pro 
Judzorum Messia venditans, spatio trium 
annorum cum dimidio, templum Hierosoly- 
mitanum instaurabit, universum orbem subi- 
get, Henochum et Eliam redivivos trucidabit, 
totum Christianismum evertet, seipsum in 
templo restaurato proponet adorandum, ac 
tandem a Christo in monte Oliveti, ex quo 
paraturus sit ascensionem in cclum, occi- 
detur.” To this effect, with minute varia- 
tions, Stern! and Bisping interpret the Apo- 
calypse. 


NoTeE C ON VER. 9—THE SEVEN 
MOovunrTAINS. 


The applicability of the symbol of the 
Seven Heads, as denoting seven mountains, 
to the City of Rome, is obvious. Rome was 
ordinarily styled “the Seven-hilled City,”—7 
woXts 7 emtadodos,— Urbs septicollis.” She 
was celebrated as such in an annual national 
festival, the Septimontium. Thus Varro (ob. 
B.C. 28) writes: “ Dies Septimontium nomi- 
natus ab his septem montibus in queis sita 
Roma est.”—De ling. Lat. iv.; and Plutarch: 
TO Sentipovvtiov G@yovow ext 7@ Tov EBdopov 
Adghov TH wOdEL TpocKataveunOjvat, Kai THY 
“Pauny émtadogoy yevécbat.—Probl. Rom. p. 
280. See also Tertullian De Idol. 10; Ad 
Nationes, ii. 15. 

“Of the seven hills, the Quirinal and 
Viminal are styled coll/es, whilst the others, 
though without any apparent reason, are 
called montes. It cannot depend upon their 
height, since those called co/les are as lofty 
as those dignified with the more imposing 
name of montes; whence it seems probable 
that the difference originated in the ancient 
traditions respecting the Septimontium.”— 
Smith’s Dict. of G. and R. Geogr. ii. 721. 


1 Stern writes: ‘‘ Most of the expositors of 
the Apocalypse and many of the Fathers are of 
opinion that in the 17th and following chap- 
ters the downfall of eathen Rome is predicted. 
Already the Jews were wont to apply the name 
Babylon to Rome, which they hated so bitterly : 
—see Schottgen, Hor. Hebr. pp. 1050, 1125. 
Babylon in the Last Days Stern ‘identifies 
with ‘‘ das abgéttisch gewordene Rom” (s. 382). 


To give a few quotations out of many .—- 
Virgil :-— 
‘* Tila inclyta Roma, ... 
‘* Septemque una sibi muro circumdabit arces. 
Zn. vi. 783. 
Cicero :— 
‘* Hoc tu indaga, ut soles ; ast hoc magis: é 
&orews érrardpov.”—Ad Attic., vi. 5. 
Horace :— 
‘* Di quibus septem placuere colles.” 
Carm. Sac. 7. 
Tibullus :-— 
‘* Carpite nunc tauri de septem montibus her- 
bas.”—ii. 5, 55- 
Ovid :— 
‘* Sed que de septem totum circumspicit orbem 
Montibus imperii Roma deiimque locus.” 
Trist. i. 4, 69. 
Martial, celebrating the view from the Jani- 
culum, writes :— 
“* Hinc septem dominos videre montes 
Et totum licet estimare Romam.”—iv. 64, 11. 


Claudian :— 
** Aurea septem-geminas 
Roma coronet arces.”’—xii. 19 (ed. Gesner). 

Prudentius :— 
** Diviim favore cum puer Mavortius 

Fundaret arcem septicollem Romulus.” 

Peristeph. X. 412. 

See, in /oc., Wetstein, Wordsworth (Sequel 
to Letters to Gondon, xi.), Alford. 


NoTE D ON VER. 1o—THE SEVEN HEADS 
AND TEN HORNs. 


The “Seven Heads” (or “ Kings”) are 
variously understood (see on ch. xiii. 1) :— 


I. As Seven Kingdoms :—a. (1) Egypt, (2 
Assyria, (3) Babylonia, (4) Medo-Persia, o 
Grecia, (6) Rome, (7) The Roman Eme- 
pire reconstituted after the Barbaric inva- 
sions:—so Auberlen, Keil (Oz Daniel, Engl. 
tr. p. 279), Hengst., Alford. Stern partially 
accepts this classification: he omits Egypt, 
and divides (4) into Media as the téird, and 
Persia as the fourth Kingdom,—the seventh 
“ Head” being a new heathen power which 
in the Last Days is to rule the nations from 
Rome. 

b. (1) Assyria, (2) Babylonia, (3) Persia, (4) 
Macedonia, (5) Syria under Antiochus Epi- 
phanes, (6) Rome, (7) The “ Ten Horns” of 
ver. 12 combined into a seventh Apocalyptic 
World-kingdom :—so Hofmann, and Ebrard. 

c. (1) Babylonia, (2) Medo-Persia, (3) 
Macedonia, (4) Syria, (5) Egypt, (6) Heathen 
Imperial Rome, (7) “The Imperial power of 
Germany :”—so Words. The same principle 
of interpretation was adopted by Andreas (for 


BBB2 


755 


75€ 


whom the seventh World-kingdom began 
with Constantine, and the eighth is the King- 
dom of Antichrist), Beda, N. de Lyra. 

d. For Godet’s opinion, see on ch. xiii. 1. 


II. As the Seven forms of Roman govern- 
ment, Republican and Imperial :—i. (1) Kings, 
(2) Consuls, (3) Decemviri, (4) Military 
Tribunes, (5) Dictators, (6) Emperors, (7) 
The rule of Odoacer. So Calovius, whom 
Vitringa (p. 771) calls “ Anonymus ;” adding 
that Launoy—who also understood by the 
“Kings” the forms of government at Rome 
—-substituted for Odoacer, the series of Popes 
who, before they gained temporal power, had 
constituted the seventh King, and after they 
gained it, became the eighth King of ver. 11. 
Mede understands the same forms of govern- 
ment, but regards the ‘‘ False Prophet” (ch. xiii. 
11) or Roman Bishop as the seventh: “the last 
Head of the Beast is indeed but the seventh, 
yet in some respects is an eighth [see ver. 11],” 
for the Sixth Head, or rule of the Czsars—that 
“which was” in St. John’s day— declined at 
length to a Demi-Czsar confined to the West, 
which being in some sort diverse from the 
former, takes the seventh place, and makes the 
“ False Prophet” the eighth. But being, as in 
name, so in substance, the same Cesar with 
the former, ‘the False Prophet’ (in whose 
time the Whore rides the Beast) is still in 
order the seventh. The ‘ False Prophet,’ be- 
ginning his dominion as soon almost as the 
Demi-Czsar, is therefore in order of time the 
seventh as well as he;’—though ‘the Demi- 
Czsar is soon gone, the ‘ False Prophet’ still 
survives, succeeding him as it were an eighth 
(Opp. pp. 524,922). iil. To the preceding may 
be added: “Septem capita esse septem illos 
montes [scil. Rome], et etiam septem Reges, 
quo numero intelliguntur omnes Romani Im- 

ratores.”— Bellarmine (de Roz. Pont. iii. 5). 
lii. Vitringa notes (see above on the inter- 
pretation of Calovius): “Longe magis mihi 
arridet systema Anonymi” (p. 773); but he 
proceeds to suggest a new imterpretation, 
viz. that the “Seven Kings” of the mystical 
Babylon, or the seven more eminent Popes, 
are intended by the “Seven Heads” of the 
Beast,—that is to say, before the Reformation, 
Gregory VII., Alexander III., Innocent III., 
Boniface VIII., John XXII.;—and after the 
Reformation, Paul III., and Paul V. (see also 
his note on ch. xiii. 1, p. 592). iv. Akin to this 
is the following interpretation,—the “ Seven 
Kings” denote the Patriarchs of Alexandria, 
Jerusalem, Antioch, Constantinople, Rome, 
Gaul, Spain; so Cocceius. 





III. Allegorical explanations :—a. The Seven 
capital vices—the pride of the lion, the avarice 
of the tiger, the luxury of the bear, the gluttony 
of the wolf, the envy of the serpent, the anger 
of the viper, the sloth of the ass: so Tirinus 


REVELATION. XVII. 





on ch. xii. 3 (Comm. in S. Script., 1632, vol. 
ili. p. 581); but he also explains the Drag 

Heads as further denoting “septem sibi 
famulantes reges et regna:” see his notes on 
ch. xiii. 1; xvii. 9;—b. On the same principle 
Alcasar (/. c., p. 678) understands the Seven 
Christian persecutions. 


IV. The literal explanations: The “ Seven 
Heads” are Seven personal Rulers—literally 
Seven “ Kings, or Emperors of Rome.” 

Mr. Maurice, as a “ Preterist,” makes Nero 
the ffth Emperor ; Galba is the sixth (“ the one 
is”); Otho, the seventh (“és not yet come”): 
“ When Nero died, it seemed as if the wild 
Beast into which imperial government had 
transformed itself, was extinct; Vitellius 
[‘ the eighth’| would show that it lived and 
breathed” (/. c., p. 326). 

This principle is accepted with one con- 
sent by the rationalistic school. The idea, 
however, is by no means original :—see the 
interpretation of St. Hippolytus, as given in 
Note C on ch. xii. 3; and also the method 
of Meera (see below Note Ey, which 
was applied in a manner equally arbi 
Hammond and Grok This in aaa = 
tion received a more systematic application 
in 1781 from Corrodi, a Swiss theologian in 
his “ Histoire du Chiliasme;” and through 
Eichhorn (in 1791), and Bleek (in 1820) it 
has become the leading feature of rational- 
istic exegesis. Among modern rationalists, 
Renan (as formerly Wetstein) gives the in- 
terpretation in a form somewhat modified. 
He makes the series of the Roman Czsars 
to begin with Julius (see Note C on ch. xiii. 
3); but the order of the Emperors is taken 
by the vast majority to be:—(1) Au 
(2) Tiberius, (3) Caligula, (4) Claudius, (5) 
Nero, (6) Galba, (7) Otho, (8) Vitellius, (9) 
Vespasian, (10) Titus. The forms of the 
literal interpretation may, accordingly, be 
classified ; and thus the “ Seven Heads” are 
as follows :— . 

(a.) The five before Domitian,—(1) Galba, 
(2) Otho, (3) Vitellius, (4) Vespasian, (5) 
Titus; then (6) Domitian, (7) Nerva;— 
so Victorinus. (b.) The Emperors counted 
from the Czsar who first opposed Chris- 
tianity,—(1) Claudius, (2) Nero, (3) Galba, 
(4) Otho, (5) Vitellius, (6) Vespasian, (7) 
Titus, (8) Domitian;—so Hammond and 
Grotius :—“ He begins from Claudius,” writes 
Grotius, “because Tiberius and Caius had 
no knowledge of the Christians: and, as 
Ezekiel always computes times from hs 
own deportation, so John also counts the 
Emperors from his” (i2 /oc.). (c.) Assum- 
ing that Nero must be the ff#4 Head,—the 
Head “smitten unto death” (ch. xiii. 3),—and 
that the Apocal was written before the 
destruction of Jerusalem, é.¢., between the 
end of Dec. 69 and the spring of the year 70, 


REVELATION. XVII. 


under Vespasian (who is, therefore, the 
sixth “Head”)—Liicke, Bleek, and Disterd. 
decide on counting thus, (1) Augustus, (2) 
Tiberius, (3) Caligula, (4) Claudius, (5) 
Nero, (6) Vespasian, (7) Titus, (8) Domitian. 
Nero they argue died June 9, A.D. 68. Galba 
was now recognized as Emperor by the 
Senate, and was assassinated January 15, 
A.D. 69, on which day Otho was proclaimed. 
Otho put an end to his own life on April 
17, and was succeeded by Vitellius, who was 
slain Dec. 21. The “ Principate” of Vespa- 
sian, however, dated from July i, A.D. 69, 
on which day “the Legions swore to him at 
Alexandria” (see Merivale, /.c. vol. vi. p. 477). 
The three short reigns of Galba, Otho, and 
Vitellius, Liicke regards as a mere inter- 
regnum, and as not deserving a place in the 
list of Emperors. This interregnum, ac- 
cordingly, following the suicide of Nero, “ the 
fifth King,” the last of the line of the Czsars, 
constituted the “ death-stroke” of ch. xiii. 3. 
The “ healing ” of the wound was effected by 
Vespasian, “the sixtH King,” who restored the 
full power of the Roman Empire by founding 
the new dynasty of the Flavii. The sole proof 
of this theory offered by Disterd. consists 
in the words with which Suetonius begins his 
life of Vespasian: “Rebellione trium principum 
et cade incertum diu et quasi vagum imperium 
suscepit firmavitque tandem gens Flavia.” 
This passage, however, by the mere applica- 
tion of the title “ Principes” to the three— 
Galba, Otho, and Vitellius—distinctly re- 
cognizes the right of each to the name of 
Emperor (see Introd. § 4, b). Thus Ovid 
contrasts Romulus with Augustus: 


‘« Vis tibi grata fuit ; florent sub Czesare leges : 
Tu Domini nomen, Principis ille tenet.” 
Fast. ii. 142. 


The title of “ Imperator” conveyed the 
idea of the ruler’s military capacity ; the title 
of “ Princeps” conveyed the idea of the 
highest civil pre-eminence (see Merivale, /.c., 
iii. p. 452). And consequently as Julius is 
the first (see Note C on ch. xiii. 3), and 
Nero the sixth Emperor, so Galba (as Renan 
allows) must be regarded as the seventh. 
This theory, indeed, of Liicke and Disterd. 
has been devised in order to preserve some 
slight authority for the Apocalypse as a pro- 
phetical Book (see on ver. 11); but it is 
utterly extinguished by the light of history. 
(d.) On the rationalistic principle pure 
and simple, the “ Seven Kings” are the Seven 
Czsars beginning with Augustus,—Nero 
being thus the 7t/: Galba is the sixth, 
and his advanced age indicates that a new 
reign is close at hand. ‘ Every one in the year 
68 must have known’ that Galba’s successor, 
the seventh “ King,” would be either Otho or 
Vitellius; and as St. John ‘believed’ (see ch. 


757 


xili. 5) that the world was to come to an 
end in three years and a half, the reign of 
this seventh must be of short duration. Then 
comes the eighth, or Nero returning from the 
Abyss as Antichrist:—so Volckmar, in /oc.; 
so Ewald; and also, De Wette, Credner, 
Guericke, Réville, Scholten, Krenkel, &c. 
Reuss lays down the principle of this school: 
“The Beast is the seat of the ‘ Woman’; 
consequently something local—an Empire 
which has ‘Seven Kings’ at its head (sept 
tétes):”—the reigning Head, the sixth, is 
Galba. 

Renan, who understands history, argues dif- 
ferently ;—although he too accepts the “ Nero- 
fable” (“cette idée, mére de l’Apocalypse,” 
p- 351), namely, that the dead Nero was 
to return as Antichrist ;—and he concludes: 
The “ Seven Heads” arethe Seven Emperors 
from Julius Cesar to Galba. Galba, the 
seventh, reigns for the moment, but he is old 
and feeble. The sixth, Nero, who is at the 
same time the Beast and one of the “Seven 
Kings,” is not dead according to popular 
belief; he will reign again (the final cata- 
strophe being only three and a half years 
distant); he will thus be the eighth King; 
and will then perish (p. 433):—On the 
“ Nero-fable,” see Note E. 

(e.) Stuart regards it as indifferent whether 
we begin with Julius or Augustus ; #.e., whe- 
ther Nero or Galba is the sixth: St. John 
only seeks to cover the ground till the close of 
the persecution then raging ; and Otho’s short 
reign would make no difference (/. ¢., p. 325). 

(f.) That no eccentricity of interpretation 
should be wanting, Rinck (s. 62) combines 
the principle of Hammond and Grotius (see 
above b.) and the arbitrary hypothesis of 
Liicke (see above c.), with the Nero-fable; 
—He begins with the Emperor whom he 
assumes to have been the first persecutor, (1) 
Caligula; then come (2) Claudius, (3) Nero, 
(4) Vespasian, (5) Titus, (6) Domitian, (7) 
Nerva—and Nero revived is to be regarded 
as a prophetical and indefinite uni (“ Eins”) 
for all the Czsars who follow until the sub- 
version of the Roman Empire. 

V. The hypothesis of Ziillig is still more 
eccentric: The Beast is Edom—that is to 
say, false Judaism. In 1 Chron. i. 43-50, we 
find the names of eight kings of Edom. The 
fourth is named Hadad; and, consequently, 
the eighth, who is also named Hadad, “is 
of the [previous] Seven” (see ver. 11);— 
or, perhaps, in the catalogue of Gen. xxxvi 
the name should be always written Hadar (as 
i ver. 39, where the Hebrew 7 is put for 
I) sor, again, it might be Harad, the root 
of the name Herod. Now the Herods sprang 
from Edom; and we have accordingly, in 
these eight kings, types of the new Edomite 
kings over Israel,—viz. (1) Herod the Great, 


758 


2) Archelaus, (3) Philip, (4) Herod Antipas, 
5) Agrippa I., (6) Herod of Chalcis, (7) 
Agrippa II. (Acts xxv. 13), whom Josephus 
B. J., iii. 17) and Justus of Tiberias (ap. 
hot. Cod. xxxiii.) name as the seventh and 
last of these kings, who reigned until a.D. 
too (see Winer R. WW. B., art. Herodes). 
This conclusion is shared by Herder and 
Wetstein; who regard the entire Beast as 
the Judaism which persecuted Christianity. 
On the reference to “ Edom” see Renan, 
quoted on ch. xiv. 8. 


VI. The “Kings” understood by the 
Greek interpreters: see I. Williams quoted 
on ver. 9. 


VII. The interpretation of the “Futu- 


i. (a) See the theory of Roman Catholic 
Expositors as stated in the note on ver. 18. 

(b) According to Todd (p. 281) and De 
Burgh (“I do believe it is Rome, but 
Rome as it shall be, and not Rome as it 
is,” p. 319) this prophecy relates to Rome 
in that future time to which this Vision 
refers. 

ii. Bengel is partly a “Futurist”:—The 
prophecy, he writes, regards “Seven Moun- 
tains” according to the times of the Beast, in 
which the Palatine is deserted, and the Vatican 
flourishes. The ‘Seven Heads” have not a 
double meaning; but one only compounded 
of a Mountain anda King :—There is (1) the 
Mons Cezlius and on it the Lateran with 
Gregory VII. and his successors ;—(2) Mons 
Vaticanus with the temple of St. Peter, from 
Boniface VIII.;—(3) Mons Quirinalis, with 
the temple of St. Mark, and the Quirinal 
Palace, from Paul II.;—(4) Mons Esquilinus, 
with the temple of St. Maria the Greater, from 
Paul V. From these four spots, Papal Bulls 
given from the City, have been dated: no 
fifth, sixth, or seventh “* Mountain” has as yet 
been so respected by the Popes. Bengel 
considers that this fact establishes the truth 
of his interpretation. 


VIII. In the Chronicle of Roger de Hove- 
den (ed. of the ‘“‘ Master of the Rolls,” vol. iii. 
p. 75) under the year 1190, we are told of an 
interview at Messina between Richard I. and 
the Abbot Joachim. The Chronicler thus 
reports Joachim’s explanation of this verse : 
“© There are Seven Kings’; namely Herodes, 
Nero, Constantius, Maumet, Melsemutus, 
Saladinus, Antichristus; of these ‘ five’ ave 
fallen; ... ‘and one is, namely Saladinus, 
who at this time oppresses the Church 
of God, and keeps possession of it with 
the Sepulchre of our Lord, and the Holy 
Tity Jerusalem; . .. . ‘one of them is not 
yet come, namely Antichristus. Concerning 
this Antichristus, the same Joachim says 
that he is already born in the city of 


REVELATION. XVII. 





—— and will be elevated to the Apostolic 
ee.” 3 
On this Professor Stubbs notes that the ex- 
planation of the present verse given in Joachim’s 
Commentary (Venice, 1527) “is not in close 
agreement with the account given in Benedict 
and Hoveden, but is not sufficiently incon- 
sistent with it to prove the latter to be a 
fabrication. The Bollandists contend that 
the whole account is a forgery, but this is 
extremely improbable” (4., p. 76). Professor 
Stubbs adds that Joachim, in his Commentary, 
had made the fourth Head to be Ch 
king of Persia, “ sub quo perditus Maometus 
invaluit”; the #ft+ the Emperor Henry L.; 
while the seventh begins with Frederick I1.:— 
“but this was probably written after the 
quarrel of Frederick II. with the Papacy.” 
Melsemutus was “the second monarch ot 
the Almohad dynasty.” 


Among the interpretations of the “Ten 
Horns” we meet the following :— 

I. (i.) According to Vitringa: Ten King- 
doms arise out of the fragments of the Roman 
Empire, and are recognized in the world, in 
organized form, about the time of the appear- 
ance of Antichrist, in Cent. xi. The king- 
doms are (1) Gaul, (2) Spain, (3) Germany, 
(4) England, (5) Scotland, (6) Denmark, (7) 
Sweden, (8) Hungary, (9) Bohemia, (10) 
Poland; all ready to recognize the supre- 
macy of the See of Rome ;—(ii.) Hengst. and 
Words.: They are Kings or Kingdoms, as 
Daniel’s Vision explains (ch. vii. 24), growing 
out of the Roman Empire at its dismember- 
ment ;—(iii.) Alford: Ten European powers 
arising out of Daniel’s Fourth Kingdom; 
“not the Roman Empire merely, but the 
aggregate of the Empires of this world as 
opposed to Christ;” “in the precise number 
and form here indicated, they have not yet 
arisen (see on ch. xiii. 2) ;’—(iv.) I. Williams 
does not consider that these Ten Horns are the 
same as the ten in Daniel, or the Kings that 
destroyed the Roman Empire: Ten signifies 
(see St. August., De Civ. Dei, xx. 7) univer- 
sality of dominion; and as the seven heads in 
Daniel, all meeting here in one, intimate that 
the kingdoms of the world will form this one 
body, so its ‘Ten Horns’ represent all the 
great and powerful of the world which it 
sways. Antichrist leagued with the world 
will war with the Lamb (Ps. ii. 2, 3, p. 346); 
—(v.) Auberlen: “Individual small kin 
doms” which give their power to the anti- 
christian Kingdom: “ That three of them are 


? On the application of these words by Bish 
Hurd (Sermons on the Study of Prophecy, p. 23§ 
and by Bishop Newton (4. ¢., on ch. xi. I-14), 
see Dr. S. R. Maitland’s Letter to Rev. W. Dighy, 


p- 64, &c. 


REVELATION. XVII. 


humiliated in doing so, is mentioned in Dan. 
Vii. 8, and is not repeated but presupposed 
by John” (p. 303). “The non-existence of 
the Beast,” he adds, “embraces the whcle 


Germanic Christian period:” the healing of 


the wound has already begun; the return 
of the Beast is prepared in the principles 
of the Revolution of 1789—“In Napoleon, 
despotism sanctioning revolution, and proving 
that the Beast even in this shape can carry 
the Harlot ;—In Socialism ;—-In Communism.” 
At what period the seventh Kingdom shall 
pass over into the etghth, God alone knows, 
“Can ye not discern the signs of the 
times?” (Matt. xvi. 3) ;—(vi.) Ebrard: The 
Ten Kingdoms are here spoken of, not so 
far as they lie concealed as its component 
parts in the sixth, or Roman World-empire, 
but so far as, on the cessation of Roman 
power, they come forward with independent 
authority and constitute the seventh World- 
empire: 

II. Ziillig (see abore) refers to Gen. XxXxvi. 
40; 1 Chron. 51, where e/even princes 
(Heb. alluphim ; “AN: “dukes ”) of Edom are 
enumerated (ii. s. 327). The Rabbins, how- 
ever, reduce these e/even, to ten (see Eisenm. 
i. 734, 781): and R. Bechai, reads in the 
case of the last two names, either ‘duke 
Magdiel of the city Iram;” or “duke Iram of 
the city Magdiel.” The word a//uphim, more- 
over, signifying friends, confidants, allies, the 
modern antitypes of the provincial rulers of 
Edom—rulers of Jen smaller kingdoms of 
Edom—now make common cause with the 
Beast. 

III. “ Preterists ”:— Mr. Maurice considers 
that these “‘ Horns” are significant of that 
military force upon which the Empire rested. 
The “Ten Kings” are the commanders of the 
Legions in the different provinces: ‘‘ There 
could be no more faithful account of an 
organized anarchy” (p. 327). 

The rationalistic school are unanimous in 
finding in the historical circumstances of St. 
John’s age, the interpretation of this symbol. 
(a) The Ten Horns are the Proconsuls and 
Imperial Legates of the ten chief provinces, 
or nationalities of the Empire :—e.g. Réville 
(p. 121) reckons up (1) Spain, (2) Gaul, (3) 
Germany, (4) Italy, (5) Greece, (6) Asia, 
(7) Syria, (8) Palestine, (9) Egypt, (10) 
Africa; and Renan enumerates, (1) Italy, (2) 
Achaia, (3) Asia, (4) Syria, (5) Egypt, (6) 
Africa, (7) Spain, (8) Gaul, (9) Britain, (10) 
Germany ,—adding, * “Apoc. xvil. 12 rend ceci 
clair” (p. 413). And so Ewald, Volkmar, H. 
Gebhardt, who refer the “ one hour” (ver. "lo) 
to the short continuance of Nero as Anti- 
christ. (b) Others, e.g. Eichhorn, De Wette, 
Bleek and Krenkel, understand the Parthian 
Kings who were to cross the Euphrates (ch. 
®vi. 12) as allies of Nero. (c) Wetstein 


applies the symbol to the Ten leaders of he 
Flavian parties. 

IV. Stern understands that Antichrist, in 
the last times will acquire the Empire of the 
world, and conquer Babylon by the help of 
the “ Ten Horns,” —i. e., supported by Ten (a 
number used figuratively for tolerably many) 
smaller kingdoms, which have not yet attained 
independent strength, but which, out of 
jealousy towards all-powerful Babylon, ally 
themselves with Antichrist, and deposit in 
his hands all the warlike means which they 
possess. And thus Babylon—Rome become 
godless—will be destroyed (s. 382). 

V. Disterd. allows that the “Ten Horns 
(wv. 3, 7) serve to identify the Beast here 
with the Beast already described ; but he gives 
up “every concrete, historical reference of the 
‘Ten Horns.” What is said here of the 
“Ten Kings” is simply borrowed from Dan. 
vii. 24, in order to finish off “the Apocalyptic 
picture.” If we look for “the relative fulfil- 
ment” of the prophecy we find it in this, that 
henceforward Emperors are to attain to 
power only by means of intestine strife, and 
through conflicts which must tend to the 
destruction of the City (s. 518). 


Nore E ON VER. 11—THE NERO-F ABLE. 


The origin and growth of the “Nero- 
fable” render it easy to estimate the proba- 
bility of its having had any influence on the 
composition of the Apocalypse. Let ime 
partial history tell the source of this fiction. 

Dean Merivale (Hist. of the Romans under 
the Empire, vol. vi. p. 365, ed. 1858) writes: 
“Nero perished on the 9th of June (A.D. 
68) at the age of thirty years and six months, 
in the fourteenth year of his principate.... 
Some unknown hands were found to strew 
flowers on his sepulchre, and the rival King 
of Parthia adjured the Senate to do honour 
to his memory (Suet. Ner. 50, 57). Un- 
doubtedly the Romans regarded with peculiar 
feeling the death of the last of the Czxsars” 
[Sueton. Ga/ba i.; “ Progenies Czesarum in — 
Nerone defecit”’]. . . . “Yet these circume 
stances would not have sufficed to impart a 
deep mystery to the event, without the pre- 
disposition of the people to imagine that the 
dynasty which had ruled them for four gene= 
rations could not suddenly pass away finally 
and irrevocably. The idea that Nero still 
survived, and the expectation of his return to 
power, continued long to linger among them. 
More than one pretender arose to claim his 
empire, and twenty years later a false Nero 
was protected by the Parthians, among whom 
he had taken refuge, and only surrendered tothe 
repeated and vehement demands of the Roman 
Government ” [Suet. Nero, 57 ; Tac. Hist. ii. 8 
—“Achaia et Asia falso exterrite, velut Nero 


759 


760 


adventaret”]. “This popular anticipation 
was the foundation, perhaps, of the common 
persuasion of the Christians, when the death 
of the prince was no longer questioned, that 
he should revisit the earth in the character of 
Antichrist ; and both Romans and Christians 
seem to have combined in believing that the 
East, and possibly that Jerusalem itself 
would be the scene of his reappearance.” 
[Compare Suetonius Nero, 40: “Predictum 
a mathematicis Neroni olim erat, fore ut 
quandoque destitueretur. . . Sposponderant 
tamen quidam destituto Orientis domina- 
tionem, nonnulli nominatum regnum Hiero- 
solymorum, plures omnis pristine fortune 
restitutionem”]. “There will be different 
opinions whether this idea sprang originally 
from the Christians or the Romans; probably 
it was the result of a common feeling reaching 
from one to the other” (p. 368). And again 
eee 89): “During the progress of these 
istant wars Domitian had been disturbed, 
though only for a moment, by the appearance 
of a pretended Nero, who threw himself on 
the support of the King of Parthia, if he was 
not in fact set up by the Parthians to annoy 
the chief of the rival Empire. This event oc- 
curred perhaps in 89. . . The Romans were 
at last disabused of the imposture regarding 
their late tyrant, which had so long floated 
before their eyes ; but the fable survived among 
the Jews and Christians, for many generations 
after the fall of the Flavian dynasty ” [7.c., after 
the death of M. Aurelius, A.D. 180]—/.c., vol. 
Vii. p. ITI. 
The pretender here mentioned, A.D. 89, 
was the third and last of the “false Neros.” 
As to the growth of this fiction, and its 
application to the interpretation of the Apoca- 
ree it is to be observed,— a 
Firstly—That the obscure reference in 
Rev. xili. 3, to one of the Heads of the Beast 
as “though it had been smitten unto death,” 
and to the subsequent healing of its wound, 
has been found in some early and fantastic 
writers applied to Nero. E.g.:— 


bray yy emaverOn 
dx mepdrwy yalns 56 puyas untpoxrdévos Addr. 
Orac. Sibyll. viii. 70, 71. 


This Sibylline book is ascribed by critics 
to Cent. ii. or iii. The fourth book, however, 
ascribed to the year 79, is apparently the 
earliest Christian notice of the “ Nero-fable,” 
—see Introd. § 4, b. No. (30); and Note E 
on ch. ii. 20. Sulpicius Severus (circ. A.D. 
401), (Chron. ii. 28, ap. Corp. Script. Eccl, 
Lat. ed. Halm., vol. i. p. 82), describes Nero 
as one “qui persecutionem primus inciperet: 
nescio an et postremus explerit, siquidem 
opinione multorum receptum sit, ipsum ante 
Antichristum venturum.” And again: “In- 
terim Nero humanis rebus eximitur, incer- 


REVELATION. XVII. 


tum an ipse sibi mortem consciverit: certe 
corpus illius non repertum. Unde creditur, 
etiam si se gladio ipse transfixerit, curato 
vulnere ejus servatus, secundum illud quod 
de eo scriptum est: ‘et plaga mortis ejus 
curata est, sub seculi fine mittendus, ut 
mysterium iniquitatis exerceat”"—id., c. 29, 
p. 84.! 

Secondly,—T hat ch. xvii. 8 is relied upon in 
order to prove that Nero is intended by the 
reference in ch. xiii. 3, and that he is to 
return from the Abyss as the embodied Anti- 
christ. 

Now, not to argue again that one can hardly 
understand by the whole Beast in ch. xvii. 8 
Nero only, who is typified in ch. xiii. 3 as one 
of the Beast’s Heads, it is to be noted—(1) 
That this interpretation ascribes to St. John 
a superstitious belief in a fable which even 
the heathen rhetorician Dion Chrysostom, 
who lived under Domitian, scoffed at* (Orat. 
xxxi., ed. Reiske, t. i. p. 504) ;—(2) That it is 
doubtful in the highest degree whether the 
Nero-fable existed even at the end of Cent. ii. 
in the form in which Rationalists wish to find 


! The source of this interpretation was plainly 
St. Martin of Tours, whose life was written by 
Sulpicius. This life includes an account of St. 
Martin’s intercourse with angelic beings (*‘ Con- 
stat autem etiam angelos ab eo plerumque 
visos "— Vita, 21, #., p. 130), and of the reve- 
lations imparted to him by the Angels. Of 
these visions a fuller account is given by his dis- 
ciple Gallus (Déa/. i. 1, 2. p. 152), who informed 
Sulpicius of the things ‘‘ que Martino angelus 
nunciavit”: e.g. of the end of the world,— 
‘*Neronem et Antichristum pmus esse ven- 
turos: Neronem in occidentali plaga subactis 
decem regibus imperaturum, persecutionem ab 
eo eatenus exercendam, ut idola gentium coli 
cogat.” Antichrist is to rule in the East from 
Jerusalem ; he is to destroy Nero, and is himself 
to be destroyed by the coming of Christ: ‘‘ Non 
esse autem dubium quin Antichristus malo 
spiritu conceptus jam natus esset et jam in 
annis puerilibus constitutus, tate legitima 
sumpturus imperium.”—Djia/. ii. 14, 2. p. 197. 

2? For his liberality, writes Dion Chrysostom, 
Nero was pre-eminent (rovrm 5) udAiora epi- 
jv 6 Néowyv) ; and also for his despotic character. 
Consequently men revolted from him, and com- 
pelled him to destroy himself,—jvdyxacav br@ 
mote tpdrm dmodccOa avtdy. ovdéerw nat 
viv toutd ye djAov éotw. éwel Ta YE wy 
évexey ovdty éxdaAvey abtoy BaciAcvew Toy Gxayta 
xpédvoy, Sv ye kal viv ers wdvtes emBupovor Cpr. 
of d€ wAcioro: Kal ofovrat, kal [or xalro:] tpdmoy 
Twa ovx anak abtod TeOynkdtos, GAARA woAAdKLS 
peta tav opddpa oindévrwy avrdy Cpv (tbid.). 
These words Reimarus (af. Dion. Cass., p. 1056) 
renders thus: ‘“‘ Et adhuc omnes cupiunt eum 
vivere, plurimi quoque putant: quanquam nor 
semel, sed multoties quodammodo mortuus sit, 
una cum iis qui tantopere sibi persuaserant eum 


vivere.” 





REVELATION XVII. 


ttinSt. John. On the contrary, there is clear 
proof that the original “ Nero-fable” assumed 
that form in which, by an anachronism, 
Rationalists find it in the Apocalypse, from 
combining with it a misinterpretation of 
2 Thess. ii.; Rev. xiii. 3; xvii. 8. It is not 
said by Suetonius, or Tacitus, or Dion Chry- 
sostom, that the popular delusion amounted 
to this,—that Nero, really dead, was to re- 
turn to life from the nether world; but 
merely that it was not known in what manner 
he had perished (“vario super exitu ejus 
rumore, eoque pluribus vivere eum fingenti- 
bus credentibusque.’—Tac., Hist. ii. 8), 
and that the report had arisen that he was 
not dead, but had fled to Parthia, whence 
he was to return to punish his enemies 
(“quasi viventis et brevi magno inimicorum 
malo reversuri.”—Sueton. Nero., 57). Thus 
in the passages already referred to from the 
Sibylline Oracles he is represented as a fugi- 
tive (guyds, pevyov): and so Lactantius 
when tracing the origin of the fable to the 
Sibyllines represents the matter: “ Dejectus 
itaque fastigio imperii ac devolutus a summo 
tyrannus impotens nusquam repente com- 
paruit, ut ne sepulture quidem locus in terra 
tam male bestie adpareret. Unde illum 
quidam deliri credunt esse translatum atc 
vivum reservatum, Sibylla dicente, ‘ Matrici- 
dam progressum a finibus esse venturum, ” &c. 
(De Morte Persec. c. 2). Lactantius knows 
nothing of the re-animation and return of the 
dead Nero; and the uncertainty as to the 
place of Nero’s burial is easily explained by 
the words of Eutropius,—“ exsequias Ne- 
ronis, que humiliter sepulte fuerant” (Hist. 
Rom. vii. 18). And thus in the time of 
Lactantius (A.D. 325) the “ Nero-fable,” 
which he describes as a delusion, had not yet 
taken the shape in which it is now sought 
to find it in the Apocalypse. See Diisterd. 
in Joc.; Alexandre, Excursus ad Sibyll. V1., 
pars ii.,c. 16. 

Victorinus (if indeed the words ascribed 
to him are genuine—see Cave, Hist. Lit., i. p. 
147; and Note G on xiii. 18) appears to apply 
the Nero-fable to the Apocalypse. It seems 
probable however that the passage is an in- 
terpolation due to one of those writers who 
are spoken of with little respect by Ambro- 
sius Autpertus in the eighth century :—see 
Introd. § 4, b. 

The words of Victorinus are as follows :— 
“One is,” ic., (1) Cesar Domitianus; “ fve 
have fallen,” i.2., (2) Domitian’s brother Titus, 
(3) his father Vespasian, (4) Otho, (5) Vitel- 
lus, (6) Galba. “ Another is not yet 
come,” i.c., (7) Nerva, who continued but a 
short while, scarcely two years. “The 
Beast is ‘ of the Seven,’”—i. e., Nero reigned 
before those Emperors; “and is the eighth 
{ectava),” for, when the Beast shall come 


761 


again, count thou the eighth place, *“quoniam 
in illo [viz. Antichristo] est consummatio” 
(4. c., p. 61). The Head smitten to death, 
and then 4ealed (ch. xiii. 3), denotes Nero, for 
he killed himself with his own sword; him, 
“suscitatum Deus mittet regem dignum 
dignis, et Christum qualem meruerunt Judai.” 
As he will bear another name the Jews will 
receive him as Christ. He will rise again 
from Hell, as Ezekiel (xxxi. 4) says, “ Aqua 
nutriet illum, et infernus auxit illum.” 

St. Augustine is really the first writer who 
mentions the “ Nero-fable ” in connexion with 
the interpretation of Scripture ; but it is with 
reference to 2 Thess. ii., and not to Rev. xvii. 
“No one doubts,’ observes St. Augustine, 
“that St. Paul has spoken in 2 Thess. ii. of 
Antichrist and the day of judgment.” He 
confesses that he does not understand verses 
6-8 :—“ Some think that this is said of the 
Roman Empire, and therefore that Paul the 
Apostle expressed himself obscurely lest he 
might incur the charge of wishing ill to the 
Roman Empire,” “ut hoc quod dixit, ‘ Jam 
enim mysterium iniquitatis operatur,’ Ne- 
ronem voluerit intelligi, cujus jam facta 
velut Antichristi videbantur. Unde nonaulli 
ipsum resurrecturum, et futurum <Antichristum 
suspicantur. Alii vero, nec eum occisum 
putant, sed subtractum potius, ut putaretur 
occisus: et vivum occultari in vigore ipsius 
ztatis, in qua fuit cum crederetur extinctus, 
donec suo tempore reveletur, et restituatur in 
regnum. Sed multum mihi mira est hec 
opinantium tanta presumptio.”—De Civ. Dei, 
xx. 19. St. Augustine makes no reference 
whatever to the Apoc. in this connexion.’ 

As to the fact dwelt upon by Litcke, Bleek, 
and others, that the “ Nero-fable” was be- 
lieved in by the Christians of the first century 
independently of the Apocalypse—in proof 
of which the words quoted above from the 
Sibylline books are adduced—we may ob- 
serve that not a word is said by any 
ancient writer of the miraculous recovery 
of Nero (a notion founded by modern 
critics on Rev. xili. 3), or of his rising 
again from the Abyss (founded on Rev. 
xvii. 8);—all that is said applies not to 
Nero himself but to the false Nero, who, 
shortly after the eruption of Vesuvius, raised 
the standard of revolt in the East, under the 
reign of Titus; and who perished miserably. 
The references of the Sibyllist are simply in 
accordance with the affected mystery in which 
his pretended oracles are involved:—nothing 
is said of what the false Nero is to accomplish, 


1 St. Jerome (on Dan. xi. 28) mentions that 
many regarded Nero as the Antichrist spoken of 
by Daniel,—‘‘ Domitium Neronem Antichris- 
tum fore” :—but there is no reference t’: the 
Apocalypse. 


762 


or even of the capture by him of Rome. 
The contrary! follows from the Sibylline 
verse that comes next after those relied upon 
in proof of the fable ;—The false Nero 


“Hiei, «al ‘Péuns 0 puyas, uéya &yxos Gelpwv, 
Eiophtnv diaBas wodAais dua uvoiddecow,— 


And the result is :— 


TAtipov Aytidxeia, ot St wrdAw ovKer Epovoi, 
B. iv. 138-140. 


This passage merely speaks of Antioch and 
other places in the East suffering much from 
the fugitive’s return ; but of Antichrist, or his 
connexion with Nero not a word is said. See 
Hengst., ii. p. 79 &c.; Thiersch, Versuch der 
Herst. fiir die Kritik des N. T., s. 410, ff. 

No historical grounds indeed can be 
alleged for asserting that St. John in Rev. 
xili. 3 adopted a popular delusion widely 
diffused in his time, as to the return of 
Nero who was to be raised from the dead. 
The belief did not exist in St. John’s age; 
and no one, as yet, has ventured to maintain 
that St. John was himself the concocter of 
this form of the “ Nero-fable.” The sole 
historical fact round which this fable has 
gathered, is the existence of Pretenders who 
assumed the name of Nero. 

A fable of this nature which, like other 
popular myths, has grown up so slowly, is 
not peculiar to any one age or race. The 
legend of King Arthur as not dead, but 
sleeping on the Hildon hills, lived long in the 
hearts of the people of Britain. The belief in 
the return of Fredérick Barbarossa is still 
cherished by the German peasant. A similar 
expectation filled Portugal in a later and 
more historic age (A.D. 1578) when the fate 
of the chivalrous Sebastian was involved in 
some mystery after his defeat by the Moors. 
Michelet having told the death of the last 
Duke of Burgundy, adds: “Il n’était pas 
facile de persuader au peuple que celui dont 
on avait tant parlé était bien vraiment mort. 


1 We read to this effect in B. iv. 145, “Hie 
8 cis "Acinv mAotros péyas, bv mote ‘Pun 
[ovAnoaca], as it had been said in B. iii. 350- 
352, ‘Orndoa Sacuopédpou ’Aclys bredetato ‘Paéyn, 
Xphuara nev tpls téoca Sedekerar Eumadw *Acols 
°EK ‘Péuns, dAohv kK. T.A. 

Alexandre refers these notices of a restoration 
to Asia of the wealth plundered from it by 
Rome, to the belief—‘‘ Orientem aliquando pre- 
valiturum ” (Sueton. Vespas. 4; Tac. Hist. v. 12). 
As Lactantius writes: ‘‘ Romanum nomen.... 
tolletur de terra, et imperium in Asiam rever- 
tetur, et rursus Oriens dominabitur” (vii. 15), 
Alexandre explains this popular belief by the 
expectation, derived from the Jews, of the 
approaching kingdom of Messiah (p. 353). 
The words rather point to the hoped-for 
success of the false Nero. 


REVELATION. XVII. 


Il était caché, disait-ca, il ait tenu enfermé, 
il était fait moine; les pélerins Vavaient 

en Allemagne, 4 Rome, a Jérusalem .. . . 
se trouvait des marchands, qui vendraient a 
crédit, pour étre payés au double, alors, que 
reviendrait ce grand duc de Bourgogne.”— 
Hist. de France, 17. (See Trench’s “ Hulsean 
Lectures,” p. 187). 


NOTE F ON VER. 11—GALBA, OTHO, 
VITELLIUs. 


It has been shown in Note D that 
one of the steps in the proof on which 
the usual rationalistic interpretation of this 
chapter depends, is the omission from the 
series of Roman Emperors of the three 
rulers who intervened between Nero and 
Vespasian,—Galba, Otho, and Vitellius. On 
Otho’s defeat at Bedriacum by the generals 
of Vitellius, in April 69, Otho killed him- 
self, after a reign of but ninety-five days,— 
“Nonagesimo et quinto Imperii die,” are the 
words of Suetonius. Vitellius was put to 
death in the following December; and the 
brief duration of these three reigns has led 
Licke, Disterd. and others to omit them from 
the order of the imperial succession: see, above, 
Note D. Some authorities may indeed be 
quoted in favour of this omission ;— 

The “ Paschal Chronicle” (ed. Dindorf. 
p- 459) thus describes the succession after 
Nero :—pera Nepwva TadBas €Bacidevoev ev 
"IBnpia, OvereAduos ev Teppavia, “OOwv emi 
‘Pouns. After mentioning the shortness of 
their reigns, the chronicler proceeds,—Pw- 
palev ¢ eBuciievoey Oveoractards, making 
Vespasian the seventh emperor, and the suc- 
cessor of Nero—who would thus be the sixth 
(see id., p. 311). Domitian is reckoned the 
ninth, as succeeding Titus (6. p. 465. Cf. 
Note C on ch. xili. 3). In his Chronicle 
Eusebius gives the statement, here copied, 
as to Galba, Otho and Vitellius; but in his 
History (iii. 5) he includes Galba and Otho 
alone between Nero and Vespasian. 

Several writers and chroniclers in like 
manner leave out of the imperial succession 
some one or all of these three Emperors. 
Thus Clemens Alex. in the jirst catalogue 
given by him (see Note C on ch. xiii. 3) 
states the order to be “ Augustus, Tiberius, 
Caligula, Claudius, Nero, Galba, Vespasian, 
Titus,” &c.; but in the second, “ Julius, 
Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, 
Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian,” &c. 
Orosius (lvii. c. 7, 8) gives the succession 
thus: “Quo [Galba] mox oppresso, Otho 
Rome, Vitellius in Germania, Vespasianus in 


Syria, imperia simul atque arma rapuerunt ;”" 


where he too seems to omit Otho and 
Vitellius from the list of established Eme 


perors. 











REVELATION. XVII. 


None of these writers make Vespasian 
either sixth or even seventh Emperor- 

These quotations give more or less support 
to the rationalistic interpretation: but on the 
other hand, there is no doubt whatever that 
the three Emperors were recognized by 
contemporary writers as belonging to the 
line of the Imperial succession,—and, indeed, 
by all subsequent writers who are not in- 
fluenced by subjective theories of history. 
Thus Josephus (B. J. IV. cix. 2; cxi. 9) 
describes in full the succession to Nero of 
Galba, Otho, and Vitellius. Suetonius in- 
cludes them regularly among “ The Twelve 
Cezsars,” as also does Ausonius, writing of 
the Emperor who followed them: “His 
decimus, fatoque accitus Vespasianus.”—De 
XII. Cesaribus. 

Dion Cassius writes: otra pév oty 6 PdAB8as 
avroxpdrwp amedetx6r (lib. Ixiv. p. 1049); the 


* How the changes are rung on this historical 
question may be illustrated by the following con- 
troversy :— 

The fourth chapter of the Epistle of St. Bar- 
nabas (as given in the Cod. Sinaiticus) quotes, 
as follows, Dan. vii. 24:—Aéye: 5& oftws Kal 
& mpodfjtns BaciAela déxa ex) THS Vis Bactredt- 
govow, Kal éfavaornocerar bmicbey avTay uikpds 
Bacircts, ds rawewéoetTpels bP ev TOY Bacihéwr: 
and also Dan. vii. 7, 8 :—xai eldoy rb réraptov 
@nploy wovnpby Kal isxupby kal xadrerérepov 
wapa mdvta 7a Onpla THs ys, Kal as e— abTod 
GveretAev deka Képata, Kal €& ad’t@y utkpdy Képas 
wTapadvddiov, Kai ws eramelywoev bp ev Tpia Tav 
peydrwy Kepdtwr. . 

These words Hilgenfeld (Mov. Test. extr. 
Can., Fasc. ii. p. 66), in opposition to Volk- 
mar, applies to the time of Domitian. Hilgenfeld 
maintains that St. Barnabas here alleges that 
there will reign ez Roman Emperors ; and that 
**the Little Horn,” which comes up last, signi- 
fies Nero (Ady 6 vibs abtod Katapyhoe Toy 
kaipby Tov “Ayduov. (c. xv.)—viz. Nero), who, 
returning as Antichrist, will strike down three 
Emperors who are closely connected one with 
another. These Hilgenfeld takes to be the three 
Flavii—Vespasian, Titus, Domitian—who, added 
to the Seven Roman Emperors of the Apoca- 
lypse (ch. xvii. 10), make up the Zen with whom 
the Roman Empire is to come to anend. Volk- 
mar, on the other hand, thinks that St. Barnabas 
—correcting St. John, who regarded Nero, re- 
stored to life, to be the Antichrist whom Messiah 
was to destroy—‘‘regnum Danielis item habuit 
Czesareum et reges sic numeravit decem: Au- 
gustus, &c., Nero (5); Galba, Otho (2}—nam 
Vitellius apud Alexandrinos non numeratur ; 
Flavii (3) : igitur decadem Ceesarum sic implent, 
quorum extremus, Domitianus, maxime fuerat 
adversarius Dei et Messiz Israelis, par fere 
Neroni. Qui sequebantur, Nerva, Traianus, 
Adrianus, efficiebant unam per adoptionem 
dynastiam : tpeis, i¢’ €v BaotAcis,”—and that 
it was these three (Dan. vii. 8) who were to be 
overthrown, by one of the preceding Emperors 
restored to life in the character of Antichrist. 


accession of Otho is next referred to (d., pp. 
1053, 1054); and then (Ixv. p. 1060), we read: 
Oi d€ &v TH ‘Popn...rovBiredduov . . . avtoKpd=- 
Topa avnyopevov,—Vespasian’s accession being 
recorded in the same manner (see Ixvi. p. 
1076). The Emperor Julian numbers them 
among the “‘ Czsars” (see Note C cn ch. 
xiii. 3); and Aurelius Victor (De Cesar. i. 
6, 7, 8) equally includes the three as suc- 
ceeding Nero. Epiphanius, who in his Ane 
coratus, makes Vespasian succeed Nero (pera 
Néepova Oveoreciavos, clx., vol. i. p. 63), 
speaks of Galba as reigning seven months 
and twenty-six days, of Otho as reigning 
three months and five days, and of Vitellius 
as reigning eighteen months and twelve days 
(De Mensur. et Ponder. cxi., vol. ii. p. 169). 
Petavius (#5. p. 385) points out the error of 
Epiphanius as to these dates, referring to the 
dates given by Dion; but this error does not 
touch the question here. Petavius himself (De 
Ration. Temp. lib. v—‘ A 68 Christi ad 96”) 
gives Galba, Otho, and Vitellius, as following 
Nero and immediately preceding Vespasian 
as Emperors. To the early authorities may 
also be added Sulpicius Severus (A.D. 401), 
who places Galba, Otho, and Vitellius after 
Nero (Chron. ii. 30, p. 84). 

To state the historical conclusion, with 
Dean Merivale :— 

Galba was saluted Imperator by the soldiers 
on the 3rd of April, A.D. 68 (vol. vi. p. 356), 
and his election was sanctioned by the Senate 
(#., p. 372). On his assassination, Otho 
“stepped through an Emperor’s blood into 
the place of the Czsars” (i. p. 399). On 
the suicide of Otho, the senators ‘“ met 
immediately and decreed Vitellius, by a single 
act, all the honours and titles which had been 
dealt out from year to year to his pre- 
decessors.” —ib., 431. 


Nore G ON VER. 11I—THE EIGHTH KING. 


Disterdieck—who does not rely on the 
Nero-fable, but who considers that Domitian 
is the eighth—partly agrees with Grotius and 
Hammond who translate, “the son of one of 
them ” (‘‘filius unius eorum”). Appealing to 
Rom. ix. 10; Matt. i.3, 5,6; Luke i. 27, they 
make Vespasian the sixth, and his younger 
son Domitian the eighth (see Note D); 
Andreas also explains “sprung from one of 
their Heads (as ék pas at’vadv).” Both exe 
planations, however, insert the numeral, which 
is not found in the text; and, therefore, 
Diisterd. understands “the extraction or de= 
scent (‘ Herkunft’) from out of the Seven:” 
“John,” he notes, “does not insist on the 
eighth springing from ove of the Seven,—ale 
though this is true,—but on this, that he who 
as the personification of the whole Beast core 
responds in a certain measure to all Seven, has 
himself, from out of these Seven, the source 


763 


704 


of his human personality. Thus the Seven 
collectively stand parallel to the eighth, who is 
the embodiment of the whole Beast ” (s. 512). 
It is not said, argues Dusterdieck, that the 
fifth fallen king (Nero) will return as the 
eighth, but that the eighth, who is still future, 
will be the personified Beast himself,—even 
he in whom the Beast from the Abyss (ch. 
xi. 7), who now “zs zot,” will reappear. To 
find, therefore, the Nero-fable here, would 
be to ascribe to St. John [as Renan does, /. c., 
p- 414] “a confusion between the entire 
Beast with ‘Seven Heads’ (the Roman Em- 
pire), and the Head ‘smitten unto death’ 
(Nero), ch. xiii. 3.” See the remark of Schleier- 
macher quoted in the Introduction, § 4, b. 
Burger, disregarding St. John’s usage, ex- 
plains: ‘‘He—the Beast, Antichrist—‘is of 
the Seven, i.e., he belongs to the number of 
the Seven, for he is the seventh Head (see on 
ch. xiii. 3), but he is, at the same time, the 
eighth—for, as being the Head ‘ simitten unto 
death, —as being he whose ‘ death-stroke was 
bealed,—as being he who ‘is not; and is about 
to come up out of the Abyss’ (ver. 8),—he ap- 
peais as an eighth in the series; and neverthe- 
less is the seventh, for it is one and the same 
perso. ‘which was, and is not, and shall 
come. ‘This is the ‘Little Horn’ of Dan. 
vil. 8, 20, 21, 24, 25. Accordingly, rising on 
the Head of Daniel’s fourth Beast, among 
its ten horns, exalted over them, and thus 
belonging to that phase of the World-power 
which this fourth Beast typifies,—Antichrist 
will ‘come up’ as the seventh ‘Head, —will 
be ‘smitten unto death,—will seem to retire 
from the stage,—but will return as an eighth, 
and yet be the same as the ‘ Head’ which 
was the seventh.” See on ch. xili. 3. 
Vitringa, Bengel, Alf. understand that, after 
the “ Seven Heads” of the Beast, the personal 
Antichrist is in the future to appear as an 
eighth. Somewhat similarly Ebrard who 
takes “the sixth King” to be the Roman 
World-power; the seventh World-power to 
be the “Ten Kings” with the Beast (ver. 12); 
and the eighth World-power to be the Beast 
from the Abyss (ver. 8), or Antichrist (s. 
464 ff.). Ebrard also compares 2 Thess. ii. 3 ff. 
with Dan. vii. 25 ; xi. 36. This opinion is de- 
veloped by Godet :—After the seventh (see on 
ver. 10), “‘ will appear Antichrist—the eighth 
Head, and at the same time the entire monster 
—issuing now not from the sea of the peoples, 
but from the Aéyss:” and, Godet adds, accord- 
ing to his peculiar theory, ‘‘ To the astonish- 
ment of the whole earth the possessor of this 
power will be found to be that Israel [the 
Head “smitten unto death,” ch. xiii. 3; see 
on ch. xiii. 1] which men believed to be erased 
for ever from the list of peoples ;—which shall 
issue, of a sudden, from its tomb as that 
which it really is, the first of the peoples,— 


REVELATION. XVII. 


that nation to which belongs, whe:her for 
weal or for woe, the sceptre of the world.” 
(1. c., p. 368). 

I, Williams writes (pp. 341-342): The 
Seven “ Kings,” though mentioned in con- 
nexion with them, are not the Seven “ Heads,” 
for the Beast himself is one of the Seven: not 
one of the “Seven Heads” he now himself 
wears, but of the seven Kingdoms of Daniel; 
as arising out of one of them, the Roman. 
“The Apocalyptic Beast corresponds with the 
‘Little Horn’ of Daniel, which arises among 
the Jen Horns of this seventh Head, and by 
its rising roots up three, by which it becomes 
itself the eighth” (Dan. vil. 8); “he is pro- 
bably the final Antichrist” : —if there be some 
“confusion” here between being one of the 
Seven and yet one beyond them, the same exists 
in Daniel (vii. 11), where the Beast, being one 
of the Seven Heads, is as it were confounded 
with the ‘ Little Horn’ itself. “ An ambiguity 
which the fulfilment alone will explain.” 

Auberlen interprets :—The wounded Head 
has been healed; the World-power has been 
restored to the condition of the preceding 
Kingdoms; a new Kingdom has arisen “in 
which all the Beast’s opposition to God is 
concentrated; . .. . therefore we read of 
an eighth, which proceeds from the seven, and 
is the full manifestation of the Beast-nature,” 
“ Like Daniel’s Little Horn the seventh King- 
dom passes over into an eighth, which is 
not merely one of the Seven, but is brought 
forth by them, and proceeds fromthem. This 
is the anti-christian Kingdom in the strict 
sense of the word.” Not that a personal 
Antichrist will certainly stand “at the head 
of the antichristian Kingdom, for it is pos- 
sible that the eighth, like the preceding “ Seven 
Heads,” designates a Kingdom, a power, and 
not a person” (/. ¢., p. 303). 

Wordsworth: “ This is descriptive of 
the Roman power as it rose to supi 
unuer the Papacy, and carried the Harlot 
as on a throne. It was an eighth Kingdom, 
and it rose after the Seven, and from them” 

see on ver. 10);—it was like the “ Little 
orn ” of Dan. vii. 8 : “Rome is the Western 
Babylon ; and the Western Babylonian Power 
is, as it were, the octave of the Eastern. The 
Eastern Babylonian Power is the frst im the 
prophecies of Daniel ; the Western Babylonian 
Power is the eight in those of St. John.” 

Hengstenberg supplies: “ He is an‘ eighth’ 
in destruction”; t. e., the Beast himself like 
the Seven, or with the Seven who have ale 
ready fallen, goes as an eighth into perdi- 
tion:—the heathen State comes to an end 
with the seventh phase of the godless World- 
power. We have a commentary on this pas- 
sage in ch. xix. 11-21. In other words, as 
Hengst. expressly concludes, there is no eighth 


Head ; the text Jimits the number to Seven. 








REVELATION. XVIII. 765 
Rings of the earth, 1 with the merchants 
and mariners, lament over her. 20 The 
ae rejoue for the judgments of God upon 


CHAPTER XVIII. 


2 Babylon is fallen. 4 The people of God 
commanded to depart out of her. 9 The 





[Ver. 1 om. xai.—aAdov ayyedov. Ver. 2 év ioxupa pov A€yov [Erasmus, without any 
authority, here abandoned his codex, and rendered by “év ioxtex” (sic) the in fortitudine of the 
Vulgate. Cf. Ps. xxix. 4, LX X.].—Oa:poviev—[The words kai pvAaky mavr. dpvéov axaé: 
xai, which are wanting in 1, and elsewhere, Er. inserted after the Vulgate “et custodia omnis 
volucris immundz et”). Ver. 3 [A omits rod otvov.—C merely reads trys ropy. rod Aujod ].— 
mémaxe [sO P, 1 (wézoxe), T. R.; cf. ch. xiv. 8.—A, C read remraxav.—n, B read rerraxacn 
“Tentw= pro merw- non potest non pro antiquissimo vitio haberi”—Tisch.: but compare 
TO mornpioy THs mraceas, Isai. li. 17, 22, LXX.,—Heb. nbynn = titubatio, “ pr. vinum quod 
titubatio est, i.e. eam efficit”—Gesenius]. Ver. 4 6 Aads pou e& avrns. Ver. 5 éxodAq- 
6noav (so 1, for which Er. substituted jxodovéyoay after the Vulgate pervenerunt). Ver. 6 
om. wpiv.—om. 2nd airp—ra Simda. Ver. 7 advtny [Words. reads atrqv]—éri KaOnpat. 
Ver. 8 [A omits Kupios].—xpivas. Ver. 9 om. aityv.—en’ airyv. Ver. 10 om. év. Ver. 11 
ém’ avrnv. Ver. 12 [B, T. R. read papyapirov.—S reads papyapirwv.—A reads papyapirais. 
—C, P read papyapiras].—Svocivov. Ver. 13 add kai Guopoy after xuwvay. Ver. 14 cov 
before rijs émiOup.—aradero for 2nd amj\Gev.—adra ob py evpnoovow. Ver. 16 om. ist 


xai.—papyapirn. Ver. 17 6 émt_rémov mAéov 
—P reads 6 éni r. mhotwv mréwv]. Ver. 18 Bdemovres. — 
Ver. 22 [8, A omit waons téxvys]. Ver. 23 [A omits 


eat oi amdécro\o. Ver. 21 pvAvor. 


oi before éyzropor).] 


THE FALL OF BABYLON (I-24). 


The approaching fall of Babylon is an- 
nounced in this chapter (see ver. 21). The 
actual overthrow is assumed to have taken 
place between ch. xviii. 24,and ch. xix. 1. In 
ch. xix. 1-10 that overthrow is celebrated. 
The appearance of three Angels (cf. ch. xiv. 
6-13) exhibits the chief stages of the Vision :— 
Gi.) In vv. 1-3 the announcement of ch. xiv. 8 is 
repeated and developed ;—(ii.) The fall of 
Babylon (see ch. xvi. 19), an event still future 

cf. vv. 4, 8, 9), is described with minute 
etails in vv. 4-20 ;—{ili.) The overthrow of 
the City is represented by a significant action 
in vv. 21-24. These three Angels have clearly 
no typical signification (see below). The 
narrative follows the division, which has 
marked the Seals, Trumpets, and Vials, into 
seven clauses, the sixth being divided from 
the seventh by an interposed section. Thus 
we have (1) The fall of Babylon and her sin 
(ch. xiv. 8 ; xvii. 2.) in vv. 1-3 ;—(2) The invi- 
tation to God’s people to depart from out 
of her (cf. Isai. lii. 11), for her iniquities have 
come “iz remembrance before God” (ch. xvi. 
19), in vv. 4, 5 ;—(3) The Angel turns to ad- 
those who are to inflict the judgments, 
in wv. 6-8 ;—(4) The lament of the “Kings” is 
given in vv. 9, 10;—(5) The lament of the 
“Merchants” in vv. 11-17 ;—(6) The lament of 
the “Mariners” in vv. 17-19. On thisisinter- 
posed a brief utterance of triumph in ver. 20; 
and then (7) comes the symbolical action 
which declares her overthrow. 

The severance between the World-power 

and the World-City (ch. xvii. 16), and the con- 


{1, T. R. read emi rév mdolwv 6 Spsdos. 
Ver. 19 ra moa. Ver. 20 of Gytor 


sequent destruction of the latter by the 
former is a leading event in the history of the 
Church of God, because it signifies the begin= 
ning of the Divine judgment on the anti- 
christian World-power itself, and on its 
prince, Antichrist. This event is announced 
by Heaven; and all the dwellers on earth who 
previously had served the “Harlot,” lament over 
it. In order to typify this event, the present 
chapter combines the overthrow of Babylon— 
the City which desolated Israel by its power 
(see Isai. xiii.;_ xiv. 22,23; xlvilil. 20; Ili. 11; 
Jer. 1.; li. 6-9), and the ruin of Tyre—which 
led Israel astray by its idolatry and lascivious- 
ness (Ezek. xxvi. ; xxvii.). Hence it is that the 
language of this description is borrowed from 
the language of the former prophets respecting 
the fate of these two cities. The object of 
this chapter, writes Hengst., is “ to clothe with 
flesh and blood” the description of ch. xvii. 16; 
and the destruction of heathen Rome is a 
guarantee of the future accomplishment of 
this prediction—see ch. xx. 8, 9. Words, 
notes: “Though Babylon falls, the Beas+ still 
remains. Therefore the fall of Papal Rome 
will mot be the destruction of the Papacy ” 
(ch. xix. 19). 

Renan considers that St. John, writing as 
a Jewish fanatic, and interpreting in the spirit 
of political hatred the rumours connected 
with Nero’s death, now imagines that the 
rulers of the provinces (see ch. xvii. 16): 
are about to attack and destroy Rome; an 
taking the destruction of the City to have peen 
accomplished, that he here celebrates thx fal 
of his enemy (p. 439). 

Reuss illustrates in an instructive manner- 


766 


ND after these things I saw 
another angel come down from 
heaven, having great power ; and the 

earth was lightened with his glory. 
2 And he cried mightily with a 


®d@.4.8 strong voice, saying, “Babylon the 


great is fallen, is fallen, and is be- 
come the habitation of devils, and 
the hold of every foul spirit, and a 


by the case of this narrative, the modern con- 
ception of “Apokalyptik” as expressed by 
Rationalists:—see Note A at the end of this 
chapter ; and Introd. § 9. 


Cuap. XVIII.—THE First ANGEL (1-3). 


1. After these things] (Omit “ dnd”— 
gee vv. //.). For this formula see on ch. iv. 1, 2. 

another angel] I.e., other than the Angel of 
ch. xvii. 1; cf.x.1. There is no reason what- 
ever for taking this Angel to be Christ (Calov., 
Hengst.);—or the Holy Spirit (Cocceius, 
Vitr.) ;—or “another of the’Vial-Angels,” as 
in ch. xvii. 1 (Bisping) ;—or Luther (Nicolai). 

coming down out of heaven,| Bengel 
connects “ another” with “coming down,” 
as if the sense were ‘ another besides the last 
who came down from heaven, —see ch. x. 1; 
and so Alf. 


having great authority;] Of this it is 
added as a visible sign— 

and the earth was lightened with his glory. | 
See Ezek. xliii. 2; Luke ii.9; Actsix. 3; xii. 7. 
I. Williams is reminded of “the Angel ascend- 
ing from the East ’—ch. vii. 2. 


2. And he cried with a mighty voice, 
saying,| See vv. lj. The subject here is the 
same as in ch. xiv. 8, but the denunciation is 
more searching. 

Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great,] 
Cf. Isai. xxi. gy. The aorists here are pro/eptic. 
Burger suggests that they may denote the 
certainty of what is to happen—see vv. 4-8. 
The fall of Babylon is also foretold in ch. xvi. 
19: see also on ch. xvii. 16. The ruin of the 
World-city is here developed. 

Reuss notes that “the allegory of the 
‘Woman’ is replaced by the proper expression.” 

and is become a habitation of devils,| See 
wv./]. On the word rendered “ devils,”—i.e., 
demons, evil spirits of an inferior order,—see 
the note on ch. ii. 10; and cf. ch. ix. 20; xvi. 14. 
For the imagery see Isai. xili. 19-22 5 xxxiv. 14 
(LXX.); Jer. li. 37. Babylon, destroyed by 
the Beast from the Abyss (see ch. xvii. 16), 
naturally becomes the habitation of his agents, 
the demons. Cf. also Matt. xii. 43. 


and a hold of every unolean spirit,) Gr.a 


REVELATION. XVIIL 


[v. 1—3 


cage of every unclean and hatefu’ 
bird. 

3 For all nations have drunk of 
the wine of the wrath of her fornica- 
tion, and the kings of the earth have 
committed fornication with her, and 
the merchants of the earth are waxed 
rich through the ‘abundance of her 
delicacies. 





prison (see ch. ii. 10 and cf. ch. xx. 7), a place 
of custody (‘‘ the prisoner to his 4o/d retir’d.”— 
Dryden). De Wette, Hengst., Bisping under- 
stand a place of banishment. 

and a hold of ewery unclean and hateful 
bird.| Another prophetic symbol of desola- 
tion, see Isai. xxxiv. 11;—for Babylon, cf. 
Jer. 1. 39; for Nineveh, cf. Zeph. ii. 13, 14. The 
symbol is differently explained by Words: 
“ Not cage or prison, but place where they are 
safe ; where these ill-omened birds resort or 
keep their vigils.” 

3. For] The sins, on which her judgment 
is grounded, are the cause. 


of the wine of the wrath of her for- 
nication] Compare the text of this verse 
with that of ch. xiv. 8,—see the note on that 
place. Compare, too, the note on ch. xvii. 2. 
(Observe, the Cod. Alex., A, omits the words 
“ of the wine”: and Cod. C merely reads “ of 
the fornication of her wrath.”) 


all the nations have drunk;| Unless 
there has been a very ancient error on the 
part of the scribes, as Tischendorf (8th ed.) 
suggests, the weight of authority supports 
the rendering: “For by reason of the 
wine of the wrath of her fornication, 
all the nations are fallen,”’—a reading 
not obviously in accordance either with the 
context, or the parallel passages, ch. xiv. 8; 
XVii. 2. 

On the other hand compare Isai. li. 17, 2a 
(LXX.) ;—A.V. “the cup of trembling”: seevv. 
il, (The two readings differ merely by the in- 
sertion in the latter verb of the Greek letter 7), 


and the kings of the earth committed for- 
nication with her,| As already stated in ch. 
xvii. 2. 

The “ Kings,” according to Reuss, are not 
the allies of Antichrist, come from the East, 
but the numerous minor vassals of the Em- 
pire, who, protected by the central authority, 
tyrannized over the unhappy populations. 


and the merchants of the earth waxed rich} 
Through the extensive commerce created 
her luxury, as explained in the words whi 
follow. 


by reason of the abundance] (Cf. ch. viiL 


power 


v. 4—5-] 


4 And I heard another voice from 
heaven, saying, Come out of her, my 
people, that ye be not partakers of 


13). Gr. by tne power of, as Marg. Vitr. 
renders copia, and aptly compares Ezek. xxviii. 
4 (LXX.). 


of her wantonness.| This noun (ro 
atpjvos) occurs only here in the N. T.; the 
verb only in vv. 7, 3; and the compound "verb 
only in 1 Tim. v. 11 (cf. 2 Kings xix. 28, 
LXX.—Hebr. shaanan = fastus E Gesen. ; 
A. V. tumult). In the verb, writes Archbishop 
Trench, “is properly the insolence of wealth, 
the wantonness and petulance from fulness of 
bread; someth'ng of the Latin /ascivire” 
(Synonyms p. Sy): cf. Deut. xxxii. 15. De 
Wette renders “by her powerful luxury” 
— von ihrer gewaltigen Ueppigkeit ;” Vulg. : 
“ de virtute deliciarumejus ;” Words.: “riotous 
luxury.” Notehere, “merchants ofthe earth” 
combined with “ kings of the earth,’—the two 
expressions denoting the different aspects of 
the phrase so often used to embrace the mass 
of mankind, viz. “ they that dwell on the earth,” 
—see on ch. ili. ro. 


THE SECOND VOICE (4-19). 


4. another voice from heaven,| The second 
Angelic voice,—see vv. I, 21. To suppose 
with Bengel and Hengst. that “ the voice must 
be the voice of Christ,” would be opposed to 
the character of the entire passage. 

This “ Voice” now proceeds, as Ebrard notes, 
to develop “ in strophic form” what the Angel 
(wv. 2, 3) had briefly announced. The pas- 
sage accordingly may be divided into six 
strophes, viz. vv. 4, 5; vv. 6, 7°; vv. 7°, 8; 
WV. 9, 10; VV. 11-16; VV. 17-19. 

The frst strophe :— 


saying, Come forth, my people, out of 
her,| The words “my people” are spoken 
in the name of Christ or of God, as in ch. xi. 
3; Xxil. 7; seealsover.8. The Angelic “ voice,” 
speaking with God’s authority as in ch. xi. 3, 
urges His people to depart out of the World- 
City where all evil is concentrated, almost in 
the very words in which Israel of old had 
been exhorted to flee from Babylon: “ My 
people, go ye out of the midst of her,” &c. 
This thought is three times expressed by 
Jeremiah (Jer. 1.8; li. 6, 45); and for proof 
that this exhortation was needed, see the note 
on Jer. 1. 8. It is thus that at all times the 
people of God have been warned to fiee from 
the City of Destruction,—cf. Gen. xix. 15, 
22 (“Escape thither ; for I cannot do any- 
thing till thou be come thither”); Numb. 
avi. 26; Isai. xlvili. 20; lil. 11; Matt. xxiv. 
1€ (see Euseb. H. E. iti. 5); 2 Cor. vi. 17. 


REVELATION. XVIII. 


her sins, and that ye receive not of 
her plagues. 
5 For her sins have reached unto 


Special applications :— 

Bossuet (followed by Hengst.) applies -he 
verse to the Lord’s care for His people when 
Rome was sacked by Alaric;—Stern applies 
it to the faithful who, in +4e Last Days, shall be 
found in Rome (see on ch. xvii. i>) ;—Bishop 
Wordsworth notes: “The Babylon of the 
Apoc. is Papal Rome. . . . Even now, at this 
present time,—as this prophecy reveals,—the 
Holy Spirit, who reads the heart, and who 
wrote the Apocalypse, sees some People of 
God in Rome ;”—I. Williams writes: From 
Egypt, from Sodom, from Babylon, from Jeru- 
salem, “ the people of God were called before 
the judgment came on those places; and now 
they are called out of the mystic Babylon” 
(p- 360). It is impossible, he adds, to under- 
stand this pathetic dirge of Babylon “merely 
of the world at large, for that cannot have 
come to an end; nor of any one city, from 
the universal nature of the figures; nor of 
any religious system or Church, for to- leave 
such is not to leave behind every temptation 
to luxury as overthrown; but an alliance 
between Christianity and the world. “The 
words may be considered partly as prophetic,” 
for the time will come “when Providence 
will bring about such a separation;” and 
partly imperative “as demanding at all times 
our ‘escape to the mountain,’ to the Jeru- 
salem which is above . . . from this Babel 
of discord” (p. 363). 

Auberlen (pp. 284, 320) comments thus :— 
As in Ezek. xvi.; xxiil., the whoredoms are 
described of Israel with the most ancient 
kingdoms of the world,— Egypt, Assyria, 
Babylon, —so in ch. xii, “ the first period of the 
Christian Church is described, when apostate 
Israel was the Harlot, and the young congre- 
gation of Christ, the Woman. Soon, how- 
ever, fornication crept into the Church itself 
[see on ch. xvii. 1], so that, as a whole, she 
appears in ch. xvii. no longer as the Woman 
but the Harlot; the great Babylon, which yet 
contains concealed the true people of God,— 
the Woman” (see ch. xvill. 4). The true 
people of God did not perish in the death 
of the Harlot; but before the judgment on 
Babylon she is commanded to come out of it, 
lest in the consummation of Babylon’s sin, she 
be polluted by it, and thus fall into her destruc- 
tion:—see Matt. xxiv. 15,16. “ Herein con- 
sists the first justification of the Woman; she 
is distinguished from the Harlot, and not 
judged with her:” but this is only a negztive 
justification ; the positive, real glorification has 
yet to be gained by a severe struggle. Here 
also it behoves her to enter, through nuck 


767 


708 


heaven, and God hath remembered 
her iniquities. 

6 Reward her even as she rewarded 
you, and double unto her double ac- 
cording to her works: in the cup 
which she hath filled fill to her double. 


REVELATION. XVIII. 


lv. 6—7. 


7 How much she hath glorified 
herself, and lived deliciously, so much 
torment and sorrow give her: for 
she saith in her heart, 
and am no widow, and shall see + 
sorrow. 





tribulation, into the kingdom of God. This 
last affliction through which the Bridal Church 
has to pass, is not a judgment, such as fell on 
the Harlot, but a time of purification, during 
which the dross of earthliness still cleaving to 
her, is perfectly taken away” (ch. xx. 4). Cf 
Luke xxi. 28. 

Renan concludes with calm precision : “‘ The 
Seer of the Apocalypse, in December 68, or 
January 69, gives orders to his people to quit 
Rome ” (p. 206). 

that ye have no fellowship with her 
sins,] See Eph. v. 11; cf. Jer. li. 6, 9. 
It is not meant: “That ye share not 
the punishment of ber sin,’ as Bengel, De 
Wette, Ziullig; but the cause is expressed 
from which the result follows, namely,— 

and that ye receive not of ber plagues:| Luke 
xvii. 32 supplies the comment. St. Jerome 
warning Marcella to flee from Rome to 
Bethlehem (A.D. 386), and referring to what 
is said of the Harlot in ch. xvii. 3, 9, 15, as 
well as to the fall of Babylon, proceeds to 
quote this verse (Epist. 46). 

5. for her sins have reached even unto 
beaven,| (See vv. /i.). Gr. were joined; 
clave together; cf. the Vulgate, pervenerunt. 
Words. renders: “because her sins clave 
even unto heaven,” as Matt. xix. 5; Luke 
x. 11; Rom. xii. 9:—on this same use of the 
same verb, compare “My soul cleaveth 
unto the dust ”—Ps. cxix. 25; xliv. 25 ; Ixiii. 
85 Lam. oi. 25) Zech. xiv.) 5) (axes). 
The _metaphor is borrowed from Jer. li. 9, 
her sins reach to heaven and adhere to it. 

One may here recall the first mention of 
Babylon m the Bible——Gen. xi. 3, 4. 

and God hath remembered her iniquities.| Cf. 
ch. xvi. 19. 

Verses 6, 7* form “the second Strophe ” (see 
on ver. 4):— 

6. Render unto her even as she ren- 
dered,| (Omit you, see vv. //.). The words are 
founded on Jer. 1. 15, 29; li. 24; cf. Ps. 
exxxvii. 8. The“ Voice,” speaking in the name 
of God (see the close of ver. 8), now turns 
to address those who are to inflict the 
judgments, thus marking the t#ird division 
of the chapter,—see the remarks intro- 
ductory. Hengst. considers that the in- 
struments of vengeance thus addressed are 
the “Ten Kings” (ch. xvii. 16); to whom 
Bisving adds Antichrist in the List Days. 


Ebrard rejects this meaning, and the 
words as addressed to “ My ” as in 
ver. 4. 

and double [unto her|theé double according to 
her works:] “Unto ber” is not read in 
Greek—see wv. //. The chief reference is 
to Jer. xvi. 18. This was the ordinary rule 
according to the Law,—Ex. xxii. 4, 7, 9: see 
the note on Isai. xl. 2. The double (see 
vv. Il.), i.e. the fixed, legal retribution; 
cf. Isai. lxi. 7; Zech. ix. 12 :—see also Ezek. 
xvi. 59. 

inthe cup whichshe mingled, mingle unto 
her double.} A double portion of the wine 
of God’s wrath, see ver. 3; ch. xiv. 8; xviL 
2, 4: see on ch. xiv. 10. The cup which she 
had used as a means of seduction, shall now 
be changed into the instrument of her 
punishment. 


7. How much soever] “In as many 
things as (éca).” Diisterdieck compares 
Rom. vi. 10 (4 d€ (7); Gal. ii. 20. 

she glorified 4erself,] Gr. her—see vv. /., 

and waxed wanton,] Or luxurious. 
See on ver. 3. 


so much torment and mourning give er.] 
Or so much give her of torment and 
mourning: for she] Seever.8 “mourning” 
(wévOos), and ver. 11 “ mourn,” A. V.: the 
usual term signifying the lament for the dead 
(Gen. xxvii. 41; Amos vili. 10),—here for 
her children. (Clause a of ver. 7 ends here). 

Verses 7°, 8, form “the third Strophe” (see 
on ver. 4):— 

Because she saith in her heart, I sit @ 
queen,| See Isai. xlvii. 7-9, on Babylon ;— 
cf. Ezek. xxvili. 2; Zeph.ii.15,0n Tyre. The 
reference is to ch. xvii. 18. Or render as 
A. V.:—see ch. iii. 17. 


and am no widow, and shall in no wise 
see mourning,| See Isai. xlvii. 8; and c& 
Lam. i. 1. “See,” that is, ‘learn from exe 
perience this sorrow.’ 

Auberlen’s conclusion as to the sense in 
which the symbol of the “ Harlot” is to be 
understood is stated here: “ Notwithstand- 
ing the universal character of the Harlot, it 
remains true that the Roman and Greek 
Churches are in a more peculiar sense the 
Harlot than the Evangelical Protestant. 
Babylon, in the times of St. John, became 
Rome; and it is clear from Rev. xviii. 7, that 


sit a ‘queen, * Is a 







——————————— 


v. 8—10. } 


8 Therefore shall her plagues come 
in one day, death, and mourning, and 
famine; and she shall be utterly 
burned with fire: for strong zs the 
Lord God who judgeth her. 

g And the kings of the earth, 
who have committed fornication and 


REVELATION. XVIII. 


lived deliciously with her, shall be 
wail her, and nse for her, when 
they shall see the smoke of her 
burning, 

10 Standing afar off for the fear 
of her torment, saying, Alas, alas that 
great city Babylon, that mighty 





we are intended to bear this in mind.... 
The Roman Catholic Church is not only 
accidentally and de facto, but in virtue of its 
very principle, a Harlot .... the metropolis 
of whoredom, the mother of harlots (ch. 
xvii. 5). It is she who, more than others, 
boasts of herself: ‘I sit a Queen, and am no 
widow,” &c., J. ¢., p. 294. 


8. therefore|—The usual prophetic for- 
mula (dia rovro), see Amos ili. 11; Micah 
iii. 12. 

Or render, “seemourning. Therefore ..” 

in one day shall her plagues come,] 
Compare the lament of the poet: 


** Omnia ademit 
Una dies infesta tibi tot preemia vite.” 
Luc. iii. 911. 


See also Isai. xlvii. 9. The singular, in one 
day, is in contrast to the plural, her 
plagues—four in number (see below)— 
which shall come with a sudden destruction. 

Ebrard understands that the several plagues 
are to come on the same day; see the expres- 
sion “ iz one hour,” vv. 10, 17, 19. 

death,| Some take this to be pestilence— 
see on ch. ii. 23; vi. 8; but it is rather death 
by the hand of enemies that the context refers 
to. 

and mourning,].for the loss of her people, 
—see on ver. 7. 


and famine;| Here notes I. Williams, 
“are the red horse, and the black, and the 
pale of the four Seals (ch. vi.). And, though 
not expressly mentioned, it is implied, that 
He also on the White Horse is together 
with them ; for it is added, ‘ For strong is the 
Lord God who judgeth her’” (p. 370). 


and she shall be utterly burned with fire;| 
The punishment of the “ Harlot” in ch. xvii. 16 


for mighty +# the Lord God which 
judged 4er.) (See vv. //.). Compare ch. 
xvii. 17, where the event is expressly declared 
to have been overruled by God; as also the 
language of Ezek. xvi. 59; Amos iii. 6. 

Verses 9, 10 form “the fourth Strophe” 
(see on ver. 4):— 

9. And the kings of the earth,| See ver. 3; 
ch, xvii. 2; Ezek. xxvi. 16,17. Verses 9-19 
comprise (1) “ Kizgs,” the rulers of the world, 


New Test#—Vot. IV. 


who are combined in this lament with (2) the 
“ merchants” of the earth; and (3) those who 
traffic on the seas ;—indicating the universal 
character of the World-City. This varied 
imagery prevents an exclusive application te 
any one City—Babylon, Tyre, Jerusalem, 
Rome: see on ver. II. 

Burger would, at this point, divide the 
section (vv. 4-20) into ¢avo; because he con- 
siders that the description in vv. 9-20 cannot 
have proceeded from the “‘ voice from heaven” 
inver. 4. This section (wv. 9-20), accordingly, 
he ascribes to St. John himself; and he explains 
that the Seer was “here moved by the Spirit 
of Prophecy to insert in this place this lament 
over the fall of Babylon (founded on Old 
Test. passages such as Isai. xxiii; Ezek 
xxvi.; xxvii.) whereby the meaning of the 
future judgment described to him in vv, 
4-8 appears in its full light.” 

who committed fornication and lived 
wantonly with her,| Or luxuriously: see 
on ver. 7. Compare the dirge over Tyre, 
Ezek. xxvi. 15-xxvii. 36, into which the 
description here passes imperceptibly. 

shall weep and wail over her,| For the 
verb to wail, see on ch. i. 7. For similar 
lamentations see the dirge in Jer. xlix. 20-22, 
over Edom ; and in Jer. 1. 46, over Babylon. 
Note,—in this, the first lament, the tense used 
is the future; in the second, the present, vv. 
11-14; in the third, the past, vv. 17-19. 
This verse gives the standpoint of the pre= 
diction: what is still future is described 
here. 


when they look upon the smoke of ber 
burning,| These words are repeated in ver. 18, 
Words. notes :—“ Some of those very Powers, 
who were once vassals of Rome, will one day 
rise against her.... The reason of this 
[lament] seems to be that the Fal] of Rome 
may perhaps be followed by a triumph of 
Anarchy, and an outbreak of Injidelity.” 


10. standing afar of for the fear of ber 
torment,| Fearing lest they may “receive of 
her plagues,”—ver. 4. 

saying, Woe, woe,| The two-fold Woe 
expresses merely the depth of their sorrow, 
not, as Hengst. thinks, a reference to the 
‘doubling’ in ver. 6. Ewald (see on ch, 
xi. 14), explains that the end of ‘‘the third 


ccc 


769 


77° 


city! for in one hour is thy judg- 
ment come. 


11 And the merchants of the earth 
shall weep and mourn over her; for 


REVELATION. XVIII. 






[v. 11—12, 


no man buyeth their merchandise 
any more : 

12 The merchandise of gold, and 
silver, and precious stones, and of 





Woe” of ch. viii. 13, is realised in a twofold 
form, three times—here and in vv. 16, 19. 

the great City, Babylon, the mighty city!) 
Observe the nominative here,—not the da- 
tive (?), as in ch. viii. 13, or accusative, as in 
ch, xii, 12,—indicating not a denunciation of 
woe, but an exclamation of sorrow. 

Sor in one bour ss thy judgment come.| See 
wv. 17, 19,—and the phrase “in one day,” 
ver. 8 For the sense “suddenly,” see 
Jer. li. 8 (dpvw, LXX.). Ebrard urges that 
we must not here understand “suddenly” (as 
De Wette), or “in the same hour,” eadem 
bora, as in ch. 8 where the prep. (now 
omitted, see wv. //.) is found, and where 
more than one judgment is spoken of; but 
“swiftly,” in the space of ome hour. And 
he interprets, either that but ome hour has 
elapsed from the announcement (perhaps in 
ch. xvi. 12) to the coming of the judgment ; 
or that in the space of one (mystical) hour the 
fall of Babylon has been completed. In sup- 
port of the former interpretation, we may 
observe that the “Ten Kings” reign during 
one hour (see on ch. xvii. 12), and these (ch. 
xvii. 17) give their power to the Beast (s. 481). 
For the word “ Judgment,” see on ver. 20. 

Verses 11-16 form “the fifth Strophe” 
(see on ver. 4) :— 


ll. And the merchants of the earth| See 
onver.3. The “ Kings” represent the world’s 
secular and political power ; the “ Merchants” 
all who engage in the world’s struggle for 
mammon: cf. Ezek. xxvii. 3, 12-25. 

The passage Jas. iv. 13-v. 6 has been 
compared with these verses (especially the 
€uropevoducba of Jas. iv. 13 with the euopor 
of this chapter—vv. 3, 11, 15), bya writer in 
the Academy (March 16, 1878), who follows 
Zeller, quoted on ch. ii, ro. But the simi- 
larity is purely fanciful. 

weep and mourn over ber,| ‘The pre- 
sent tense (see vv. //.), the descriptive tone 
being assumed here (see on ver.9). Cf. the 
use Of the tenses in ch. xi. 9, ro. The future 
is resumed fully in ver. 15 (see on ver. 14). 


for no man buyeth| We may refer to ch. 
xili. 17 as illustrating the suitability of this 
judgment. Babylon had deprived all who 
would not serve her of the social right to 
“buy or sell;” and now she is herself com- 
pelled to buy no more. 


their merchandise any more;| Gr. ship’s 


burden, as in Acts xxi. 3—their freight, 
their cargo (rdv youov); Vulg. ‘ merces, 


“wares:” the word occurs in the N. T. 
only in this passage and in Acts xxi. 3. 
For the imagery see the prophecies against 
Tyre Isai. xxiii. ; and especially Ezek. xxvii. 

Vitringa and others feel that the features 
of this descriptive passage do not suit 
Rome, which was never at any period of 
her history the centre of the world’s com- 
merce. Vitringa, accordingly, would refer 
allegorically to “ spiritual wares” (“mystice,” 

. “Roma destructa, jacet emporium mer- 
cium spiritualium,’ p. 793). Words. notes: 
“The Church of Rome, ‘the general Mart 
of Christendom,’ has endeavoured to extend 
her spiritual traffic into all parts of the world.” 
Hengst. urges, as “ decisive against this view,” 
that the commerce here spoken of is altogether 
different from that of Tyre. It is merely 
said that “ Babyion Jought this merchan- 
dise; she does not se// the wares, but they 
merely serve for her use and consumption. 
Alford writes: “ The difficulty is not confined 
to the application of the prophecy to Rome 
Papal, but extends over the application of it 
to Rome at all, which last is determined for 
us by the solution given, ch. xvii. ult. For 
Rome never has been, and from its very posi- 
tion never could be a great commercial city. 
I leave this difficulty unsolved. ... The 
details of this mercantile lamentation far more 
nearly suit London than Rome at any assigne 
able period of her history.” 

See above the remarks on ver. 9:—The 
whole passage points not to any single city, 
at any one single period, but to the Worl 
City throughout all time. See the concluding 
paragraph of the Introduction. 


12, merchandise] Omit the article. 

Reuss disapproves of this passage: “ All the 
objects of luxury which formed the basis of 
the commerce and of the riches of the whole 
world are enumerated here with an evident 
sentiment of disdain and repulsion. Com- 
merce itself, so often signalized by the ancient 
prophets as an agent of corruption, as a 
destroying element of national purity, is also 
execrated by their disciple, who takes pleasure 
in making the inventory of its disaster.” 

Hengst. notes that “the 4ard materials of 
display,” as well as “the soft” are four in 
number, ‘the signature of the earth, which 
plays an important part in this chapter, 
occupied as it is with the fate of the mistress 
of the world.” 

Zullig divides the articles of luxury in this 
Passage into seven classes :— 


v. 13-] 


pearls, and fine linen, and purple, and 


- 1@x,enee. sill, and scarlet, and all 'thyine wood, 


and all manner vessels of ivory, and 
all manner vessels of most precious 
wood, and of brass, and iron, and 
marble, 


REVELATION. XVIII. 


13 And cinnamon, and odours, 
and ointments, and frankincense, and 
wine, and oil, and fine flour, and 
wheat, and beasts, and sheep, and 
horses, and chariots, and 'slaves, and tor, 
souls of men. ae 





(1) The first class of articles of luxury :-— 
precious wares. 


of gold, and silver, and precious stones,| Gr. 
precious stone,—see on ch. xv. 6; ch. xxi. 
19. Compare the attire of the “ Harlot,” ch. 
Xvii. 4. 

and pearls;] The genitive is naturally 
to be read here, as in the case of the pre- 
ceding and the following nouns,—see vv. //. 

(2) The second class of articles of luxury :— 
materials of rich attire. 


and of jine linen,| ‘The adjective is to be 
read,—see vv. /J.; Gr. of fine linen stuff. 
On the word rendered “ine linen,” see Note 
A on ch. xv. 6. 


and purple, and silk, and scarlet;| Each 
article specified here is an extreme instance 
of luxury :—the principal distinction of the 
Czsars was the military or imperial robe of 
purple (Gibbon, ch. xili.) As to the word 
rendered “si/k” (Gr. silken stuff), Virgil 
is the most ancient writer who expressly 
mentions the soft wool which was combed from 
the trees of the Seres or Chinese (“‘ Velleraque 
ut foliis depectunt tenuia Seres °—Georg. ii. 
121). So costly was this article of luxury 
that in the reign of Tiberius a law was passed 
against its use (“ ne vestis serica viros foedaret ” 
—Tac. Ann. il. 33) ; and it was not till the 
reign of Heliogabalus (A.D. 218) that this law 
was despised, and the Emperor first wore a 
dress composed wholly of silk (Aolosericum),— 
see Gibbon, ch. x.; Brande and Cox, Dict. of 
Science, art. silk. On the word rendered 
“ scarlet” (Gr. soarlet stuff), see on ch. 
xvii. 3. 
From genitives the construction now passes 
to accusatives, until the words “ horses, and 
ebhariots, and slaves,” in ver. 13, where the 
gen. is resumed. 

(3) The third class of articles of luxury :— 
materials for costly furniture. 

and all thyine wood,| The tree Thuja was 
called citrus, and its wood citrum by the 
Romans. It is mentioned by Homer (Odyss, 
iv. 52). Athenzus (v. p. 207) connects it 
with ivory, as here. It was commonly used 
for inlaying,—cf. Dioscorides (i. 21); Theo- 
phrastus (Hist. Plant.iii. 4). The Thuja is 
one of the cupressineous division of conifere, 
of which one species, the arbor vite, is com= 
mon in English gardens. Here we are to 
understand the related genus Callitris quadri- 


valvss of present botanists (the Thuja arts- 
culata of Desfont), a large tree of Barbary, 
yielding a hard fragrant wood, and also the 
aromatic gum-resin called Sandarach. Pliny 
(H. N. iii. 15) speaks of a mania at Rome for 
tables made of this material:—see Smith’s 
Dict. of the Bible; Brande and Cox, Dict. of 
Science. 


and every vessel of ivory, and every 
vessel [made] of most precious wood, and of 
brass, and iron, and marble;| Note the last 
four genitives depending on the preposition éx 


18. and cinnamon,| The ‘rst of— 

(4) The fourth class of luxuries :—precious 
Spices. 

“The bark of the Cinnamomum Zeylanicum, 
a lauraceous tree, native of Ceylon ;” it was 
imported into Judea by the Phcenicians or 
Arabians. It was a component of the holy 
oil, Ex. xxx. 23; a perfume for the bed, Prov. 
vii. 17:—see Smith’s Dict.; Brande and Cox, 
as before. 

The accusatives still continue—down to the 
word “ sheep” inclusive. 


and spice,| Gr. amomum,—an addition 
to the Textus Recepias (see vv. //.). 

“ Amomum,’ is a zingiberaceous plant with 
aromatic seeds, much employed under the 
name of cardamoms, grains of Paradise, &c. 3 
found only in the hot parts of India and 
Africa. The Romans prepared from it a 
fragrant balsam, and unguents for the hair :— 


‘* Assyrio semper tibi crinis amomo 
Splendeat.””—Mart. viii. 28. 


Cf. Virgil, Eel, iv. 25. 


and inoense,| The Greek word denotes 
the material, viz. gums,.spices, &c., which 
when burned produce the perfumed smoke 
known as incense, see Note A on ch. v. 8; 
and cf. ch. viii. 3; Luke i. ro. 


and ointment, and frankincense ;| Onthe 
word “frankincense” see Note C on ch 
Vili. 3. 
(5) The fifth class :—articles of food. 

and wine, and oil, and fine flour, and wheat ;| 
“ Fine flour” (cepidadis) “ the finest meal ”— 
see Gen. xviii. 6 ; Lev. ii, 1, 2 (LXX). 

(6) The sixth class:—merchandise for 
agricultural and domestic uses. 

and cattle, and sheep,| In Luke x. 34 
Acts xxiii. 24; 1 Cor. xv. 39, the Greek word 
(krjvos) is rendered “ beast ;” but it is better 


ccc 2 


77" 


772 


REVELATION. XVIII. 





[v. 14. 


14 And the fruits that thy soul and goodly are departed from thee, 


lusted after are departed from thee, 
and all things which were dainty 


and thou shalt find them no more 
at all. 





to render here “oattle:” “east” in the 
Apoc. is Onpiov—e.g. ch. vi. 8; xiii. 1; cf. 
‘obit x. Io. 
Note,—the series of accusatives ends here. 


and [merchandise] of horses, and chariots ;| 
The construction with genitives is now re- 
sumed, see on ver. 12. The noun ren- 
dered “ chariot” (pé5n,—not dpa used in 
ch. ix.9; Acts viii. 28), Quinctilian states 
to have been a Gaulish carriage with four 
wheels (Isidor. xx. 17):—see Grimm in 
woc. Alexander Severus supplied the Roman 
senators with carriages of this kind orna- 
mented with silver (Lamprid., ap. Wetstein, 
writes: “interesse Romane dignitatis putans 
ut his tante urbis senatores vectarentur ”). 

(7) The seventh class of merchandise, 
according to Zillig :—the traffic in men. 

and of slaves,| Gr. (merchandise) of 
bodies (caparav, Vulg. mancipia); cf. Tob. 
K. 10 (A.V. “ servants”); 2 Macc. vili. 11 (A.V. 
“ captives”); see the next note. In classic 
Greek the expression was “servile bodies” (ca- 
pata SovAa):—see Pollux, iii. 78; Lob. ad 
Pbryn. p. 378. Vitringa quoting Gen. xxxiv. 
29, “all their wealth” (LXX. mavta ta 
@opara avtov), explains here, “ instrumenta 
quelibet domestica.” 

The series of genitives ends here. 


and [the] souls of men.] “Souls” in the ac- 
cus. Or lives. This phrase is borrowed from 
the usage of the Old Test. In Ezek. xxvii. 13, 
“the souls of men” (DIN wWbI3,—LXX. ev 
youxais avéparav,—A.V.“‘ thepersons of men”) 
are enumerated as part of the traffic of Tyre 
—see the note in Joc. The A.V. translates by 
“ dersons” in Gen. xxxvi. 6 (LXX. 71a co@para); 
Num. xxxi. 35 ;—by “sou/s” in Gen. xii. 5 ;— 
by “men” simply in 1 Chron. v. 21 (where 
the Hebrew and the LXX. have “ souls of 
men”). The translation by the LXX. in 
Gen. xxxvi. 6 (see above) of the Hebrew 
“ souls” by the Greek “ dodies,” is urged in 
proof that “s/aves” (see the last note) and 
“ souls of men” are equivalent expressions. 
The difference of construction, however, 
points to a difference of meaning; appar- 
ently to different kinds of slaves. 

Wetstein understands by “souls of men” 
gladiators ;—Grotius and Ziillig take “ souls 
of men” to mean slaves properly so called; 
and “‘ 4odies of men” to mean persons of free 
condition who offer themselves for hire, e.g., 
mercenary soldiers, hired labourers, &c. ;— 
Ewald thinks that “ bodies” denote male and 
% souls of men” female slaves (in loc., s. 313) ;— 
Rengel, Hengst., Disterd., Alf, and others, 


refer the word “ bodies” to saves empl 
about horses and chariots (with which 
are united by construction), and “ souls” to 
slaves in general;—Ebrard, takes “souls of 
men” literally; and applies this text to the 
spiritual danger to the “ sou/” resulting from 
this luxurious traffic. The expression, accord 
ingly, does not denote the last among many 
articles of commerce; but refers to all that 
went before, and sums up the results of 
Babylon’s spirit of luxury and world-traffic 
whereby “sou/s” were ruined, and sold into 
the slavery of the Dragon (s. 484) ;—Words. 
notes, not very differently, that the reser- 
vation of the last two classes for the close of 
the catalogue “appears to be designed to 
remind the reader that it is a spiritual come 
merce which is here described: a commerce 
in bodies and souls of men; a spiritual slave- 
trade. Such is the commerce of Rome;— 
Vitringa rejects this meaning (p. 794). 

I. Williams thus expounds the passage: 
“« All these things which are so minntely par= 
ticularized, as expressive of the meshes of that 
net by which men’s souls are taken, have also 
their place in the New Jerusalem, where 
every jewel is specified by name, and the gold 
of its streets, and the fine linen, and the in- 
cense, and the wine, and the oil, its white 
norses also. In both alike must they stand 
for spiritual merchandise of good and evil, the 
false riches and the true” (p. 374). 


14. And the fruits] Gr. the harvest— 
a noun found only here in the N. Test.; the 
“ summer fruits” of Jer. xl. to. 


which thy soul lusted after are gone from 
thee,| A Hebrew idiom (see vv. //.). 

and all things that were dainty] Gr. 
“oily,” and hence “splendid,”—found only 
here (Greek and English) in the N. T. 


and sumptuous] As in Luke xvi. rg. 
are perished from thee,| See vv. il. 


and [men] shall find them zo more at 
all.| Gr. “they shall find them”—see 
vu. Il. 

The connexion of this fourteenth verse with 
the rest of the passage has greatly perplexed 
commentators. The change to the second 
person led Vitr. (p. 794), after Beza and 
Launoy, to conclude that the verse should 
come between vv. 23 and 24;—Ewald suggests 
that it is a marginal note by St. John himself, 
who for the moment found no suitable place 
for the thought ;—It is an apostrophe, notes 
Stuart, after the manner of the Hebrew 
prophets, resulting from excitement in the 


v. 15—17.] 


15 The merchants of these things, 
which were made rich by her, shall 
stand afar off for the fear of her tor- 
ment, weeping and wailing, 

16 And saying, Alas, alas that 

eat city, that was clothed in fine 
inen, and purple, and scarlet, and 


REVELATION. XVIII. 


decked with gold, and precious stones, 
and pearls ! 

17 For in one hour so great riches 
is come to nought. And every ship- 
master, and all the company in ships, 
and sailors, and as many as trade by 
sea, stood afar off, 





mind of the wnter (cf. Isai. xiv. 10; xlvii. 1-3) ;— 
Disterd. thinks that, as in ver. 9, the “ Kings,” 
so here the “ Merchants,” utter their lament 
over the City;— Alford connects with ver. 11, as 
if we had there “ our,” not “ their ” merchan- 
dise ;—This interruption, writes Ziillig, is “a 
flash from the blue heaven,” as in ch. xvi. 15; 
—Burger would divide the entire section (vv. 
4-20) at ver. 9—see above on ver. 9. 

Hengst. however, is clearly right in regard- 
ing this whole passage, vv. 4-20, as uttered by 
the voice from heaven directed to Babylon. 
In like manner, in ver. 22, Babylon is 
addressed by the Angel of ver. 21, after he 
had previously spoken of her in the third 
person. 


15. The merchants of these things,| See 
wv. 12-14,—especially the “ dainty and sump- 
tuous” things mentioned in ver. 14. 

who were made rich by her,| The cause of 
the lamentation is specified. 


shall stand afar off| The future is now 
used. 


for the fear of ber torment, weeping and 
mourning;] Ver. 11 is here resumed, after 
the interposed description of the City’s 
luxury. 

16. saying, Woe, woe,] (Omit “and”— 
see vv. /l.). 

This verse corresponds closely to ver. 10, 
the lament of the “ Kings.” 


the great city, she that was arrayed] 
Note the nominative absolute, as in ver. Io. 
Cf. this description with that of the “ Woman,” 
in ch. xvii. 4; and on this alternation of 
“ Woman,’ and “ City,” cf. ch. xvii. 16. For 
the particulars see ver. 12. 


and decked| Gr. gilded. See ch. xvii. 4. 


and precious stones and pearls!| See 
wv. /j..—Gr. precious stone and pearl— 
see on ver. 12; and cf. ch. xxi. 18, 19. 
The “ Kings,” ver. 10, mourn over Babylon 
as “the mighty City;” the “ Merchants” 
mourn for the City of Juxury. 

Burger notes that the City is here described 
exactly as it had been shewn to the Seer in 
ch. xvii. 4,— magnificent and luxurious. 
Expositors, he adds, who understand by the 
“ Woman,’ in ch. xvii. 1, the Papacy, will have 
trouble in adjusting this verse with the whole 


description which entirely confirms the con- 
clusion that the “ Harlot” isthe great World- 
City of the last W orld-Empire—the Babylon of 
the Last Times, whose judgment, announced in 
ch. xiv. 8, is recorded in ch. xvi. 19. See 
however the note on ver. 20. 


17. for in one hour so great riches is made 
desolate.| In the Greek texts, and accord- 
ing to the natural connexion, these words 
belong to ver. 16. 

Here, as in ver. 10, mention is made of 
“ one hour” as the period within which all 
this magnificence is to come to an end. 

Verses 17-19 form “the sixth Strophe” 
(see on ver. 4) :— 

And every shipmaster,| Gr. pilot. This 
word is found elsewhere only in Acts xxvii. 
11; cf. Ezek. xxvii. 27. In the addition of 
this third class—sea-faring men (see on ver. 9) 
—Ebrard sees a reference to the typical “any 
waters” of ch. xvii. 1. 


and every one that saileth any 
whither,|] So Alf—see vv. //. Gr. who 
saileth to a place (cf. Acts xxvii. 2);— 
and so the Vulgate: “et omnis qui in locum 
navigat ;—every one who saileth to 
the place (Words.);—Bengel, Ebrard, 
Hengst., Diisterd., Bisping, &c., render that 
saileth to a definite haven;—De Wette 
translates: “‘ Nach einem Orte schiffen” (but 
in his commentary he renders Kisten-fabrer, 
as the A.V. of Acts xxvii. 2, “ meaning to sail 
by the coasts of Asia”);—I1. Williams: 
every one at the place as he saileth 
by, comparing Jer. xviii. 16, of Judah, and 
Zeph. ii. 15, of Nineveh. 

(1) After the “i/ot” the person who navi- 
gates the ship, and directs her course—(2) the 
Captain is next mentioned. 


and mariners,| Here are mentioned 
(3) all who work the ship. 


and as many as gain their living dy sea,] 
A classical phrase; Gr. “as many as work 
the sea,” “mare exercent.” 

(4) All are now denoted who are in any 
way interested in the sea, whether as sailors, 
or fishermen, or divers for pearls, &c. The 
fundamental passage here is Ezek. xxvii. 26, 
&c., where the subject is the fall of Tyre. 


stood afar off,| Like the “ Kings” and 
“ Merchants” in vv. 10, 15, and of their 


773 


774 


18 And cried when they saw the 
smoke of her burning, saying, What 
city is like unto this great city ! 

19 And they cast dust on their 
heads, and cried, weeping and wail- 
ing, saying, Alas, alas that great city, 


lament ;—the other features also are repeated 
in this Strophe, viz. the mention of the 
grandeur of the City (vv. 10, 16, 18), and 
the exclamation at its downfall, vv. 10, 
16, 19. 

Observe also that in vv. 17, 18, 19, the past 
tense (€orncav) is used. In ver. 15 (as in 
vw. 8, 9) the future is resumed; and in ver. 11 
we have the present. 

Reuss notes that “the past tense of the 
Apokalyptik style is all of a sudden resumed 
here ”—see Note A at the end of this chapter. 
The change of tenses, however, rests alto- 
gether on the animated character of the 
description. 

18. and cried out as they looked 
upon] See vv. //.; and cf. ver. 9. 

saying, What [city] is like the great 
city?| Cf. Ezek. xxvii. 32, where Tyre is 
spoken of. Ebrard compares ch. xiii. 4, 
where the Beast from the sea, or “Babylon 
gua World-power, is similarly eulogized ” 
(s. 486). 

19. And they cast dust upon their heads,| 
See again Ezek. xxvil. 30; cf. Job ii. 12; 
Lam. ii. 10. 

weeping and mourning,| See vv. 11, 15. 


Saying, Woe, woe, the great city,] As 
in vv. 10, 16, we have the nominative case. 

wherein were made rich| Alford would 
render “whereby;”—he writes: “ey is 
ambiguous at first appearance, but from 
what follows it cannot be local, as E.V. 
* wherein.” 

all that had their ships in the sea] See 
vv. /l. for the introduction of the article. 


by reason of her costliness!| The substan- 
tive (rip.drns) is found only here (for the adj. 
see ch. xvii. 4; James v. 7). By reason of (see 
ver. 3) her costly treasures of gold and silver, 
all that trade by sea were made rich: cf. 
Ezek. xxvii. 33—a chapter which, once more, 
as throughout this passage, is followed. 

for in one hour is she made desolate.| ‘The 
expression “in one hour” is thrice repeated, 
VU. 10, 17, 19. 

On this lament I. Williams notes: “‘ There 
is something especially mournful in the fall 
of great cities, as in that celebrated passage 
of antiquity: ‘On returning from Asia, as 
I sailed from A’gina towards Megara, I began 
to look on the regions around. Behind me 


REVELATION. XVIII. 





[v. 18—20, 


wherein were made rich all that had 
ships in the sea by reason of her cost- 
liness! for in one hour is she made 
desolate. 

20 Rejoice over her, thou hea- 
ven, and ye holy apostles and pro- 


was A‘gina, before Megara, on the right hand 
Pireus, on the left was Corinth; cities 
which at one time were most flourishing, 
now they lay before the eyes prostrate and in 
ruins ’"—Epist. Sulpic. Cicer.” (p. 376). 


20. Rejoice over her, thou heaven,| We 
have here the section interposed between the 
sixth and the seventh clause. Ch. xix. is the 
response to this invitation, uttered—not by the 
“ shipmaster” and “mariners” (ver. 17) whom 
it would not suit,—nor yet by St. John, who is 
the passive beholder of the Vision,—but by the 
celestial voice (as in ch. xii. 12) from which 
proceeded all between ver. 4 and the present 
verse: see on ver 14. This verse, in fact, 
is “as it were an Epistrophe to the six 
Strophes” (Ebrard):—see on ver. 4. Cf 
Deut. xxxii. 43 (LXX.); Isai. xliv. 23; xlix. 
13; Jer. li. 48. I. Williams understands ch. 
xix. I to correspond to the word “ Heaven”; 
and ch. xix. 4, where the Church is symbol- 
ized by the Twenty-four Elders, to correspond 
to the “ Apostles and Prophets”—ch. xix. 5, 
referring to the “Saints.” The parallel in 
ch. xii. 12 proves that the speaker is not, as 
Zillig and Burger suppose, St. John himself. 


and ye saints, and ye apostles, and 
ye prophets;| (See vv.i/.). Not only Heaven, 
but those also who belong to the Lord on 
earth (see Phil. iii. 20) are invited to rejoice 
over the fallen City. Believers on earth are 
specially enumerated here, as “ the Saints,” 
“the Apostles,” “the Prophets;” they are 
classed more summarily in ver. 24, in ch. xi. 
18, and in Luke xi. 49-51. Hengst. restricts 
“the Apostles” to the Twelve, as in ch, 
xxi. 14 ;—Ziillig understands by them all 
teachers “sent forth,” e.g. Barnabas, Acts 
xili. 3; Epaphroditus, Phil. ii. 25; cf. Rom. 
xvi. ;—Ebrard makes the “ Apostles and Proe 
phets” to represent “the martyrs of Jesus,” 
ch. xvii. 6. 

Licke (s. 389) argues from these words 
that because the Apostles are here assumed 
to be in heaven, the Apocalypse was not 
written by the Apostle John. To this Dis- 
terd. answers that one might as well argue 
from the verse that the writer of the Apoe 
calypse was not a prophet, or that he was 
not an Apostle; and Godet (St. John’s 
Gospel, i. 56)—having observed that the 
passage proves that when the Apocalypse 
was written there were in heaven some 


v. 2I—22.,] 


phets; for God hath avenged you on 
her. 

21 And a mighty angel took up a 
stone like a great millstone, and cast 
it into the sea, saying, Thus with 
violence shall that great city Babylon 
be thrown down, and shall be found 
no more at all, 


REVELATION. XVIII. 


22 And the voice of harpers, and 
musicians, and of pipers, and trum- 
peters, shall be heard no more at all 
in thee; and no craftsman, of what- 
soever craft he be, shall be® found any 
more in thee; and the sound of a 
millstone shall be heard no more at 
all in thee ; 





gaints, apostles, and prophets, who had 
suffered martyrdom—adds: “ But ‘some 
apostles’ are not a// the Apostles, any more 
than ‘some saints’ are a// the saints.” 

From Acts xii. 2 we learn that the Apostle 
James had been put to death, Renan regards 
this verse as confirming the tradition that 
St. Peter and St. Paul suffered martyrdom 
at Rome.—p. 185. Reuss observes that 
“the prophets are the Christian orators 
known from the Acts and the Epistles; 
Rome was not guilty of having shed the 
blood of those of the Old Testament.” With 
reference to the narrative of the martyrdom 
of St. John by the Jews, as alleged in the 
chronicle of Georgius Hamartélos (Cent. ix.), 
—which Keim (/.c., i.s. 42) adduces in order 
to shew that the Apostle John was never in 
Asia Minor,—see Introd. § 4. 


for God hathjudged your judgment on 
her.| On this use of the preposition (x) cf. 
ch. vi. 10; xix. 2. 

This passage, we may perhaps conclude, 
refers to the prayer of the Martyrs under the 
fifth Seal (ch. vi. 10), and to the acknow- 
Iedgment of God’s judgments under the 
third Vial (ch. xvi. 5-7): and we may under- 
stand by “your judgment,” (1) Either‘ what 
you have judged,’ or ‘what she hath judged 
concerning you’ ;—(2) After the analogy of 
Isai. x. 2; Micah vii. 9 (LXX.), ‘ what seemed 
right to you” (For 76 xpiya here, cf. ch, 
xvii. 1; xx. 4; John ix. 39. For 7 xpious 
ver. 10, cf, ch. xiv. 7; xix. 2; John iii, 19; 
v. 22, 29, 30). Hengst. explains: “ Your 
judgment (cf. ch. xvii. 1; xx. 4), the doom 
which she pronounced upon you, the judg- 
ment which she held over you, your con- 
demnation (ch. vi. 10, and cf. ch. xiii, 10).” 
Words. translates: “for God judged your 
eauso from out of her; that is, He has 
taken your cause out of ber bands into 
His own—Ps. ix. 4; cxl. 12.” Alf.: “ God 
hath exacted from her that judgment of 
wengeance which is due to you.” Diisterd.: 
“It is called a judgment of believers (‘your 
judgment’), so far as this judgment executed 
on the City (‘taken from her”) is the justifica- 
tion and satisfaction of the believers who had 
been ted by the World-City, but who 
are now avenged on her.” 


THE THIRD ANGEL (21-24). 


The third Angel (see vv. 1, 4) now enters 
on the scene. 

21. Andastrong Angel] Gr. one strong 
{or mighty] Angel, cf. ch. viii. 13. The 
epithet “mighty” refers to the task to be 
performed,—cf. ver. 1; ch. v. 2; x. I. 

took up a stone as it were a great millstone, | 
(See vv. //. :—note the forms of this expres- 
sion in Matt. xviii. 6; Mark ix. 42; Luke 
xvii. 2). Cf. ch. viii. 8, for a similar image. 

and cast it into the sea,| The figure is 
borrowed from the symbolical action come 
mitted to Seraiah by Jeremiah (li. 61-64): 
“Thou shalt bind a stone to it, and cast it 
into the midst of Euphrates: and thou shalt 
say, Thus shall Babylon sink,” &c. Here the 
image is intensified by being changed into 
that of “a great millstone,’—with plain 
reference to the words of Christ as to those 
who cause to offend, Matt. xviii. 6. 

The Euphrates, the river of Jeremiah’s 
prophecy, has now become a sea. 

saying, Thus with a mighty fall shall 
Babylon the great City, be cast down,] 
The noun (éppnpa) is found only here ;—on 
the cognate verb cf. Matt. viii. 32 and the 
parallel passages. 

and shall be found no more at all.| The 
total disappearance is denoted, as a great 
stone sinks beneath the waters :—cf. Ex. xv. 
5; Neh. ix. 11. Observe,—the phrase “no 
more at all” occurs six times in vv. 21-23. 

“They who say that the Apocalyptic 
Babylon fell when Rome was taken by the 
Goths, contradict this voice of the Angel” 
(Words.). 


2.2. And the voice of harpers andminstrels 
and fluteplayers| This imagery, expressive 
of complete desolation, is borrowed from 
Isai. xxiv. 8; Ezek. xxvi. 13. 

and no craftsman of whatsoever craft 
[be be] shall be found any more at all im 
thee;| Gr. no oraftsman of every 
eraft—words which important authorities 
omit, see vv. H, 

and the voice of a mill] See Matt 
xxiv. 41. Compare the reading in ver. 21 
Ortranslate “the voice of a millstone.” 


775 


776 


23 And the light of a candle shall 
shine no more at all in thee; and 
the voice of the bridegroom and of 
the "ride shall be heard no more at 
all in thee: for thy merchants were 
the great men of the earth; for by 


REVELATION. XVIIL 






[v. 23—24. 


thy sorceries were all nations de- 
ceived. 

24 And in her was found the 
blood of prophets, and of saints, and 
of all that were slain upon the 
earth. 





23. And the light of a lamp shall shine} 
The word signifying “ /amp” occurs here for 
the first time in the Apoc. :—cf. ch. iv. 5; viii. 
to. The verb is rendered as if accentuated 
as the active (avn); if accentuated as the 
passive (pav7), render “shall be seen.” 


and the voice of the bridegroom and of the 
bride] The imagery of this whole passage 
is founded on Jer. xxv. 10:—see also Jer. 
Wii. 343 XVI. 95 xxxili. 11. 

Sor thy merchants were the princes of the 
earth;| See on ch. vi. 15. Burger takes 
“the princes of the earth” as thesubject 
here—‘they were thy Merchants’ (see 
vv.ll.); which he thinks suits best the order 
of the /aments, ver. 9, &c., and also the de- 
scription of ch. xvii. 2, The expressions here 
are founded on the language used of Tyre in 
Isai. xxiii. 8. The words refer not to the 
merchants of Babylon itself, but to “ the 
Merchants of the earth” who “ waxed rich b 
the power of her wantonness,” ver. 3; cf. 
ver. 15 ; Ezek. xxvii. 21, &c. Renan (p. 442) 
admits that this feature of the description is 
not very well suited to Rome. 

In the phrase “the princes of the earth” 
are combined the classes specified separately in 
ver. 3,and in vv. 9—16,—viz. the ‘“‘ Kings ” and 
the “ Merchants” of the earth, who share in 
the fall of the Great City. The cause of “the 
princes of the earth ” waxing rich, by means 
of that traffic with Babylon which supplied 
the luxury and the enjoyments that are now 
no more, is added in the next clause,— 


Jorwith thy sorcery were ail the nations 
deceived.| (See on ch. ix. 21). That is, 
because all the nations had been allured by 
her seductions (ch. xvii. 2); and all the 
world’s treasures had flowed into her lap. By 
the guilty seductions of Babylon (Isai. xlvil. 
9-12), as described in ch. xiv. 8; xviii. 3, 
all the nations have been deceived, and, 
Owing to this cause, been subjected to her 
dominion. 

Stuart rightly takes the last two clauses, each 
beginning with “for” (dr), as “separate 
and co-ordinate reasons for the ruin that had 
just been predicted.” I. Williams takes these 
two clauses “to. mark the Tyre and the 
Nineveh of the prophets—Tyre, ‘ the crown- 
ing city whose merchants were princes’ 
(Isai. xxiii. 8) ; and Nineveh, ‘the mistress of 
witchcrafts’ (Nah. iii. 4)—both tvpes of the 


days of merchandise polluting the Christian 
Church with the ‘whoredoms and witchcrafts 
of Jezebels’ (2 Kings ix. 22)”...“ As the 
Balaam of the Seven Epistles was the fore- 
runner of the False Prophet,—so Jezebel 
of the great Harlot, Babylon” (p. 382). See 
also on ver. 24. 


24. And inher was found) The Angel now 
ceases to address the fallen City; and, adopting 
the narrative style, speaks out this last great 
cause of her overthrow as a fact respecting 
her. 


the blood of prophets and of saints, and o 
all that have been slain on the earth. 
To what is said in ver. 20 is added here “ 9 
all that have been slain on the earth. 
“From this passage,” says Andreas, “ we are 
confirmed that the prophecy is of the world, 
and not of one city” (Ac, p. 105) I. 
Williams refers to Matt. xxiii. 29, 35, 36; 
Luke xi. 49, 51; xi. 332 sant asked 
how can the blood of saints shed by heathen 
Rome be required of this mystical Jeru- 
salem? it is the same as to ask how the blood 
of Abel could be required of Jerusalem” 

. 383). 
herd takes the two co-ordinate clauses 
of ver. 23 beginning with “for,” together 
with this verse, to state a threefold denun- 
ciation of the guilt of Babylon—(1) on 
account of her luxury (see wv. 3, 11); (2) 
of her lasciviousness (vv. 3, 6, 9); (3) of her 
blood-stained hatred of believers (ch. xvii. 6): 
— And thus the discourse of the Angel is 
closed by a definite statement of the guilt 
of the City.” 

Auberlen—who represents Babylon as 
meaning the Church, “the Harlot of the New 
Covenant,”—writes : “ Nor must we confine 
our thoughts here to cases like those of 
Huss, the Waldenses, the Huguenots, the 
British Martyrs, &c., or the martyrs which 
are yet future; but bear in mind the words 
‘Whoso hateth his brother is a murderer’ 
(x John iii, 15). Wherever true faithful 
Christians are neglected and oppressed by 
the rulers of the Church .... there we com- 
mit murder against the saints of God” (Le 

. 290). 
: Be his as it may the result is clearly this, 
that as Jerusalem filled up the measure of its 
sin by the rejection of the Saviour, and must 
also now expiate the guilt which had been 


REVELATION. XIX. 


mcurred by Israel in past generations (Matt. 
xxiii. 35), so must the World-City of the 
Last Days. 

With this Vision the judgment on Babylon 


is completed and sealed. To she present 
section (ch. xvii. 1-ch. xix. 10) belongs the 
scene in heaven which corresponds to the 
invitation of ch. xviii. 20. 


ADDITIONAL NOTE on Chap. XVIII. 


Nore A ON CHAP. xviii‘ APOKALYPTIK.” 


The modern conception of “ Apokalyptik ” 
has been already discussed in the Introduc- 
tion, § 9. This conception has been favoured 
by such orthodox writers as Auberlen (/.c., p. 
80, &c.). Rationalists also have adopted it; 
and rationalistic writers seek to combine the 
notion of “Apokalyptik” with their own 
theory as to Prophecy (see on ver. 18). For 
Rationalists, “an ordinary Prophet” is but 
a moral teacher whose vision is bounded by 
the horizon of his own time—by “the real and 
actual situation.” Prophecy includes no fre- 
dictive element; and—as Rationalists deny the 
existence of the Supernatural—no Prophet 
possesses an insight into the future. 

To give an example :—Although, notes 
Reuss (p. 127), ch. xviii. is one of the most 
simple and easy of the entire Book, it has 
nevertheless presented the difficulty of de- 
termining the precise moment at which the 
Seer places the ruin of Rome, predicted in 


CHAPTER XIX. 


8 God is praised in heaven for judging 
the great whore, and avenging the blood 


ch. xvii., and positively accomplished when 
ch. xix. begins. Thereader may at first sight 
hesitate whether “the three voices which here 
celebrate in succession the fall of the Capital, 
prophesy the future or speak of an accom- 
plished catastrophe.” The author, adds Reuss, 
here abandons the framework of his “ Apo- 
calyptic” drama, and speaks as an ordinary 
prophet from the point of view of the real 
and actual situation. From the “ Apocalyptic” 
point of view there should be, when Rome is 
destroyed, only the elect on one side, and on 
the other the Romans and their adherents, 
whom Antichrist [Nero] and his Oriental 
army have devoted to death. But now, from 
the point of view of simple prophecy—the 
colours of its pictures being borrowed from 
the Old Test.—we hear of men im great 
numbers, who, ruined politically by the fall of 
Rome, but not included in her catastrophe, 
shall mourn over her destiny from motives of 
interest rather than of pity. See Note A on 
ch. i. 1. 


of his saints. 7 The marriage of the 
Lamb. 10 The angel will not be wore 
shipped. 17 The fowls called to the great 


slaughter 





[Ver. 1 om. 1st xai—as govnv.—rcydrtav.—om. Kai 9 TYun.—om. Kupia.—rod Ceod. 


Ver. 5 azo r. 6p.—1d Ocd.—om. xai before of po8.—om. xai before of prxpoi. 
C breaks off here). Ver. 6 Aeyovrwv.—[N, B, P read 6 ©. npdr}. 


8acopev]. Ver. 8 Aaumpdr, xadapdv. 


(Codex 
Ver. 7 [A reads 
Ver. 9 [A reads of adn6.].—rod Geod ciciv. Ver. 11 


[A, P, 1 omit xaXovpevos]. Ver. 12[8, B, P, 1 omit os|—[B, Syr., Andr. read Eyer évopara 
yeypappéva, kat 6vopa yeyp.]. Ver. 13 [Nreads repipepaypevov,—ct. Pepavricpevor, Heb. x. 22]. 


—KEKANTat. 
om. 2nd rd. 


ef. 14 ra €v TO Ovp.—hevkdy, Kabapdv. Ver. 15 rou Gupov trys opyjs. Ver. 16 
Ver. 17 dedre cuvaxGnre [1 reads Setre cis ro Seixv., and Er. supplied kai 


ouvayeoGe from the et congregamini of the Vulg.].—r. detmvov ro péya tov. Ver. 18 


Crevbepav te cat. Ver. 19 Tov wédepor. 
S = ; 
per avrov 6].—r7ys Katopévns.—ev Oeio. 


Ver. 20 xat per avrod 6 [A, Cop. read xai of 
Ver. 21 77 e&eAOovon [so also in 1; but Er 


altered this reading after the qui procedit of the Vulg.; cf. ch. i. 16; xix. 15].] 


This chapter, in vv. 1-8, gives the response 
to the invocation of ch. xviii. 20. Judgment 
has been inflicted on the “ Harlot” (ch. xvii. 
1) ; and as the downfall of the “‘ Accuser” had 
peen followed by a hymn of praise (ch. xii. ro), 
go now a heavenly Hallelujah celebrates the 
first act of the final sentence upon the anti- 
christian powers which served as Satan’s 
instruments. At each crisis in the Apoca- 

> 


lypse we find a similar hymn of praise—ch. 
IVs S$ Vig) Wiis, 105) XL E55 XVe 3 3,-XVL 55 

It is to be noted that from this point 
onwards the Apocalypse follows the course 
of the closing chapters of Ezekiel, from ch. 
xxxvi. to the end:—There, the land of Israel 
is comforted, and a resurrection of the dead 
is described (Ezek. xxxvi.; xxxvii.); then 
comes “ the Gog-catastrophe” (Ezek. xxxviii.; 


777 


778 


A ND after these things I heard a 
great voice of much people in 
heaven, saying, Alleluia; Salvation, 


REVELATION. XIX. 






[v. 1—2, 


and glory, and honour, and power, 
unto the Lord our God : : 
2-For true and righteous are his 





xxxix.); then we read of a new Heaven 
and a new Jerusalem in a new Holy Land 
resembling Paradise. 

Hengst..—who considers that in St. John’s 
time the Beast oppressed the Church by the 
instrumentality of the “sixth Head,’ or 
heathen monarchy of Rome (see on ch. 
Xvii. 1),— concludes that now, in answer to the 
voice of the Angel in ch. xviii. 20, the Church 
of the just made perfect celebrates God’s 
judgment on Rome, (1) by the Hallelujah of 
the Saints (wv. 1-3), and (2) in ver. 4, by the 
Hallelujah of “ the four and twenty Elders,” or 
representatives of the Church—see on ch. iv. 
4- Here, as exhibited in the Vision, a past 
salvation is celebrated; and on this follows, 
in vv. 5-8, another Hymna which by faith anti- 
cipates what is to come, and introduces a 
narrative of how such anticipations are gradu- 
ally realized. The Song of praise and the 
Vision of the Bride are intended to give 
support under the sad picture cf ch. xviii. 
In vv. 9, loa new command to “ write,” as in 
ch. xiv. 13, is given; and then—in vv. 11-21 
which enlarge on the intimations of ch. xvii— 
the victory of Christ over the “Ten Kings” 
is recorded :—on the defeat of Attila, notes 
Hengst., the battle-field of Chalons was 
strewn with 162,000 corpses. We next read of 
the destruction (ver. 20) of #qwo of the three 
enemies of God’s Kingdom, of whom we were 
told in ch. xiii.; | while ch. xx. 1-6 represents 
how the #¢4ird, Satan, is rendered for a time 
harmless. 

Ebrard regards vv. 1-10 as marking the 
transition to the second part of the seventh 
Vial (see on ch. xvi. 21). The first judgment 
under this Vial, or the fall of Babylon (ch. 
Xvi. 19), having been developed in ch. xvii. 
and ch. xviii., the second judgment, or that on 
the Beast from the Abyss and the agents by 
whose aid the sentence on Babylon had been 
executed, is now recorded in ch. xix. 11-21. 
This judgment Ebrard calls “ The marriage of 
the Lamb” (ver. 7); and it brings to an end 
the three and a half days during which the 
Beast from the Abyss (ch. xi. 7-11)—the 
eighth World-power (ch. xvii. 11)}—is to 
rule. 

In the description of the Apocalyptic judg- 
ment in ch. xvii—xix., notes Auberlen (/. c., 

317), “we are struck by this remarkable 

ifference, that the Harlot is judged first by 
the Beast and his Kings, and that afterwards 
the Beasts and their allies are judged by the 
‘ Parusia’ [L.e., “ the Presence” or “ Coming,” 
2 Thess. ii. 8; 1 John ii. 28] of the Lord 
Jesus himself.” 


CHAP. XIX.—THE SONG OF TRIUMPH (1-4), 


1. After these things.| Omit “ And”—see 
vv. Il. 


I heard as it werea great voice.) The 
addition of ‘‘as it were” (see vv. //., and 
cf. ver. 6) denotes that what St. John now 
hears merely resembles the voice of a mul- 
titude. It is not necessarily the voice of the 
Saints spoken of in ch. xviii. 20 (Bengel, 
Hengst., Ebrard, &c.); or of the Angelic 
host (Ziillig); or of those described in ch, 
vii. 9, 14 (De Wette);—the words merely 
express ‘a voice loud as that of a great 
multitude.’ 


ofagreat multitude in heaven, saying,] 
The participle “saying” is in the genitive 
plural (see vv. //.), agreeing with the cole 
lective noun, “multitude” in the singular. 


Hallelujah;] The frst Hebrew words 
of Ps. cxxxv. 1, signifying “Praise ye the 
Lord,” 

We are given in ver. 5, after St. John’s 
manner (cf. ch. ix. 11), a translation of this 
Hebrew formula, which occurs in the New 
Test. only in this chapter (four times, notes 
Hengst., and “in reference to the victory of 
God over the Earth, the signature of which is 
four).” It is borrowed from the Psalms, of 
which fifteen either begin or end with 
Hallelujah. This phrase Hallelujah, like the 
“Amen” (Ps. xli. 14) and the “ Hosanna” 
(John xii. 13; Ps. cxviil. 25) of the Psalms has 
become current in our language; it is found in 
the Psalter for the first time in the /ast words 
of Ps. civ. 35, where R. Kimchi notes that in 
the Psalms and elsewhere Hallelujah chiefly 
appears where mention is made of the pun- 
ishment of the ungodly. Thus it is used 
here also. The Jewish “Te Deum,” as it is 
called, consisting of Ps. civ.—cix., chiefly sung 
at the Feasts of the Passover and of Taber- 
nacles, derived its title of ‘‘ The great Hallel” 
from the frequent use in those Psalms of the 
phrase Hallelujah. Here, then, we have the 
great Hallelujah of the Apocalypse; and the 
Christian “Te Deum” has thus its counter- 
part in Heaven. 


Salvation, and glory,and power, belon 
unto our God:] (Omit “and honour,” 
“the Lord,’ and read rod Geod in the geni- 
tive:—see vv. //.). Gr. “The salvation 
and the glory,” &c.; or “All salvation, 
and glory,” &c. On the rendering “ belong 
unto our God,” see the A.V. of Ps. iii. 8 
(LXX.). This doxology is threefold ; and on 


v. 3—5-] 


judgments: for he hath judged the 
great whore, which did corrupt the 
earth with her fornication, and hath 
avenged the blood of his servants at 
her hand. 

3 And again they said, Alleluia. 
And her smoke rose up for ever and 
ever. 


the doxologies in the Apocalypse, see on ch. 
i. 6; Vv. 13; vil. 12. 

2. for true and righteous are his judg- 
ments;| Cf. ch. xv. 3; xvi. 7. The reason 
is here given for the ascription of praise in 
ver. 1. The praise is special]; not general as 
it is in ch. v. 12, 13. 

Sor he hath judged the great harlot,] A 
second coordinate clause, as in ch. xviii. 23. 

which did corrupt the earth| Cf. ch. xi. 
18, and the fundamental passage Jer. li. 25 
(LXX.)—the Greek verb being the same in 
all three places. 

with her fornication,| Gr. “in her forni- 
cation.” The cunning policy by which 
the “ Harlot ” sought to bring the world and 
Christians to destruction (Hengst.). 

Instead of opposing (writes Auberlen on 
his peculiar theory —see on ch. xvii. 1), 
“ and lessening, she [“ the Harlot Church” 
promoted the sinful life and decay of the 
world by her own earthliness, allowing the 
salt to lose its savour” (/. c., p. 289). 

and he hath avenged the bloodof his servants 
at her hand.| See 2 Kings ix. 7 (LXX.). On 
the prep. (€x) cf. ch. vi. 10; xviii. 20. 

8. And a second time they say, Halle- 
lujah.] Note the verb in the perfect,—_they 
have said. This verse is a kind of anti- 
strophe to the strophe consisting of-wv. 1, 2. 

The first Hallelujah corresponds to the 
Angel’s voice, ch. xviii. 4-19, and is the 
response to ver. 20; this second Hallelujah 

-rresponds to ch. xviii. 21-24, where it is 
declared that Babylon “ shall be found no 
more at all.” 

And her smoke goethup for ever and ever.]| 
Cf. ch. xviii. 9, 18; Isai. xxxiv. 10. We 
have “ And,” not “for” as in ver. 2, because 
this verse but repeats the preceding strophe. 


4. And the four and twenty elders and the 
four living beings] See on ch. iv. 4, 6: 
the Twenty-four Elders, the heavenly repre- 
sentatives of the Church, and the four 
Living Beings the representatives of the living 
Creation upon earth, re-echo the strain of 
adoration,—see ch. iv. 11; v. 8, 14. 

God that sitteth on the shrone,| See ch. 
© 13. 


REVELATION. XIX. 


4 And the four and twenty elders 
and the four beasts fell down and 
worshipped God that sat on the 
throne, saying, Amen; Alleluia. 

5 And a voice came out of the 
throne, saying, Praise our God, all 
ye his servants, and ye that fear him, 
both small and great. 


saying, Amen; Hallelujah.] These words 
are taken from the end of Ps. cvi. 48 :—like 
the Song of Moses (ch. xv. 3), the Amen and 
Hallelujah of the Temple Service are used in 
Heaven. 

Thus closes, notes Hengst., what the Seer 
announces as to the fate of Babylon or 
heathen Rome, in her Imperial power, ch, 
xvil. 18. Onthe ground of this interpreta- 
tion, St. Ireneus (4dv. Her. v. 30) expects 
the partition of the Empire among the “ Ten 
Kings.” Tertullian insists that Babylon is 
with St. John, ‘ Romane urbis fgura’ (Adv. 
Mar. iii. 13) ; and so, more than all the Fathers, 
St. Jerome, writing A.D. 386 (“‘ Lege Apoca- 
lypsin Joannis et quid de Muliere purpurata 
et Babylonis cantetur exitu contuere: Exite, 
inquit Dominus, de illa, populus meus, ¢s°c.” 
(See Note B on ch. xvii. 4). Even in Cent. v. 
Rome had not renounced its heathenism 
(see Orosius, vil. 38); and what was histori-= 
cally realized in the course of centuries is here 
compressed into one scene. Hence neither 
the calamities inflicted upon Rome by Alaric 
(Bossuet), nor by Attila (Grotius) exhaust 
the sense of this prophecy. At all events the 
appearance of the “ Four Living Beings,”— 
who do not appear when the Judgment under 
the seventh Trumpet (ch. xi. 15-18) is come; 
and also the going forth of “ the Word of God” 
(wv. 11-16) to smite the nations after this 
thanksgiving is ended, denote that the 
Kingdom of God is still making progress on 
earth. 


5. And a voice came forth from the 
throne,| See vv. /].—the reading (amo) de- 
noting the direction merely, not the source 
of the voice. The speaker is left quite 
indefinite, as is the case so often in the Apoc. 
(see ch. i. 10; x. 4,8; xiv. 2). Hengst. and 
Ewald, referring to ch. xvi. 17, think that the 
voice must proceed from Him “ that sitteth 
on the throne,’ from Christ, as in ch. ili. 213 
v. 6; vii. 17:—but we should note that 
Christ nowhere employs the expression “ our 
God,” see John xx. 17 ;—Bengel ascribes the 
voice to the “ Four Living Beings ;’—Zillig, 
De Wette, Bisping to ove of them ;—Diisterd., 
referring to ch. v. 9, to the “ Elders” and the 
“ Living Beings.” This verse is not a continua= 
tion of the Hymn of praise in vv.1-4 proceed- 


779 


780 


6 And I heard as it were the voice 
of a great multitude, and as the voice 
of many waters, and as the voice of 
mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia : 


ing from those martyrs whom Babylon had 
slain, but is rather anticipatory of the future, 
as in ch. xv. 4. I. Williams considers that 
the voice of the “ Saints,” on earth (ch. xviii. 
20)—who are here described as the “ser- 
vants” of God, and who are distinguished 
from the Angels in heaven—echoes back, in 
full response, (1) the voice of “the innumer- 
able company of Angels” in ver. 1; and (2) 
that of the representatives of the Christian 
Church in ver. 4. 


saying, Give praise to our God,| The 
dative case—see vv. /). (cf. 1 Chron. xvi. 36; 
2 Chron. xx. 19, LXX.). These words are 
the translation of Hallelujah,—see on ver. 
1; the pronoun our being added. 


all ye bis servants, ye that fear him, 
the small and the great.| See vv. lj. for the 
omission of “ doth ” :—cf. ch. xi. 18. 

The Angel, in ver. 9, affirms the truth of 
the facts that form the theme of the Hymn of 
praise which now follows. 


THE MARRIAGE SUPPER OF THE LAMB 


6, And I beard] Asin ver. 1; and in re- 
sponse to ver. 5. This last choral Hymn 
looks onwards, beyond the Divine judgments, 
to the Marriage of the Lamb. 

In vv. 6-10, notes Auberlen (p. 318), is 
described “ how the judgment of the Harlot 
prepares the justification and Marriage Feast 
of the Woman.” These verses form the 
transition to the subsequent prophecies :— 
with the judgment of Antichrist (vv. 11-21) 
the Marriage Feast begins. 


and as the voice of mighty thunders,] 
This Hymn of praise, according to Ebrard is 
not confined to heaven as in vv, 1-3. Here, 
the “ Nations” of ch. xvii. 15, now repentant 
(ch. xi. 13), are symbolized :—the “ many 
waters” point to the troubled “sea” of 
the peoples ; and the “mighty thunders ” 
to the mysterious acts and influences of 
God which lead to repentance—see ch. x. 
3, 4. Bisping considers that all the hea- 
venly voices now combine,—the Four Living 
Beings, the Elders, the Angels and Saints; 
and thus the chorus rings forth in louder 
harmony. 


saying, Hallelujah:) The participle is in 
the genitive plural,—-see vv. //, 


for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth.| See, 


REVELATION. XIX, 


for the Lord God omnipotent reign- 
eth. 

7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and 
give honour to him: for the marriage 


on ch. i. 8. The word here rendered “ Ome 
nipotent” is elsewhere rendered “ Almighty” 
(mavroxpatwp). If the pronoun be reatiale 
vv. il.), translate “for the Lord our God, 
the Omnipotent, reigneth.” The verb is 
in the aorist:—see on ch. xi. 17. Words, 
explains—“ sheqwed Himself to de King, by sub- 
duing His enemies”; and De Wette:—“als 
Herrscher hat sich gezeigt der Herr, unser 
Allmichtige.” 

That God takes possession of His Kingdom 
is the great theme of this verse, the full import 
of which is exhibited in ch. xx. 11-15. ‘This 
event is connected with the Marriage of the 
Lamb, wv. 7, 8 :—cf. Isai. liv. 4-8. As Hengst. 
puts it, we have negatively the foundation of 
God’s Kingdom in the overthrow of His 
enemies (ch. xii. 10); and positively, as soon 
as this event takes place, in the glorification of 
the Church. 

Here, notes Ebrard (see the remarks 
introductory to this chapter), is celebrated the 
last act of the Divine Judgment; and he 
illustrates this result by a comparison of the 
Apocalyptic times: I. (@) Three and a balf 
years from the Ascension and Jerusalem’s de- 
struction, to the conversion of Israel (ch. xi. 
2, 3; xi. 6);—(4) One our (ch. xvii. 123 
Xviii. 10, 16, 19) ;—(c) Three and a half days of 
Antichrist (ch. xi. 9, 11; xii. 14). Il. (@) The 
sixth (Roman) World-power (“the one is,” 
ch. xvii. 10; cf.ch. xii. 6) ;—(4) The seventh 
World-power, the Ten Kings with the Beast 
(ch. xvii. 12) ;—(c) The eighth World-power, 
The Beast from the Abyss, Antichrist (ch. xvii 
11). III. (a) Babylon as the World-power 
(ch. xiii. 8) ) Babylon as the Woman 
carried by the Beast (ch. xvii. 3). The fall 
of Babylon is now interposed (ch. xvii.). IV. 
(a) The Ecclesia pressa of the Gentile Chris- 
tians (ch. vil. 14; xi. 1; xiii; xvii. 6, &c.); 
to which is added Israel] in Exile, Jeru- 
salem trodden down (ch. xi. 2; xii. 6) ;—(6 
Israel converted (ch. xii. 7-9) ;—(c) The 
in concealment (ch. xii. 13-16; ch. vil. 
3-8; xix. 8). 


7. Let us rejoice and be exceeding 
glad, and let us give the glory unto 
him:] For the reading “and we will 
give,” see vv. //. All is said in anticipation. 
The punishment of the Beast and of the 
“False Prophet” (ver. 20)—or the beginning of 
the Last Judgment—follows the fall of Baby- 
lon: and thus the reign of the “ Omnipo= 
tent” (ver. 6) and the full glory of the Church 
are yet to come. 


[v. 6—7. 4 


| 


v. 8.] 


of the Lamb is come, and his wife 
hath made herself ready. 





for the marriage of the Lamb is come,]| 
The “aorist proleptic” as in ch. xi. 18; cf. 
ch. xiv. 7. 


“The Marriage of the Lamb” is the blessed 
union of the Lord with His chosen Bride 
the Church. Although betrothed to Him 
she has not yet been brought to perfect 
union, but still lives in hope (Rom. viii. 24, 
25). The figure ot marriage is borrowed 
from the Old Test.,—cf. Isai. liv. 1-8 ; Ezek. 
xvi. 8; Hos. ii. 19. On this passage compare 
Matt. xxii. 1-14. 

The event does not come to pass until 

xxi. 2, We are neither to deen 
with Vitringa, “te Marriage Supper” of ver. 
9 j—nor refer, with Words., to John ii. 1-3, 
as in such a sense both the “ Marriage” and 
the “ Supper” would refer (cf. ch. xxi. 9) to 
the Church’s state of happiness to be looked 
for before the End of all things;—nor yet 
understand with Ziillig an “ante-past” of a 
select circle of Messiah’s friends, which con- 
tinues during the Millennial Reign (ch. xx. 4). 
We must rather infer that the voice of Scrip- 
ture declares how the union of the Lamb 
with the “Bride,” or Church of the Redeemed 
(ch. xxi. 9; xxii. 17), signifies the fiza/ im- 
parting to the faithful of their eternal reward 
(ch. xi. 18; xxii. 12). 

It is to be observed that in Johniii. 29 it is 
not explained who is “the Bride.” In 2 Cor. 
xi. 2 St. Paul approaches the full explanation, 
which he gives in Eph. v. 22-32: “Ispeak 
concerning Christ and the Church.” The 
Church therefore is “ the Bride, the Wife of 
the Lamb ”:—and so in the Old Test., the 
Song of Songs, and Psal. xlv.; cf Matt. ix. 
15; xxv. 1, &c.; Mark ii. 19; Luke xii. 36. 
The feast, or “ante-past,” as distinguished from 
the “ Marriage,” is referred to in ch. iii. 20. 


and his wife hath made herself ready.| 
Ready for the Bridegroom—see ch. xxi. 2; 
Matt.xxv.10. The “Marriage” itself has not 
as yet arrived, although the day has dawned ; 
and this preparation for the future union is 
alluded to in such passages as 2 Cor. xi. 2; 
Eph. v. 27. The word rendered “Wife” 
(yvvn) is used in the sense of “ Bride” in 
Gen. xxix. 21 ; Deut. xxii. 24 (LXX.); Matt. 
i. 20. The “ Bride” had already been re- 
ferred to under the figure of “a great mul- 
titude which no man could number” (ch. 
Vil. 9),—as the “ Woman” with the Crown 
of Stars (ch. xii. 1),—as the 144,000 on 
“the Mount Zion.” She is the Church of the 
Last Days—the Elect of Israel and of the 
Heathen. She has been “made ready” in 
“* the wilderness” (ch. xii. 6); and having re- 


REVELATION. XIX. 


8 And to her was granted that she 
should be arrayed in fine linen, clean 


— 


mained faithful in the time of tribulation, the 
recompense described in ver. 8 awaits her. 

I. Williams explains:—At the fall of the 
mystic Babylon “the marriage of the Lamb 
iscome.” The Apostolic “ Woman” had fied 
into the wilderness (ch. xii. 14), and had disap- 
peared from sight. In her stead was seen the 
“ Harlot,” in whom, for a time, the Church 
visible had been lost. Now, on the destruc- 
tion of the “ Harlot,” the Virgin Bride again 
appears (p. 391). See also Auberlen’s con- 
clusion referred to in the note on ch. xviii. 4. 

De Burgh, appealing to Isai. liv. (cf. Hos. 
il. ; ili.), regards the emblem of marriage as 
denoting the future restoration of the Jewish 
people (p. 343). It isto be noted that writers 
who hold the doctrine of the ‘‘ Pre-millennial 
Advent of Christ,’ “all distinguish between 
‘the Bride of the Lamb’ and the whole number 
of the saved; affirming that the one will be 
complete at His Coming, but the other not.” 
—D. Brown, /.c., p. 79. The Bride repre- 
sents “all who have believed up to the com- 
mencement of the Millennium. These alone 
are the mystical body of Christ. But after 
they are completed, at the Second Advent 
the earth will be peopled by the ‘nations of 
the saved’ in flesh and blood,—a totally dif- 
ferent party from the then glorified Bride” 
(Pp. 80). 

8. And it was given unto her] By 
Divine Grace,—cf. ch. vi. 4. 


that she should array herself] For 
the constr. (with iva) see ch. vi. 4; Vili. 3; 
John xvii. + Cf. the words “ hath made her- 
self ready,” ver. 7: “ She shall be brought unto 
the King in raiment of needlework.”—Ps, 
xlv. 14. See also Gal. iii. 27; Eph. vi 13; 
Isai. lix. 17. 

in fine linen, bright [and] pure.] See ch. 
vii. 9. For the reading, see vv. //.; and on 
the word “dinen,” see ch. xviii. 12, 16, as 
well as Note C on ch. xv. 6. The adjectives 
signify the brightness of a holy life, and the 
purity of the Christian character:—cf ch. 
xiv. 1-5. Grotius notes :—“ The grave attire 
of the matron; not the gaudy splendour of 
the harlot” (ch. XVii. 3). 

Alford regards this whole verse not as 
the voice of the celestial chorus, but as a 
narrative clause “ written in the person of the 
Seer himself.” Far better, however, is it 
(with Disterd., Ebrard, Burger, &c.) to 
consider the heavenly song as ending with 
the words “bright and pure;” the rest 
of the verse being added parenthetically 
the Seer from his reminiscence of ch. vii. 14 ; 
ch. iii. 18, See to the same effect on ver. 16. 


783 


782 


—a 2Ble 


and white: for the fine linen is the 
righteousness of saints. 

g And he saith unto me, Write, 
ssed are they which are called 





(For the fine linen is the righteous acts 
of the saints).] These words are the com- 
ment of St. John. For the word rendered 
“righteous acts” see on ch. xv. 4. De 
Wette and Bleek explain the plural to sig- 
nify the number of persons who possess this 
righteousness ;—Diisterd.: “ righteous deeds 
by which the Saints have manifested their 
fidelity ” ;— Words. notes that this use of the 
plural, the “ pluralis excellentiz et majestatis,” 
adopted from the Hebrew, is frequent in the 
Apoc. : e.g. (capkas) “flesh,” ch. xvii. 16 ; xix. 
18, 21 (cf. “ bloods,” John i. 13). He under- 
stands “the large freeness of the righteous- 
ness bestowed by the infinite merits of Christ’s 
obedience ;? — Alf.: “The plural (d:xcaro- 
para) is probably distributive . . . one [‘act 
of righteousness ’] to each of the Saints, en- 
veloping him in a pure robe of righteousness.” 
“Not,” adds Alf, “ Christ’s righteousness 
imputed or put on, but the Saints’ righteous- 
ness... . It is their own; inherent, not im- 
puted; but their own by their part in and 
union to Him ;”—Hengst.: Not the reward 
of the “ Bride” for her preparation, as in ch. 
vi. 11; “not the g/ory of the Saints; but 
their exce/lencies,’— cf. ch. ili. 18. See Pro- 
fessor Archer-Butler’s Sermon on “ The Wed- 
ding Garment,’ Matt. xxii. 11-14, where he 
writes: ‘The Wedding Garment must be 
woven and fashioned on earth. It must be 
brought from thence with each happy spirit 
to heaven.” 

In ch. xiv. 13 it is said “their works 
follow with them;” here that they are 
clothed in fine linen, whichis “the righteous 
acts of the saints.” 

Before the grace of Christ, the Old Testa- 
ment conception is expressed in Isai. lxiv. 6. 


THE EPISODE (9-10). 


Before the last Vision of this series is 
exhibited to the Seer, there follows an episode, 
Clusely resembling that which occurs in ch. 
xiv. 12, 13. The blessedness is now repre- 
sented of the guests who are symbolically 
described as the “ Bride” (Matt. xxii. 1-14 ; 
xxv. 10); and the true object of the Church’s 
worship is pointed out, as in a parable. 


9. And he saith unto me,| Note the simi- 
larity to ch. xxi. 5. All that can be said 
with certainty as to the speaker is that he is 
an Angel, see ver. 10; ch. xxii. 8, 9 :—but 
what Angel? Bengel, Zillig, De Wette, 
Hengst., Diusterd., Alf, assert positively 


REVELATION. XIX. 






{v. 9—10, 


unto the marriage supper of the 

Lamb. And he saith unto me, 

These are the true sayings of God. 
1o And I fell at his feet to wor- 


that it is the Angel who from ch. xvii. 1 has 
stood beside the Seer; the same who in ch, 
xxi. 9 shows the “ Bride” to St. Jolin ;—Lange 
understands the Angel of ch. xviii. 21 ;—Per= 
haps, notes Bleek, he who in ver. 5 utters 
the voice from the throne;—On the other 
hand, Ewald and Ebrard conclude that with 
the entrance of the Angel of ch. xviii. 1, the 
agency of the Angel of ch. xvii. 1 has ceased ; 
and they justly understand here the “ Angelus 
interpres” of ch, i. 1:—see also ch. i, 10. 


Write,| See on ch. i. 11. 


Blessed are they which are bidden to the 
marriage supper of the Lamb.| Cf. ch. xiv. 13, 
to which this clause corresponds,—both de- 
noting the first stage of blessedness, and both 
forming a comment on 1 Thess, iv. 17. In 
both cases moreover a Divine confirmation 
is added : in one it is “ Yea, saith the Spirit; 
in the other, These are true words 
of God,”’—see also on ver. 7; as well as the 
saying in Luke xiv. 15. For the verb “¢o 
bid” or “ call,” see on ch. xvii. 14. The “Mar- 
riage,” aS pointed out on ver. 7, is to be 
distinguished from the “ Marriage Supper :” 
“The betrothal and union of Grace in this 
life passeth over into the union of glory, of 
which it is said, ‘ Blessed are they who are 
called to the marriage supper of the Lamb.’” 
—Pusey, on Hos. ii. 19, See also on ver. 17. 


And he saith unto me,| These words ine 
troduce a second and distinct clause. 


These are true words of God.] See 
vv. ll. Cf. ch. xxi. 5; xxii. 6. Hengst. trans. 
lates: “These words are true, (they are the 
words) of God ;’—Diisterd. and Burger: 
‘These are the true words of God;’—De 
Wette, Alf.: “These sayings are the irue 
[sayings] of God;”—Ziillig: ‘These true 
words are God's words.” 

Bengel notes on the phrase that the word 
rendered “true” (a\nOwos, see on ch. ili. 7) 
is not put alone in the Apoc. except in this 
one place, being always conjoined with 
“holy” (ch. iii. 7), or “righteous” (ch. xv. 
3), or “faithful” (ch. xix. 11). Thus rod 
Ocov (“of God”) here supplies the place of 
“ faithful” in ch, xxi. 5; Xxil. 6. 

Ebrard (see on ch. xvii. 17) would restrict 
the expression “words of God” to wv. 6-9, 
i.e., down to “the marriage supper of the 
Lamb ;”—Burger would restrict the saying to 
vv. 1-8, which immediately precede ;— Diis- 
terd. would apply it to ch. xviii. r-ch. xix. 9, 
viz. to what the Angel promises in ch. xvi, 


Ve 10] 


ship him. And he said unto me, 


eb 9 4See thou do it not: I am thy fellow- 


servant, and of thy brethren that have 


1;—Alf. to all that follows ch. xvii. 1;— 
Hengst. to the preceding vv.5-8 only, viz. to 
the truths of the coming of the Lord’s 
Kingdom, of the Lamb’s Marriage, of the 
preparation of the Bride. 

H. Gebhardt (/. ¢., s. 14) infers from this 
verse, combined with ch. xxi. 5; xxii. 6, that 
a distinction is indicated between the true 
announcements of God, relating to what 
went immediately before, and the erroneous 
opinions of the Seer:—or, as he words it: 
“They modify the certainty and true Divine 
character of the rest of the contents ” of the 
Apocalypse. In this he goes even beyond 
Volkmar, who sees here only a distinction 
between “the word and the spirit” of what 
is written (s. 278). 


10. And I fell down before his feet to 
worship him.| See ch. xxii. 7, 8 ; the natural 
meaning in both passages being that St. John— 
on hearing what is said in ver. 9, and the words 
‘“‘ T come °—took the Angel to be the Lord 
Himself and not a “ fellow-servant.” In ch. 
xvi. 1; xvii, 1, the Seer recognized that the 
speaker was a created Angel; but here not 
so. On the other hand, Grotius, Vitr., 
Bengel, Ewald, Alf., see in this act a token of 
exaggerated gratitude or reverence paid to 
one who had imparted such great things ;— 
A mark of Oriental homage, notes Stern, as 
Lot (Gen. xix. 1), or Nathan before David 
(1 Kings i. 23), not as one worships God ;— 
Ebrard and Words. see in the narrative a 
warning “ against all such acts of worship as 
are directed by the worshipper himself to any 
Being beside God ;”—Hengst. considers that 
St. John in his 4umility forgets his own share 
in imparting the revelation; and that the 
Angel in 4is humility brings this to light (see 
Matt. iii. 14; Rom. xii. 10; and cf. Acts x. 
25, 26) ;—Ziillig thinks that the passage is 
founded on Dan. ii. 46, where (as Jewish tra- 
dition explains in accordance with Dan. ii. 
27-30; v. 16, 17), the Prophet refers the 
King, with his adoration, to God ;—Auberlen 
contrasts this expression of gratitude at the 
glorious promise to the Church confirmed 
by the words of ver. 9, with the feeling of 
wonder described in ch. xvii. 6; and he com- 
pares Dan. viii. 17;—I. Williams notes: “It 
appears here like a termination. This end 
before the end (ch. xxii. 9), followed by 
resuming the subject, much resembles the 
same in St. John’s Gospel, which seems to 
terminate with the chapter before the last, 
and then, after some addition, comes again to 
a similar conclusion” (p. 393). 


REVELATION. XIX. 


the testimony of Jesus: worship 
God: for the testimony of Jesus is 
the spirit of prophecy. 


And he saith unto me, See [thou doit] not :] 
Gr. See; not (Opa pn) ;—Wimne> (s. 530) 
explains the phrase as “ an aposiopesis :’ for the 
full constr. cf. Matt. viii. 4 ; xviii. 10; 1 Thess, 
Ws, 5s 

Words. notes the contrast to the claim of 
the antichristian power, ch. xiii. 4, 8, 12, 15. 


I am a fellow-servant with thee] 
See on ch. i. 1. The title of “ servant” is 
assumed by the sacred writers without any 
disparagement of their office and authority :— 
cE Rom ive; Phil iar Tit. 152 Pes 
1; &e. 

and with thy brethren that have the testie 
mony of Jesus:| Or “that hold.” On 
“ the testimony of Jesus,’ see ch. i. 2,9; Xib 
17; xx. 4. In ch. xxii. 9 the words are 
“with thy brethren the prophets, and with 
them which keep the words of this Book,’— 
a parallel which throws light on what follows 
here. 


worship God.| Whose servants we both 
are (see ch. xxii. 6, 9)—of Whose prophetic 
Spirit we alike partake in this our common 
ministry; and therefore one of us may not 
worship the other. 


(For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of 
prophecy).| These words, like the latter 
clause of ver. 8, are a parenthetical explana- 
tion given by St. John himself, who thus pre= 
pares the way for ch. xxii. 9—the meaning of 
the words being this: ‘I am the fellow ser- 
vant of thy brethren that have the testimony 
of Jesus—that is of thy brethren the prophets; 
for (as St. John here explains) the testimony 
of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy’ “The testi- 
mony of Jesus,” as noted on ch. i. 2, is to be 
understood both subjectively, and objectively; 
as denoting both the testimony borne 4y Jesus 
{John iii. 31-33; viii. r4—see ch. xxii. 20), 
and the testimony borne #o Jesus (John y. 37; 
1 John i. 1-3). See Luke xxiv. 27. 

The majority of writers, however, under- 
stand these words as spoken by the Angel, 
and Stern makes the connexion to be: 
‘The gift of prophecy is thy reward for 
holding fast the testimony of Jesus, for having 
faith in Him, and bearing witness to it before 
all the world ;’"—and Burger interprets “ Not 
merely the gift of prophecy (1 Cor. xii. 10) but 
the gift of understanding prophecy; and St. 
John differed from his ‘ drethren, or fellow- 
Christains, merely in possessing a higher 
measure of this gift.” 

According to Diisterd. the genitive is 
altogether subjective—“ the witness which pro- 


783 


“84 


REVELATION. XIX. 


(v. an. 


11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that 





ceeds from Jesus,” and the thought is that 
Christ, by imparting the testimony of the 
Apocalypse to believers, fills them with the 
Spirit of prophecy ;—Alf., on the other hand, 
takes the gen. to be altogether objective; the 
Angel saying : “ Thou and I and our brethren 

bear witness to Jesus; and the way in 
which we bear this witness, the substance 
and essence of this testimony, is ‘the spirit 
of prophecy’ (1 Cor. xii. 13);” this Spirit 
given to me and to thee “is the token that 
we are fellow-servants;”—And so Vitringa 
(“ Plenius dixisset: Spiritus testimonii Christi 
est Spiritus prophetia ; hoc est ejusdem generis, 
dignitatis, et scopi est, cujus Spiritus pro- 
ae ”—p. 819). It has been thus inferred 

m ch. xxii. 9 (cf. ch. vi. 9; xii. 17) that all 
Christians, in every age, who can receive and 
understand Prophecy, have this spirit ; and 
are, like St. John, fellow-servants and brethren 
of the Angels ;—so Ebrard and Bleek. Con- 
sequently Angels are not to be worshipped. 

Here comes to a close the interposed sec- 
tion (wv. 1-10) which forms the transition 
from the description of the fall of Babylon— 
the hostile World-power, to the description 
of the overthrow of Satan and his allies—the 
hostile spiritual power. 


THE VISION OF THE WORD oF Gop 
(11-16). 


Babylon, with which Antichrist had hitherto 
shared the rule of the world, has fallen ; and 
the Seer now returns to Antichrist and the 
“Ten Kings” (see ver. 19) who had been left 
as if with none to resist them. Their war with 
Christ has been already foreshadowed in ch. 
Evil. 14 (cf. too ch. xvi. 12,14). The Lord 
—‘The WORD of God”—now comes for- 
ward to fight the last fight, and to bring com- 
fort and peace to His Church. 

This description of Christ sums up the 
features and attributes of earlier descrip- 
tions:—The White Horse (ch. vi. 2); the 
Titles (ch. iii. 14; xvii. 14); the Eyes (ch. i. 
14; ii. 18); the unknown Name (ch. ii. 17); 
the Sword (ch. i. 16); the Rod of iron (ch. 
ii. 27); the Winepress (ch. xiv. 20)—which 
is also recalled by the Vesture dipped in 
blood; the many Diadems (not merely Seven 
or Ten as in ch. xii. 3 ; xiii. 1) which signify that 
He combines in His Person all royal dignity 
and power ; and thus is “ King of kings” (ch. 
xvii. 14). 

But is this description bolical or 
literal? It may be assumed with confidence 
—in accordance with the entire character of 
the Apocalypse, and in opposition to modern 
theories (see Note A at the end of this chap- 


ter)—that the scene now brought before us is 
altogether figurative and spiritual; and that 
the conflict here described is neither literal 
nor visible. I. Williams truly says (p. 402): 
“The idea of a [literal] army is altogether 
destroyed by the same being also a Marriage 
Supper and a Bride. We have, therefore, no 
clue to the nature of the fulfilment, except 
that of final discomfiture, all notion of a 
sensible warfare being stopped.” Accordingly, 
assuming that this is go, the connexion seems 
to be as follows :—The seventh and last scene 
of the Revelation proper (see the remarks in- 
troductory to ch. xvi.) begins with the vic- 
tory of Heaven over the hostile World-power 
(ch. xvii. 1-xviii. 24). Then in ch. xix, 1-10 
we hear the voices of triumph, and the an- 
nouncement of the “ Marriage of the Lamb.” 
On this follows the picture of the overthrow 
of Satan’s allies and of himself (ch. xix. 11- 
xx. 10); this destruction of the hostile 
spiritual power being followed by the uni- 
versal Judgment (ch. xx. 11-15), and the 
glories of the New Jerusalem (ch. xxi. 1-ch. 
xxii. 5). 

On this passage (vv. 11-21) Dean 
Vaughan, having quoted ch. xvii. 1o—“ When 
be [the seventh king] cometh, be must continue 
a little while,” observes: “ One day is with 
the Lord as a thousand years (2 Pet. iii. 8); 
and that short space has been expanded by 
the event into a period of several centuries. 
Other Babylons, on a smaller scale, and with 
features less precisely marked, have come and 
gone since St. John’s prophecy against Rome 
was fulfilled. The Beast still is, and still 
developes himself from time to time in new 
forms and shapes. Wherever he developes 
himself, there arises another Babylon. ... We 
are living not in the time of the sixt/, but in 
the time of the seventh Head of the Beast ; 
that Head which is known by its ‘ Ten Horns; 
that power which is known by division, not 
by concentration ; by a plurality, not by a 
unity of crowns and thrones on earth. And 
here we read of the closing scene of the period 
of that seventh supremacy. It is the last of 
the Empires: there is none to follow it. I+ 
is to terminate in that great outbreak or evil 
which under many different figures appears 
both in Old Test., and in New Test. pro- 
phecy, as the sure token of the last end of 
all” (ch. xvi. 13-16 ; xix. 19).—/. ¢., il. p. 202. 

ll. And I saw the heaven opened;| In 
ch. iv. 1 “@ door” is opened in heaven in order 
that the Seer may ascend thither, in spir't, 
and gaze within and learn the secret things of 
God. Here the “ Heaven” itself is opened in 
order that the Lord may issue forth with His 
hosts. These Ewald would identify with the 





v. 12.) 


sat upon him was called Faithful and 
True, and in righteousness he doth 
judge and make war. 

12 His eyes were as a flame of 





144,000 of ch. xiv. 1-5, as they were there 
geen prepared for their victory. 

In ch. xi. 19 the Temple in heaven, and in 
ch. xv. 5 the Holy of Holies had been already 
opened; consequently, argues Ebrard, no- 
thing more can be revealed in heaven, and this 
can be no new Vision, but the second part 
merely of the Vision explaining the seventh 
Vial :—see on ch. xvi. 21. Ebrard also com- 
pares this verse with ch. xiv. 14:—In ch. xiil. 
St. John had beheld the Beast from the “sea” or 
the Kingdom of this world; and then, in ch. 
xiv., he was led to see the 144,000 on Mount 
Zion, and to hear of the fall of Babylon, and 
to look upon the Son of Man coming “upon 
the cloud” to reap the harvest :—so here, after 
he has beheld the Beast from the Abyss (ch. 
xvii. 8) or the kingdom of Antichrist, and 
after Babylon has fallen, and he has heard the 
song of triumph over her, he looks upon 
Christ issuing forth from heaven. 


and-behold, a white horse, and he that sat 
thereon,| ‘There is here a reference to ch. 
vi. 2, where exactly the same words occur. 
Under the frst Seal the Rider on the White 
Horse went forth to his work of conquest; 
here He comes forth to strike the last blow 
and to execute the last acts of judgment. 
In neither case does the Rider come forth 
visibly—see Note A at the end of this chapter. 
And thus the Rider beheld under the frst Seal 
reappearseat the close of the Book; He is the 
Beginning and the End, the Alpha and the 
Omega of the Apocalypse (ch. i. 8; xxi. 6; 
xxii. 13). 

called Faithful and True;| (The “was” 
of A.V. is not to be inserted,—cf. ch. iv. 2, 3). 
In ch. ili. 14 the same epithets are applied 
to Christ :—on the word rendered “ True” 
see ver. 9. There is weighty authority for 
omitting the word “called,”—see vv. //. 

and in righieousness he doth judge and make 
qwar.|] Compare Isai. xi. 3, 4. The nature 
of the judgment is indicated in conformity 
with vv. 14, 19. 

Todd,—having observed that the Vision of 
Babylon terminates, like the Visions of the 
Seals and Trumpets (ch. vi. 17; xi. 15), in 
the great Day of wrath, and the establishment 
of Christ’s Kingdom,—infers that as the 
Coming of Christ in Glory “is described at 
the conclusion of each of the apocalyptic 
Visions, these Visions, although consecutive 
in the order in which they were exhibited 
to St. John, are not consecutive, but syn- 
chronous in their fulfilment ;” which is to be 


Lew Test.—Vou. IV. 


REVELATION. XIX. 


fire, and on his head were many 
crowns; and he had a name written, 
that no man knew, but he him- 
self. 


sought for in the future—in the events that 
precede, accompany, or immediately follow 
the Lord’s Second Advent (J. c., p. 80). 


12, And Ais eyes [are] a flame of fire,] 
Omit “as,” see vv. i], Cf. ch. i. 14. The 
features of this description differ in some 
respects,—required by the different circum- 
stances of #4is appearance—from those in ch, 
vi. 2. There Christ is armed with a bow— 
the weapon which strikes from afar ; here his 
eyes “are a flame of fire”—denoting that 
He comes not to seek and to save that which 
was lost, but to scorch and to consume. Such 
is the character in which the Lord zow appears. 


andupon his head[are| many diadems;| 
Not now the “crown,” the Victor’s wreath, 
but the kingly “diadem” the emblem of 
His own proper Regal authority ;—nay more, 
“many diadems,” denoting the concentra- 
tion of all kingly authority in His Person, as 
plainly expressed in ver. 16: see Note D on 
ch. il. ro. E.g. Ptolemy Philometor “set two 
diadems around his head, that of Asia and of 
Egypt.”—1 Macc. xi. 13 ; Artabanus also “ in 
whom the Kingdom of Parthia ended” used 
two “diadems ”—see Spanheim, De usu Numm. 
t.i. p.451, who refers to Joseph. Avtt. xiii. 8; 
and to Herodian, Hist. vi. 2, ed. Bekk. p. 119. 
In Diodorus Siculus (i. 47) we read of one 
having “three 2ingdoms on the head,” “the 
context plainly showing that these are three 
diadems, the symbols of a triple royalty.”— 
Trench, Syzoz., p. 77. Pusey, on Zech. vi. 11, 
notes that the “ crowns” there spoken of were 
not “ diadems” at all, but “circlets of silver 
and gold.” Referring to this place, Ziillig 
would explain the “Ten Diadems” of ch, 
xiii. 1 to be trophies of victory borne away by 
Christ from the “Ten Kings” of ch. xvii. 12:— 
cf. 2 Sam. xii. 30. To this Diisterd. objectsthat 
the “ Kings” had not yet been conquered. 

and he hath a name written, which no 
one knoweth but be himself.| See Matt. 
xi. 27. The “ New Name” of ch. ii. 17; iii. 
12, which will finally be disclosed to those 
“which are bidden to the Marriage Supper 
of the Lamb.” St. John sees the “Name”; 
it appears “ written ;” but he can neither read 
nor express it: cf. Judges xiii. 18. Some say 
it is the ineffable name JEHOVAH; others 
“The WORD of God,” ver. 13:—but neither 
of these names is ‘‘NEW,” nor is either of them 
unknown. It has also been asked wéere this 
name was written? On the diadems? On the 
forehead (so Burger after the analogy of 
ch. vii. 3; xiv. 1)? On the vesture? On the 


DDD 


785 


786 


Ad 


13 “And he was clothed with a 
vesture dipped in blood: and his 
name is called The Word of God. 

14 And the armies which were in 
heaven followed him upon white 
horses, clothed in fine linen, white 
and clean. 





horse ? 
be given. 
Alford admits into the text the words in- 
serted merely by “ B, Syr., Andr.” (see vv. //., 
and Tisch., 8th ed.). He renders “having 
panes written, and] a name written,” 
c., expressing, however, a doubt as to their 
genuineness ; and suggesting “that the names 
were inscribed on the diadems, signifying the 
import of each” :—Reuss would explain this 
doubtful reading by a reference to the zames 
Messiah, Christ, Word, Son of David. 


18. And he [is] arrayed in a vesture 
dipped in blood:| On the word “ dipped” 
(BeBappevov) see John xiii. 26; the verb 
occurs elsewhere only in Luke xvi. 24. Cf. 
ver. 15; and ch. xiv. 20. For the reading 
“sprinkled with blood,” see vv. //.:—cf. 
Heb. ix. 13, 19, 213 X. 225 xii. 24; 1 Pet: (1 
2. The reference in any case is to Isai. lxiii. 
2, 3:—doubtless the blood of His enemies. 
Words. notes that St. Hippolytus (én Noet. § 
15, p. 53, ed. Lagarde) reads “sprinkled,” 
but “explains it as referring to Christ’s own 
blood, by which the Incarnate Word cleansed 
the world.” 


and his name is called The verbis in the 
perfect tense,—see vv. //. 


The Word of God.| This is no “new 
name:” by this title of “THE WORD” 
Christ is designated only by St. John: 
—here, in John i. 1-14, and in 1 John 
i. 1. He is the Personal Revelation of God 
Himself—in Whom dwells the fulness of 
the Godhead bodily (Col. ii. 9). Lucke and 
others object that we have here “the Word 
of God,” and not, absolutely, “the Word” 
(see Introd. § 7, III. (a) ). The writer, how- 
ever, of the Fourth Gospel was confessedly 
the writer of the First Epistle, and there, too, 
the title is not “the Word,” absolutely, but 
“the Word of Life.” It may be noted that 
the phrase “the word of God” (also 6 Adyos) 
—when not used as a title of the Personal 
Word—occurs in ch. i. 2, 9; Vi. 9; XX. 4:— 
gee on ch. i. 2; and cf. ch. xvii. 17; xix. 9. 

At His first coming in humility He is 
known as “ The Son of Man ;” at His Second 
Coming in glory aa “THE WORD OF 
GOD.” 


14. And the armies which [are] in beaven] 


To these questions no answer need 


REVELATION. XIX. 


[v. 13—15. 


15 And out of his mouth 
a sharp sword, that with it he should 
smite the nations: and he shall 
rule them with a rod of iron: and 
he treadeth the winepress of the 


fierceness and wrath of Almighty 
God. 


(See vv. //.). It is in close accordance with 
the usage of Scripture—as well as with the 
interpretation adopted above—to hold that 
the heavenly Host (Luke ii 13) which ace 
companies Christ in this His manifestation 
as Judge, is composed of Angels only be 
Matt. xvi. 27; xxv. 31; 2 Thess. i. 7; and cf 
1 Kings xxii. 19; Ps. cxlvili. 2). Zilli 

Disterd., De Burgh, Alf. would include the 
glorified Saints also who are introduced in 
ch. xvii. 14. Theshare of the Saints, however, 
in the Judgment (1 Cor. vi. 2, 3) is described 
for the first time in ch. xx. 4 :—see on ver. II. 


Sollowed him upon white borses,| Symbol- 


izing a triumphant march—see on ch. vi. 2. 
clothed in fine linen, white [and] 
pure.] (Omit “and”—see vv.i/.). White 


is the colour and livery of heaven—see on 
ch. i. 14; here the holiness and purity of the 
heavenly host are symbolized (cf. ver. 8). 
Hengst. would refer to ch. xv. 6, but see the 
note on the text of that verse. Their garments 
are not, like their Leader’s, “ dipped in,” or 
“sprinkled with d/ood” (cf. “ Their blood 
shall be sprinkled upon My garments,” Isai. 
lxiii. 3). This Host is without sword or spear 
—arms of actual warfare are assigned only 
to the WorRD: see on ch. xvii. 14. 


15. proceedeth a sharp sword,| See on 
ch. i. 16; cf. ch. ii.12,16. Compare also “the 
breath of bis mouth,’ 2 Thess. ii. 8. In illus- 
tration of the effect of Christ’s words upon 
His enemies, Hengst. refers to John xviil. 5. 
Such features of the description as we have 
here show that all is symbolical. 

that with it] The preposition (¢y) is in- 
strumental. 

and he shall rule them] See on ch. ii, 27 i 
xii. 5. Here, and in the words “ be treadetb, 
the pronoun “He” (airds) is emphatic— 
“ HE” and none other. 

be treadeth] In ch. xiv. 17-19 it was 
“ another Angel” who gathered the vintage of 
the earth; but how “the wine-press was 
trodden” (ver. 20) is not stated. As im 
Isai. lxiii. 3, Christ treads “the wine-press 
alone.” 

the wine-press of the fierceness of the 
wrath of Almighty God.] See vv. ll. :—cf. 
ch. xiv. 8, 10; ch. xvi 19. Gr. the wine= 
press of the wine of the fierceness. 








v. 16—18.] 


16 And he hath on Ais vesture and 
on his thigh a name written, “KING 
OF KINGS, AND LORD OF 
LORDS. 

17 And I saw an angel standing 
in the sun; and he cried with a loud 
voice, saying to all the fowls that fly 
in the midst of heaven, Come and 





The two images of the “ cup of wrath” and 
of the “wine-press” in ch, xiv. 10, 19, are 
here combined. 

He comes to execute judgment on the god- 
less, as described in Jude 14, 15. 


16. And he hath upon his vesture, and 
upon his thigh a name written,| (See vv. //.). 
Many explain that the name was written on 
the vesture only ;—upon the part of it which 
covered the thigh: so De Wette, Hengst., 
Disterd., Bisping, &c. Hengst. observes that 
the thigh is introduced as the place where the 
sword (which is not mentioned ere, see 
ver. 15) is usually found, in accordance with 
Ps, xlv. 3: “ Gird thee with thy sword upon 
thy thigh, O most mighty.” Wetstein, Eichhorn, 
De Wette, refer to the custom of engraving 
the artist’s name on the thigh of a statue 
(“Signum Apollinis cujus in femore nomen 
Myronis erat inscriptum.’—Cicero, Verr. iv. 
43; cf. Pausanias, Eliac. extr.; Herod. ii. 
106; and Wetstein iz /oc.). 


KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF 
LORDS.] The order is that in 1 Tim. vi. 15; 
but the order of ch. xvii. 14 is inverted. For 
the title cf. Deut. x. 17; Ezra vii. 12; 
Ps. cxxxvi. 3; Dan. ii. 37, 47 ; viii. 25. 

Hengst. notes that the names of Christ in 
this Vision are four—(1) “‘ Faithful and True” 

ver. 11); (2) the Name “that no man knew” 
ver. 12); (3) “The Word of God” (ver 13); 
@ and here “ King of Kings and Lord of 
rds,” — Before this sacred number four, 
the earth, whose signature is four, must 
tremble.” In an elaborate, but most unsatis- 
factory dissertation, Ziillig tries to establish a 
parallel between these four names and the 
titles of Messiah in Isai. ix. 6:—(1) (as 
Hengst.) “ Wonderful, Counsellor ;” (2) “ The 
Mighty God” (or as Zillig explains “The 
Divine hero—the hero of might”); (3) “ The 
Everlasting Father” (or as he explains) —“ The 
forerunner for the gaining of spoil ”—“ Vor- 
mann zum Beutemachen”); (4) “The Prince 
of Peace.” (‘‘ Der Sprech-geist Gottes ”). 
The Action now begins :— 


THE CONFLICT (17-21). 
17. An angel] Gr. one Angel:—cf. 


eh, viii. 13, Xvili. 21. 


REVELATION. XIX. 


gather yourselves together unto the 
supper of the great God ; 

18 That ye may eat the flesh of 
kings, and the flesh of captains, and 
the flesh of mighty men, and the 
flesh of horses, and of them that sit 
on them, and the flesh of all men, both 
free and bond, both small and great. 


standing in the sun;| From which station, 
writers comment, as well suiting the glory of 
the Angel, he can best summon the birds in 
mid-heaven, who surround the place where 
the Angel stands; and whence his voice can be 
heard by the whole earth. 


and he cried with a great voice, saying to 
all the birds that fy in mid-heayen,] 
See ch. vill. 13; xiv. 6. 


Come [and] be gathered together] (Omit 
“and;” see vv. /l.). This call of the Angel 
directs us to the same memorable call in Ezek, 
XXXix. 17-20, and to the mysterious gathering 
against Israel, there described, of Gog and 
Magog ; thus connecting that description with 
their appearance in ch. xx.8. The usual 
imagery, signifying a disastrous defeat, is 
employed :—see 1 Sam. xvii. 46 ; Isai. xviii. 6 ; 
Jer. vil. 33; xii.9; cf. also Matt. xxiv. 28. 

Universal nature is summoned to rejoice 
at this consummation of God’s purpose. 


unto the great supper of God;] See 
ov. li. We have to note the contrast here to 
“ the Marriage Supper” of the Lamb, ver. 9. 
This passage gives one aspect of ‘the war of 
the Great Day of God, the Almighty ”—ch., 
xvi.14. For the other aspect see ch. xx. 7-9. 

“Tt is the great Epiphany,” notes I. 
Williams (p. 400). “ The first Epiphany was 
by a Star, this in the Sun.” Beda understands 
the Eagle-spirits of heaven: “Ye holy souls 
that hunger after righteousness, come now 
and behold the righteous judgments of God.” 

Andreas takes the birds to be good Angels; 
—Primasius makes them to be evil angels ;— 
Brightman and others understand nations and 
churches which have not yet attained full 
truth. 


18. and the flesh of captains,) Or military 
tribunes,—Gr. chiliarchs. 


and the flesh of horses and of them that sit 
thereon,| The word “flesh” is repeated 
here five times in the plural (see on ver. 8): 
Words. takes this to denote “the completee 
ness and universality of God’s retribution.” 

both free and bond,and small and great.| 
The word “ doth” is read in the Greek,—see 
vv. li. Hengst. compares this enumeration 
to those in ch. vi. 15; xiii. 16; there are 
Your classes (Kings, Captains, Mighty mémy 

DDD 32 


787 


788 


1g And I saw the beast, and the 
kings of the earth, and their armies, 
thered together to make war against 
im that sat on the horse, and against 
his army. 
20 And the beast was taken, and 
with him the false prophet that 


REVELATION XIX. 


[v. 19—20. 


wrought miracles before him, with 
which he deceived them that had 
received the mark of the beast, and 
them that worshipped his image. 
These both were cast alive into 
a lake of fire burning with brim- 
stone. 





Riders); and another composed of four 
members, the “free and bond,” the “ small 
and great.” 

“The world,” notes Auberlen, “in its 
opposition to God, when it has reached the 
highest development of its material and 
spiritual power, is after all only a decorated 
carcase, decaying; round which the eagles 
gather, and to devour which all the birds 
that fly in the midst of heaven are called 
together” (p. 323). 

19. And Isaw] The past tense here, and 
in vv. 20, 21, imports that this act of the 
judgment was represented in Vision; not de- 
scribed, as in ch. xviii. 

the beast,| Of ch.xiii. 1. Ebrard however, 
understands not “the Beast from the sea,’—the 
World-power; but the “ Beast from the 
Abyss,’— Antichrist, (ch. xvii. 8): see on ch. 
xiii. 1. 

and the kings of the earth,| ‘The allies of 
the Beast—the “ Ten Kings” of ch. xvii. 12, 13 
who are called up by demons, see ch. xvi. 13- 
16. Ebrard draws a distinction between the 
“kings of the earth” (ch. xviii. 3,9), and their 
“armies ;” both together making up the “‘ Ten 
kingdoms” which are symbolized by the “ Ten 
Kings” of ch. xvii. 12. Hengst. takes the 
phrase “kings of the earth” as the contrast 
to “the King of Kings,” who is of Heaven. 


and their armies,| Consisting of the in- 
habitants of the earth—see ch. xiii. 4, 8, 16. 


gathered together to make war| Gr. the 
war (see vv. //. here and in ch. xx. 8). The 
article is emphatic:—+he great last struggle 
for which they had assembled under the 
sixth Vial (ch. xvi. 12-16; xvii. 14), but 
which does not take place until now— The 
Great Day of God, the Almighty” (ch. xvi. 14). 


against pim that sat on the horse, and against 
bis army.| Note here the sing. “ army,” as 
contrasted with “ armies” above. The unity 
among Christ’s followers is signified—He 
has but ove army, composed of various hosts: 
gee ver. 14. 

The appearance of Christ, writes Ebrard, 
has put an end to the attack on the Church— 
see ch. xii. 15. Antichrist now turns 
against the Lord Himself. 

The rationalistic interpretation may be 
summe’ ur in the words of Renan:—“ Al- 


though Rome is destroyed, the Roman world, 
represented by Nero, the Antichrist, is not 
annihilated .... The prophet sees the Beast 
(Nero), and the kings of the earth (the 
Generals of the Provinces, almost indepen- 
dent) and their armies, united to make war 
against Him who is seated on the White 
Horse” (/.c., p. 444): see on ch. xvii. 12. 


20. And the beast was taken,| This verb 
(mtd¢w) is characteristic of St. John’s style: 
—it occurs eight times in the Fourth Gospel; 
elsewhere in the New Test. in Acts iii. 7; xii, 
4; 2 Cor. xi. 32. Ziillig and Hengst. note 
that it is not stated how or by whom the 
Beast was seized :—doubtless it was by the 
army of Christ. 

On this description see Dan. vii. 11. 


and with him the false prophet} See on 
ch, xiii. 11-17; with which passage agrees 
this appearance of the “ False Prophet.” See 
also ch. xvi. 13. 


that wrought the miracles in his sight,] 
See ch, xiii. 13; Gr., the signs :—the “ False 
Prophet” being thus identified with the 
second Beast in ch. xiii. 11. This perform- 
ing of miracles, notes Bengel, explains why 
the “ False Prophet” receives a like punish- 
ment with the Beast. 

wherewith he deceived them] See ch. 
xiii. 14. 

Ebrard thus explains the connexion with 
ch. xiii.:—The agency of the “ False Prophet” 
is carried on in the sixth World-Kingdom, 
risen again from apparent destruction; but 
now long since subverted asa World-kingdom 
(or Beast from the“ Sea”). The W orld-power 
has parted into three powers (cf. ch. xvi. 19 
with ch. xvii.)—into (1) the “Ten Kings” 
(as a seventh World-power); (2) the Beast 
from the Abyss (as becoming near the 
seventh); (3) Babylon, now become the 
“Woman.” After this, Babylon (ch. xvii. 16) 
has been utterly and for ever overthrown 
(ch. xviii. 21); the “ Ten Kings ” have given up 
their power to the Beast from the Abyss; 
and this Beast then reigns as the eighth World- 
power. Asthe “ False Prophet,” in ch. xiii. 11, 
had come to help the Beast from the “ Sea” in 
his sixth form; so now an analogous lying- 
power (in another form but in the same spirit 
—that of the Dragon) comes to help the 
Beast in his esg+th form—i.e., the Beast from 





v. 21.] 


21 And the remnant were slain 
with the sword of him that sat upon 
the horse, which sword proceeded 


the Abyss—and will exercise anew his old 
arts until Christ’s Second Coming (s. 507). 


that bad received the mark of the beast, and 
them that worshipped his image:| See ch. 
Kili. 15, 16. 

they twain were cast alive into the lake 
of fre| Or Gehenna (Matt. x. 28; Mark ix. 
43; Jas. ili. 6)—* the eternal fire ” (Matt. xxv. 
41). The word “Gehenna” is not found in 
the writings of St. John. This language rests 
on such passages as Isai. xxx. 33; xvi. 24. 
On the “Lake of Fire,” cf. ch. xx. 10, 14; 
xxi. 8. 

For Renan’s explanation of the source of 
this symbolism, see on ch. ix. 2. 

We are to note that St. John implies a 
distinction between the place of Satan’s abode, 
th: Abyss (ch. ix. 15 xi. 23 xvii. 8; xx. 
I, 3)—and the place of Satan’s punishment 
“ the Lake of Fire” (ch. xix. 20 ; XX.10, 14,15; 
xxi. 8). 

that burneth with brimstone:] (Note 
the irregular concord here,—see vv. //.). 
This casting alive into the “ Lake of Fire” (ef. 
Dan. vii. 11) has been contrasted with the 
Ascension of the “Two Witnesses” (ch. xi. 11, 
12) to heaven. It is not stated who inflicts 
this judgment ; the agent is doubtless some 
“ministering spirit” as in ch. xx. 2. 

They are cast “alive,” notes Hengst., for 
they have not a human nature,—they are 
purely ideal forms. Those who are human 
suffer a bodily death, ver. 21. 

These are living men, notes Burger, not 

nifications which could not be cast into 
the “ Lake of Fire.” 


21. and the rest were slain; All the in- 
habitants of the earth, ch. xiii. 3, 8, 14, 
16 (Diisterd.) ;—the adherents of Antichrist 
enumerated in ver. 18 (Hengst., Ebrard, 
Bisping) ;—or the “ dings” and their “ armues” 
(ver. 19). which seems to be the most natural 
meaning. So in effect Auberlen (p. 339); 
who considers that the unconverted Jews and 
Heathen still survive on earth, inasmuch as, 
never having come into contact with the 
Gospel, they are therefore not guilty of re- 
fecting it. 


REVELATION. XIX. 


out of his mouth: and all he fowls 
were filled with their flesh. 


with the sword of him that sat on the 
forse, [eyen the sword] which came 
forth out of bis mouth:| (See vv.ij.). Asin 
ver. 15. Death—spiritual death, no doubt, see 
Isai. xi. 4—falls on them as a preliminary 
punishment: see ch. xx. 12-15. 

Burger—who looks upon this conflict as 
literal and visible—admits that “ the sword” 
is not a literal “ sqword,” but he gives as 
illustrations of what is intended the events 
referred to in Josh. x. 12; 2 Kings xix. 35; 
and also ch. xx. 9, together with the descrip- 
tion of ch. xvi. 18-21— especially the “ great 
hail?’ Nevertheless Burger doubts whether 
this judgment on Antichrist and the Lord’s 
appearance described in wv. 11-16 are what 
we read of in Matt. xxiv.30; xxv. 31; John 
v. 28, 29; 2 Cor. v. 10. He also points to 
the difference between vv. 11-16 and ch. xx. 
11. These difficulties, to which his exposition 
is exposed, he leaves unsolved, 

and all the birds] See ver. 17. 

The following expositions have been given: 
—The “ birds” (vv. 17, 21) are, according to 
Hammond, the Goths and Vandals who 
desolated the Roman Empire ;—According to 
Cocceius they are the Turks who after the 
fall of Constantinople devastated the Catholic 
countries of the W est;—According to Hengst. 
the Huns ;—Wetstein applies the prophecy 
to the murder of Domitian (ver. 20), and 
the overthrow of his soldiers (ver. 21) ;— 
Grotius applies ver. 19 to the Emperor 
Julian and his partizans; and ver. 20 to the 
abolition of pagan sacrificial rites by Theodo- 
sius and Justinian;—C. a Lapide under= 
stands a description of the miserable deaths 
of heretics ;—Stuart notes: The substantial 
meaning is that the leaders as well as their 
followers in the persecutions directed against 
the Christians will be subjected to a speedy 
and dreadful punishment : “1 doubt not that 
the great truth taught is, that final, complete, 
and certain victory over heathenism will be 
achieved” (vol. ii. p. 352). He makes “ the 
Second Catastrophe” (see the remarks intro- 
ductory to ch. xii.) to end here; the “ Third 
Catastrophe and sequel” being ‘contained in 
ch. xx. 1-xxii. 5. 


ADDITIONAL NOTE on Chap. XIX. 


Nore A ON VER. 11—THE PRE-MILLEN- 
NIAL ADVENT. 


A controversy which embraces more than 
one question has arisen at this point in modern 


times respecting the Second Coming of Christ, 
— Will it be pre-Millennial?” 
The Second Advent,—the “ Presence,” —the 
“Parusia” of Christ Gj japoucia Tou Xpiatov), 
—is frequently spoken of by the writers of the 


789 


 - 


New Test. in connexion with the Last Judg- 
ment,— Matt. xxiv. 3, 37; 1 Cor. xv. 23; 2 
Thess ii.8; James v. 7, 8; 2 Pet.i.16; &c. 
In St. John’s writings the word sapovcia is 
found only in John ii. 28, and does not 
occur in the Apocalypse (see on ch. xvii. 8). 
Now the Last Judgment is not described in 
this Book until ch. xx. 11; and Scripture 
recognizes only one visible Return, or Coming, 
or “ Parusia,” of Christ. The question, there- 
fore, arises, whether the issuing forth of the 
Lord from heaven, as described in vv. 11-21 
is or is not visible? Whether the conflict here 
is literal or symbolical? In other words, 
whether the overthrow of Antichrist is carnal 
or spiritual? Christ has, it is true, intimated 
that all is not to be peace on earth (Matt. x. 34); 
and the Church will, doubtless, be militant 
unto the End:—but St. Paul defines the 
means by which alone the Cross is to triumph 
when he declares that the weapons of our 
warfare are not of the flesh (2 Cor. x. 4). 
Dr. David Brown well observes: “The 
Kingdom of Christ not being ‘ of this world, 
and so not ‘bearing the sword,’ does not 
‘break in pieces and consume all these king- 
doms’ (Dan. ii. 44) in any such pitched battle 
as the armies of men contend for the mastery 
in, and such as many are wont to represent 
‘the battle of that great day of God Almighty ” 
at ‘ Ar-Mageddon.’ . . . I believe the warfare 
itself to be not carnal. There may be much 
carnal warfare 12 connexion with it... . But 

. . this symbolical description [Rev. xix. 
11-21] of the conflict that is to issue in the 
final destruction of Antichrist and all his party, 
does not lead me the more to expect a ‘ carnal 
warfare, but just the reverse.... The final 
issue is to be gradwal rather than immediate— 
the result of zany blows rather than of one.” 
—Christ’s Second Coming : Will it be Premillen- 
nial? p. 334. 

The question, in short, amounts to this, Is 
the Second Advent of Christ to re-constitute, 
or to terminate the present state of things? 
—to establish an earthly (Millennial) kingdom 
illuminated by the beams of His Glory, and 
pervaded by the sense of His visible Presence? 
that is to say, Is the doctrine of what is 
called the “Premillennial Advent” true? 
That doctrine is as follows:—The present 
earthly state of things is not to terminate 
with the Second Coming of Christ, but to be 
then set up in a new form; when the Re- 
deemer with His glorified Saints will reign in 
Person for a Thousand Years over a world 
of men still in the flesh (see Brown, /.c., p. 
6). And again: “ But it may be said, if this te 
not the Second Advent, where does it occur 
in the Apocalypse after this? ‘ After the 
Millennium,’ says Mr. Birks, ‘there is not 
found one syllable in the prophecy expres- 
sive of such an Advent. True, for this is 


REVELATION. XIX. 


symbolical and figurative ;... But when I read 
thus, ‘ And I saw’ [after the Millennium] ‘a 
great white throne, &c. &c. [ch. xx. 11], and 
connect this with 2 Pet. iii. ro, I see the Lord 
personally present in the one passage, while 
the other informs me he has only then come. 
Thus no attempt is made in the Apocalypse 
to picture by symbols the Personal Advent, 
but in place of it He is beheld in His great 
white throne—just come; with which agree 
the words of Jesus himself, ‘When the 
Son of Man shall come in His glory, and 
all the holy angels with Him, then shall 
He sit upon the throne of His glory’” (/. ¢, 


P- 446). 

On the other hand, the majority of exposi- 
tors, of the most different schools, decide that 
the Second Advent of Christ is to be visible: 
many writers further insisting that the Second 
Advent is to precede the Millennium. Thus 
Auberlen: “This coming of Christ [to ‘es- 
tablish His kingdom of glory upon earth’] 
must be carefull distinguished from His 
Coming to the final Judgment. It is this 
Coming which both Daniel and John describe 
(Rev. xix. 11-12; Dan. ii. 33-44; vil. 9-14, 
26, 27); it is this Coming by which all shall 
be fulfilled which the prophets of the Old 
Test. have prophesied concerning the Mes- 
sianic time of peace and prosperity; it is this 
Coming which the Lord Jesus refers to in His 
discourse, Matt. xxiv. 29, &c., as distinguished 
from that spoken of in Matt. xxv. 31”.... 
“The expression, ‘the Parusia of Christ’ de- 
notes in the New Test., this Advent, and it 
alone; and this Second Coming of Christ, 
viewed in connexion with the Kingdom 
established by it upon earth (the Millennial), 
occupies a much more prominent position in 
the Biblical mode of conception, than in that 
of the modern Church. Passages like Matt. 
xxiv. 27-31; Acts i. 11; Rev. i. 7, leave 
scarcely a doubt that this appearance of the 
Lord will be visible” (/.c., p. 322). [Itisa 
mere assumption, it may be observed, on Au= 
berlen’s part, that the passages last quoted 
refer to vv. 11-21, and not to the Lord’s ap- 
pearance in ch. xx. 11]. Auberlen next pro- 
ceeds to bring in his theory of “an invisible 
Church” (see on ch. xvii. 1 :—“ The fundae 
mental importance of this Coming of the Lord 
consists (according to Col. iii. 3, 4) in this, 
that Christ and His Church shall become 
manifest and visible, even as before they are 
hid in God. The Advent of Christ~has a 
two-fold object,-To judge the W orld-power, 
and to bring to the Church redemption, 
glorification, and power over the world” 
oom From this conclusion Bisping only 

iffers in not assigning so much importance 
to this victory over Antichrist, and to the 
Millennial reign, which he regards as merely 
a transition period, and not the ultimate ob» 








v. 1] 


of the Second Advent. No less certain 

is Mr. Birks (“‘ Ihe Four Prophetic Empires,” 
. 330) that “The Second Advent of our 
rd, as described in the latest prophecy of 
Scripture, does not follow, but precedes the 
Millennial kingdom.” To the same effect 
De Burgh distinguishes t47s appearance of 


REVELATION. XX. 


Christ, or the Second Advent, from the gene- 
ral Judgment, ch. xx. 12-13; previously to 
which as well as to the Millennium, comes 
this “special judgment on a specific body of 
persons, an organized faction, found in ope 
position to Him, and His Kingdom” (J. é 
P- 345). 


79% 


Magog. 10 The devil cast into the lake of 
CHAPTER XxX. fire and brimstone. 12 The last and general 
resurrection. 


2 Satan bound for a thousand years. 6 The 
Jirst resurrection: they blessed that have part 
therein. 7 Satan let loose again. 8 Gog and 


ND I saw an angel come down 
from heaven, having the key 





[Ver. 2 [A reads 6 dis 6 dpxaios]. Ver. 3 om. and airév.—[A reads éppevas aitov for 
émdvo avtov).—om. cai before perd. Ver. 4 om. 1st avtav.—om. ta before yidua. Ver. § 
om. Sé.—é{yoav axpi [1 reads avéornoav axpu—T. R. avé{goav gws, Erasmus having 
taken the first syllable av from his manuscript, and é(jcav és from the Vulg. vixerunt donec. 
Er. himself, in his five editions, has éws reAcoOj ra yidta Erm Gxpt,—ayxpr being a printer’s 
error]. Ver. 6 [N, B read ra xiAca,—A omits ra]. Ver. 8 rov médepor [cf. ch. xix. 19 }— 
dv 6 dpiOpos avrav. Ver. 9 om. dro tod Gecod [cf. ch. xxi, 2,10]. Ver. 10 cai before ré 


Onpiov. Ver. 11 peéyav evkor. 


Ver. 12 rovs peyddous Kat Tovs pup. [the words pixpods 


kal peyadous (of T. R.), omitted in 1, are found in the commentary of Andreas. Cf. ch, 


Xi. 183 xiii. 163 xix. 5, 18].—éva@mov tov Opdvov. 


Ver. 13 twice reads rovs vexpovs Tovs 


éy avr. Ver. 14 ovros 6 Oavaros 6 Sevrepos éorw, 7 Aipvy TOU Tupés.] 


After the “Seven plagues which are the 
last” (ch. xv. 1) comes the final Judgment 
itself, in the different stages of which the 
Three great Enemies of God receive their 
doom. These are the Dragon—of whom we 
first read in ch. xii., and his two agents, the 
Beast from the ‘‘Sea,” or World-power (ch. 
xiii. 1), and the Beast from the ‘ Earth,” or 
“False Prophet ” (ch. xiii. 11); cf. ch. xvi. 13. 
The enmity of these two agents of the prin- 
ciple of evil derives its source from Satan 
himself; and is realized throughout the 
Visions which follow, in bloodshed, persecu- 
tion, seduction, and blasphemy. This God- 
opposing power is further manifested in ch. 
Xvii. 3 under the two connected forms of the 
World-kingdom, or Beast, and the World- 
city, or “ Harlot.” In the description of the 
Last Judgment this order is reversed. Satan 
is now introduced and judged, not first of 
all but last of all, when he is “‘ cast into the 
lake of fire” (ch. xx. 10). In ch. xix. 20, his two 
agents, the Beast and the “ False Prophet,” 
had been subjected to the same sentence; 
while earlier still, the seat of the World- 
power, Babylon, the “ Harlot,” had been de- 
stroyed (ch. xviii.). 

But what is the place of the opening verses 
of this twentieth chapter in this symbolical 
es of the final triumph of the Divine 

ingdom over the kingdom of evil? Omitting 
minor differences there are here two opposite 
systems of interpretation :— 


I. This chapter takes up and continues in 
historical order the narratives of the preceding 
Visions ; 

II. In ch. xx. 1-9 we have, not a con- 
tinuation of what went before, but a “Re- 
capitulation ” of events dating from the First 
Advent of Christ—ch. xix. 21 being con- 
tinued at ch. xx. Io. 

On these two systems see the Excursus at 
the end of this chapter. 


THE THOUSAND YEARS (1-6). 


1. And I saw an angel coming down out 
of eaven,| One of the host of Angels ta 
whom the key of the Abyss is given, as in 
ch. ix. 1. In order to execute his office, the 
Angel comes “ down out of heaven,” for Satan 
has no longer a place there—see ch. xii. 9, 12. 

The punishment of Satan, notes Auberlen, 
is always done by ministering Angels :—in 
ch. “xii. by the Archangel Michael; here by 
an “ Angel”; in ver. 10 no agency is spoken 
of :—see on ch. xii. 7. 

Appealing to ch. i. 18, Hengst. (and so 
St. Augustine, Vitr., and others) decides 
that this Ange] must be Christ Himself, “as at 
Vii. 2 ; X. 13 Xiv. 17; xvili. 1” (but see the notes 
on these texts);—Joachim and Cocceius une 
derstand the Holy Spirit ;—Bullinger regards 
him as symbolizing the Twelve Apostles ;— 
De Lyra, either Pope Calixtus II. (who come 
pelled the Emperor Henry V. to yield on the 


792 


of the bottomless pit and a great 
chain in his hand. 
2 And he laid hold on the dragon, 


REVELATION. XX. 


[v. 2. 


that old serpent, which is the Devil, 
and Satan, and bound him a thousand 
years, 





question of Investitures, A.D. 1122), or Pope 
Innocent III.;—-According to Brightman, 
the Angel is Constantine the Great. 

having the key of the Abyss] The 
present abode of Satan and his evil spirits— 
see ch. ix. 1-11; and cf. on ch. xi. 7; xvii. 8. 
This is to be distinguished from the “ Lake 
of Fire,’ ver. 10, a further and more awful 
place of punishment: see Matt. viii. 29; xxv. 
41. St. Augustine (see on ver. 3), as already 
quoted on ch. ix. 1, seems not to regard 
the “ Abyss” as a p/ace at all; and similarly 
Ebrard (also quoted there) takes the mean- 
ing to be symbolical. It cannot, he argues, 
denote an actual locality, because the “‘ Abyss” 
is first opened under the ft Trumpet (ch. 
ix. 1, 2); while Satan nevertheless is both in 
heaven and on earth, see ch. xii. 3, 7-13: and 
again, because he has power to send from it 
the “Locusts” (ch. ix. 11), as well as the 
Beast, ch. xi. 7; xvii. 8:—but see on ver. 2. 


and a great chain in his hand.| Gr., upon 
his hand,—lying on it, and hanging from 
it, prepared to execute the Divine Will, and 
bind Satan: cf. ch. v. 1. 

Bossuet takes the chain figuratively to mean 
“the inviolable commands of God, and the 
impress of His Eternal Will.” 


2. And he laid hold on the dragon,| For the 
Three great Enemies of God’s Kingdom, see 
chi xia, 4) *11's"xvi- 1g.) On the “con= 
tinuous” system of interpretation, ch. xix. 
21 is taken up here—see Note A at the end 
of this chapter. Cf. ch. xii. 3 as to the first 
appearance of the Dragon. 


the old serpent.) Note the nominative 
here (see vv. //.) marking the prominence 
of the idea—see Introd. § 7,1[V.(d). Thesame 
titles used in ch. xii. 9 are here repeated ver- 
batim; see also ch. xii. 14,15. The word 
“ Devil” used again in ver. to is also found 
in ch. ii. 10; xii. 12 :—the word “Satan” used 
pgain in ver. 7 is also found in ch. ii. 9, 13, 
84; iii. 9. Hengst. suggests that the exact 
repetition of these titles refers to the funda- 
mental victory over Satan spoken of in ch. xii. 
9. (This verse is quoted by St. Justin M., 
Apol. i. 28: see Introd. § 2, a). 

which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound 
bim] Satan being a spirit, the binding by the 
“chain” must be understood figuratively ;— 
not permitting him, as St. Augustine explains, 
to exercise his whole power of temptation. 
The expression “‘ bound,” recalls the binding of 
“ the strong man,” “ Beelzebub the prince of the 
devils,” Satan, Matt. xii. 24, 29; Mark iii. 26, 


27. On the overthrow of Satan’s power 
compare Luke x. 18; John xii. 31; xv. 11; 
2 Pet. ii. 4; Jude 6. 

The binding of Satan, notes Auberlen, as 
a Millennarian, is mentioned first, because 
it is organically connected with ch. xix. 20, 


for a thousand years,| The accusative case— 
signifying the duration of this binding of 
Satan: cf. ch. ix. 5. The importance of this 
period of duration is indicated by its being 
repeated six times in vv. 2-7. 

That the period of a “ Thousand Years” is 
to be taken figuratively, is in accordance with 
such texts as Ps. xc. 4 (“A thousand years 
in thy sight are but as yesterday " or 
2 Pet. iii. 8 (“‘ One day is with the Lord as a 
thousand years, and a thousand years as one 
day”). A space of time absolutely Jong 
is denoted,—just as “half an hour” (see on 
ch, viii. 1) denotes a space of time absolutely 
short. In fact, a very great, although not a 
countless number is signified;—not the “ten 
thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of 
thousands” of ch. v. 11; or that “hich no 
man could number” in ch. vii. 9. We are to 
understand a long, though finite duration, 
beginning from the First Advent of Christ 
(1 Cor. xv. 24, 25). 

On the number 1ooo (=10X 10x 103 OF 
1o°)—the largeness of which has deterred the 
advocates of the “ Year-day” theory from 
applying here their favourite method of calcu- 
lation—see Introd. § 11, b, II. Asthe period 
of “three years and a half” was a chrono- 
logical expression among the Jews denoting a 
time of suffering, so a “Thousand Years” 
signified with them the “ Day of Messiah”— 
“ Dies Messie mille anni ?’—see Wetst. in loc. 

Auberlen notes that Jen, the number which 
symbolizes the World in its completeness, is 
here raised to the power Tree, the number of 
God :—‘that is the world is penetrated per- 
fectly and thoroughly by the Divine element.” 

Dean Alford expresses the J/itera/ inter- 
pretation as follows :—* That the Lord will 
come in person to this our earth: that His 
risen elect will reign sere with Him and 
judge: that during that blessed reign the 
power of evil will be bound:.. . At the end 
of the Millennial period Satan is unloosed, and 
the nations of the earth are deceived by him.” 
“This,” he concludes, “is my firm pere 
suasion.”—Prolegg., p. 259. 

How the difficulties which surround this 
notion of the Millennial reign of Christ om 
earth are met by Auberlen, may be seen in 
Note A at the end of this chapter. Auberlen 





i le ede eee 


v. 3.] 


3 And cast him into the bottom- 
less pit, and shut him up, and set a 


also considers that both Daniel and St. 
John describe the Millennial Kingdom ;—the 
ormer, after the manner of the Old Test., 
describing the earthly aspect of the coming of 
God's Kingdom (Dan. ii. 35, 44; vii. 13, 27); 
the latter describing its spiritual aspect (Rev. 
xx. 1-6). In these passages, he observes, all 
prophecy on the subject, whether in the Old 
or New Test., is summed up. With the 
Coming of Christ—t4e Parusia (Luke xix. 
II, 12, 15,see on ch. xvii. 8)—the Kingdom of 
shall be manifested; mot indeed the 
eternal blessedness after the Last Judgment 
(Matt. xxv. 34), “ but, anterior to that event, 
it shall come as an earthly, Jewish, although 
not carnal Kingdom of glory” (p. 326); 
“Tsrael is again to be at the head of all 
humanity ” (p. 340). 

Differently still:—Diisterd. dwelling on 
the “poetic beauty” of “the Apocalyptic 
drama ” takes the “Thousand Years” to be 
but “an ideal representation ” of the interval 
between the Resurrection of believers, and 
the general Resurrection of the rest of man- 
kind. 


As will be shewn below, the idea of a 
Kingdom of Christ upon earth which should 
endure for a “Thousand Years” had passed 
from Judaism to Christianity ; and many in 
the Church of the second and third centuries 
accepted the doctrine from this Jewish source, 
through the medium of such writers as St. 
Barnabas, and Papias, and St. Justin Martyr. 
That Papias borrowed his Chiliastic doctrine 
from the Jewish “ Apocalypse of Baruch” is 
almost certain, as already pointed out in the 
Introduction § 9:—see also the Excursus at 
the end of this chapter. Indeed the general 
notion of a future age of perfect earthly 
happiness, and also of a period of a “ Thou- 
sand Years” in connexion with man’s future 
destiny, was in like manner entertained among 
the heathen, as we learn from Plato (see the 
Excursus). A world-wide >Delief, accordingly, 
such as this, naturally sug plied St. John with 
symbols and with language wherein to c -fhe 
his revelation of the fortunes of the Chsrch, 
—just as he has emplored for the same pur- 

se the details of the Theocracy, or the 
Imagery of war, or the phenomena and the 
convulsions of Nature. 

Our Lord’s words, as given in Luke xi. 21, 
22, clearly refer to the restraimmg Satan’s 
power, so “that be should deceive the nations 
no more” (ver.3). Accordingly, as history has 
sae heathen idolatries, sacrifices, oracles, 

ve gradually ceased ; and Christian civiliza- 
tion and Christian morality have been de- 
veloped where the Gospel has prevailed. 


REVELATION. XX. 


seal upon him, that he should deceive 
the nations no more, till the thousand 


That aspect of the doctrine, as held by Jews 
or by certain of the primitive Christians, 
which presented the “ Thousand Years” as a 
season of carnal enjoyment, need not be re- 
ferred to:—that other aspect only which pre- 
sents a Millennium of spiritual felicity, is to 
be regarded. The passages of Scripture 
usually referred to in proof of one or other of 
the phases of Chiliasm are those promises to 
the chosen People which are contained in the 
Old Test., and which are alleged not to have 
been as yet fulfilled in their true sense, viz., 
Gen. xii. I-3; Xv. 3-6; xxvii. 17-29; and the 
prophecies of Daniel and Ezekiel. Or, again, 
our Lord’s words, Matt. v. 5; viii. 11; xix. 
28, 29; xxvi. 29; Luke xiv. 12-14; xxii. 16; 
1 Cor. xv. 25, &c.; and above all, Rev. xx. 

8. And cast him into the abyss,] Our 
Lord has Himself thrown much light on 
this whole passage by the words, “ Now shall 
the Prince of this world be cast out” (John 
xii. 31): ‘‘ Now ’—from the date, that is, of the 
Incarnation. Here Satan is cast out of the 
earth; in ch. xii. 9 he was cast out of heaven. 
From the “ Abyss,” partially unlocked (ch. ix. 
2), the smoke of the Locust-plague issued ; 
thence, too, the Beast ascended (ch. xi. 7; xvii. 8) 
to whom Satan gave authority (ch. xiii. 4, 7). 
From this locality Satan himself has been 
allowed, by God’s permission, to come forth; 
and in Jobi. 7 is revealed the liberty conceded 
to him before he is now bound. In regarding 
the “Abyss” as a purely figurative expression 
denoting “the multitude of the ungodly, the 
malignity of whose hearts against the Church 
is profound ” (see on ch. ix. 1), St. Augustine 
has, surely, exceeded the limits of spiritual 
symbolism, as the texts just quoted, amony 
others, prove :—compare De Civ. Dei, xx. 7. 


and shut [it], and sealed [it] over 
him,] See vv. //. Cf. Dan. vi. 17; Matt. 
Xxviil. 66. Note, the verb rendered “sealed” 
is used, absolutely in the active, only here and in 
John iii. 33. The Cod. Alex. reads, shut him 
up, and set en him an abiding seal. 

This “setting ” a seal over him St. Augus- 
tine takes to mean that it will for ever be a 
secret in this life who they are that belong to 
the Devil’s part, and w4o do not (éé.). 


that he should decerve the nations no more,| 
As he has hitherto done (ch. xiii. 14; xvi. 13, 
14); see ver. 8. The “conj. aorist,” taken in 
a future sense (cf. Winer, s. 450), signifies 
that “the nations” are still to be on the earth 
during the “Thousand Years.” It is clear 
from ch. xxi. 24, that “the nations” is an ex- 
pression to be taken in all its generality. 
St. Augustine (# ¢.) would restrict it to the 


793 


794 


years should be fulfilled: and after 
that he must be loosed a little season. 


REVELATION, XX. 


[v. 4. 


4 And I saw thrones, and they 
sat upon them, and judgment was 





Elect ;—Hengst. to “ 4eathen nations as such,” 
Not individuals ;—Other writers refer to the 
heathen as distinct from Christians ; for people 
who are not Christians,—argue Millennariaps 
of this class,—even after ch. xix. 21, are still to 
exist on earth, although in its most remote 
regions (ver. 8);—Burger concludes that siz 
has not as yet ceased from the earth as long 
as sinful men dwell on it: but the great 
increase and development of siz which Satan’s 
influence effects is not experienced until the 
“Thousand Years” are ended. 


until the thousand years should be 
finished:] Scripture elsewhere intimates 
that before the end of the world Satan's 
power to deceive—perhaps by the revival of 
heathenism—will be restored. “The Day of 
the Lord,” we are told, will not be “ except 
the falling away come first and the Man of 
Sin” is revealed ‘“‘ according to the working of 
Satan, with all power and signs and lying 
wonders ” (2 Thess. ii.3-9) ; when the deso- 
lating “ abomination” (Matt. xxiv. 15) will 
spring up, exceeding all other idolatries ; when 
the power that now restrains shall be taken 
out of the way. 


after this] Omit “ dnd”—see vv. Il. 
Gr. after these, viz. “the Thousand Years.” 
Or, after these things. 


he must be loosed for a little time.] 
For the prophetic formula “ must,” see ch. i. 
1; iv. 1. On the word rendered “time” 
(chronos,—not the word rendered “time” in 
ch. xii. 12, which is £airos), see on ch. i. 3; ii. 
a1. This duration is occupied by the events 
described in vv. 7-11. 

This pertod Bengel arbitrarily assumes to be 
1112 years, or “half a time” (4airos), and to 
extend from A.D. 2836 to AD. 2947+4. 
By adding to this “the short time” of ch. 
xil. 12, or 8888 years, he gets A.D. 3836, the 
close of the second Millennium or reign of the 
Saints in heaven :—see Note A at the end 
of this chapter. Upon the loosing of Satan in 
A.D. 2836, the gradual Resurrection of the 
martyrs begins. These reign with Christ in 
heaven until A.D. 3836, the period of the 
general Resurrection. Tis, with the final 
Judgment that speedily ensues, is described in 
ver. 11, &c. (see Introd. § 11, (b), 1V.). When 
this additional period is fulfilled, and Satan, 
followed by Gog and Magog, is defeated, he 
has arrived at the fourth and last stage of 
his punishment—“ the Lake of Fire”: see on 
ver. 2, and on ch. xii. 12. 

The “little time,” St. Augustine (/.¢., c. 8) 
understands to be the great period of Anti- 
christ, the “three and a half years” :—per- 


haps, suggests I. Williams (p. 413), because 
this space of time is the mystical number 
expressive of a period of trial of longer or 
shorter duration. 


THE FIRST RESURRECTION (4-6). 


These verses convey a revelation interposed 
between ver. 3 and its continuation in ver. 7. 
The Apostolic Church, sighing under her 
many tribulations, is here taught the spiritual 
meaning of that Millennial existence which 
man so fondly pictures to himself as an exist- 
ence of earthly bliss in the future—a bliss how- 
ever, of which earth can never be the scene :— 
see the Excursus at the end of this chapter. 

Burger notes that vv. 4, 5 exhibit the 
other side of the victory won in ch. xix. 20, 21. 

Ebrard takes a different view :—As ch. xix. 
20, 21, reveals the subversion of Antichrist 
by the Lord Himself, so here we have a new 
Vision unfolding the share of the “Saints” 
in that same judgment. 


4. And I saw thrones,| See the note on 
Dan. vii. 9; and read in combination with 
each other the following texts :—Dan. vii. 18, 
22; Matt. xix. 28; 1 Cor.vi. 2; Rev. ii. 26; 
iii. 21. In like manner, with the close of 
this verse, “They reigned with Christ,’ com- 
pare ch. i. 6, “He made us to be a King- 
dom;” and ch. v. 10, didst make them to 
be a Kingdom.. and they reign on 
the earth.” 

The idea of royal “thrones” can hardly be 
avoided here. Some refer exclusively to 
judicial seats or thrones—see below. One can 
scarcely doubt that both ideas are combined. 

These heavenly “thrones” have been placed 
by some on the earth. 

and they sat upon them,| The subject of 
the verb is not specified (cf. ch.x. 11; xii. 6), 
but the meaning naturally is the “ souls” 
(see below) of the glorified dead; the mare 
tyrs, as well as the faithful, who are next 
spoken of, and who now, with Christ, judge 
and govern the Church (see 1 Cor. iv. 8; 
vi. 2, 3):—so St. Augustine (dc. ¢. 9). 
Burger suggests the Twelve Apostles (Matt. xix. 
28) or the Twenty-four Elders ;—Hengst. the 
Apostles in fellowship with the Tavelve Patrie 
archs;—Reuss the Saints (Dan. vii. 22; 1 
Cor. vi. 2), or the Angels;—And yet again, 
Words. the Pagan and Papal persecutors, of 
the Church. Grotius takes the Judges to 
be God and Christ—a sense excluded by 
the following words “judgment was gives 
unto them.” Ifa distinction is to be made be- 
tween those who “ sat” upon the thrones here, 
and those who “ reigned with Christ” at the 








v. 4. 


given unto them: and J saw the 
souls of them that were beheaded 
for the witness of Jesus, and for 
the word of God, and which had 


REVELATION. XX. 


not worshipped the beast, ..either 
his image, neither had received his 
mark upon their foreheads, or in 
their hands; and they lived and 





end of the verse, the natural subject of the 
verb would be the representatives of the Uni- 
versal Church—the “'Twenty Four Elders” 
Of ch. iv. 4; xi. 16. The number of the 
“ thrones,” however, is not stated here. 


and judgment was given unto them:] 
“ Judgment” (xpipa) without the art., notes 
Burger, points to a special judgment for a 
definite object. Of those who see here a 
judicial transaction in heaven, some regard the 
“ judgment” as intended to decide on the claims 
of the Martyrs to their reward (Hengst.) ;— 
Diisterd. includes the Saints generally—to 
which Alf. objects, quoting John v. 24, the 
believer “cometh not into judgment” (cis 
xpiowy) ;— Words. writes: “The Pagan and 

apal persecutors of [the] Martyrs had been 
seated on ¢hrones executing judgment, and 
condemned them to death ;—Ebrard thinks 
that the absence of the art. before the word 
“ judgment ” indicates a judgment preliminary 
to that of ver. 12. /is he takes to be a 
judgment on Christ’s enemies identical with 
that described in ch. xix. 20-xx. 3. 

The true sense (see below) seems to point 
io that moral judgment of humanity spoken of 
by Christ in John v. 24-27, the execution of 
which is here delegated by Him to His Saints 
as promised in ch. iii. 21 :—see on ver. 12. 


and [I saw] the souls] Inver. 12 St. John 
says “I saw the dead;” here he beholds 
“ the souls” of those who “shall never die” 
(John xi. 25, 26),—of the martyrs in glory, 
—“animez,” writes St. Augustine, “ mar- 
tyrum nondum sibi corporibus suis redditis ” 
(ic.,c.9). It isofthe Martyrs only that “ te 
souls” are expressly said to have been now 
seen. Words. notes: “He does not say he 
saw the bodies ;” i.e., the Seer has a Vision of 
the Martyrs in the state of the dead, after they 
were slain, and before their Resurrection. 


of them that had been JLeheaded| Gr. 
who had been smitten with an axe; 
—the axe (méAexus, securis, fasces) was the 
badge of Roman power (Virg. x. vi. 820), 
as Wetstein notes, a supplicium Romanum. Of 
course we may take this to be an emblem of 
all forms of martyrdom; pointing to those 
“ souls” beneath the Altar which cried for 
vengeance (ch. vi. 9), as also those who were 
slain by the Beast over all the earth, and with 
whose blood the “Harlot ” was drunken—ch, 
Kili. 7, 15; XVi. 6; xvii. 6; xviii. 24. 

for the testimony of Jesus, and for the 
word of God,| See ch.i. 9; xii. 17; xix. Io. 


and such as worshipped not the Least,] 

The second class of those who were seen 
seated on the “ thrones,” see ch. xiii. 15 :— 
Either “the souls of such as,” &c.; or (with 
an accusatival construction, supplying zavras 
before oiriwes), “I saw all the faithful of all 
times, such as” &c.—which includes the 
living as well as the dead. This latter con- 
struction seems to give the true sense; and 
thus there is here not a Vision of Martyrs 
only, or of the dead only :—see on ch. vi. 11. 

neither bis image,| See ch. xili. 14. 


and received not the mark upon 
their forehead and upon their hand;] 
See ch. xiii. 16. As in ch. vi. 11, St. John 
distinguishes two classes here,—(1) “‘The 
noble army of Martyrs”; (2) “The holy 
Church throughout all the world,” undere 
stood in the sense of the lines— 
‘« There is 
One great society alone on earth: 
The noble Living and the neble Dead.” 
Wordsworth, 7he Prelude, B. xi.’ 


—the redeemed in heaven, and the faithful 
on earth—‘the Communion of Saints.” 
“ Nor is this union,” writes Pearson, “ sepa- 
rated by the death of any, but as Christ in 
Whom they live is the Lamb slain from the 
foundation of the world, so have they [viz. 
“such persons as are truly sanctified in the 
Church of Christ, while they live among the 
crooked generation of men,”] fellowship with 
all the Saints which from the death of Abel 
have ever departed in the true faith and fear 
of God, and now enjoy the presence of the 
Father.” — On The Creed, Art. ix. [“ Neque 
enim,” writes St. Augustine, “piorum anime 
mortuorum separantur ab Ecclesia que 
etiam nunc est regnum Christi... . ‘Et 
si qui non adoraverunt bestiam,’ &c. simul de 
vivis et mortuis debemus accipere” (#2.)]. 

Burger sees in ver. 4 favo classes,—as well 
the 144,000 of ch. vii. 4-8, and ch. xiv. 1-5, 
as those spoken of in ch. vii. 9-17 and ch. xv. 
2-4. 

and they lived,| Miillennarians with one 
voice assert “lived again” :—e.g. Alf. writes, 
“ @(noav = avé(noay, asin ch. ii. 8; Rom. xiv. 
9.” In both these texts the reference is to 
Christ, and therefore is irrelevant here. 
When other Millennarians urge the force of 
the words which follow, “the rest of the 
dead,’ and “the First Resurrection,’ they 
give a meaning to the passage which it can- 
not bear—see below. The «ey to the real 


795 


796 


reigned with Christ a thousand 
years. 


sense of this whole Vision is, however, to be 
found in our Lord’s words (John v. 24-29) 
which unfold the conception of spiritual Life. 
In John v. 22 the Father “hath given a// 
judgment unto the Son,”—i.e., (1) “ judgment” 
in its spiritual sense as defined in wv. 24-26, 
and (2) in its external sense, as defined in vv. 
27-29: in other words, the two senses 
in which “judgment” is now referred to 
in this present verse, and in ver. 12. 
Accordingly, it is declared in John v. 24 
that believers “ ave eternal Life,’ and “ come 
not into judgment” (in the spiritual or moral 
sense), but have “passed out of death into 
Life.” Even in this world, they already have 
spiritual Life—* Life,” in the fullest and truest 
sense of the word. And this is the meaning 
of the expression here, “they Jived :”—see 
also 1 John iii. 14; and cf. Luke xv. 32; 
Rom. xi. 15. Neither here nor in ver. 5 (see 
wv. Il.) is it said “they lived again.” 

Hengst., in his theory of the Millennium 
(see Note A), does not include those now 
actually living on earth, and explains: “I 
saw how they lived, or attained to life before 
my eyes:”—he sees them not merely in the 
state of the living; he also sees how they 
came to this state—cf. Ezek. xxxvii. 7. 


and reigned with Christ a thousand years.]| 
See vv. ll. The Textus Receptus reads the 
article here—“ ¢4e Thousand Years.” 

This reigning of the Church Militant on 
earth, as well as of the Church triumphant in 
heaven (1 Cor. iv. 8; cf. Eph. ii. 6; 2 Tim. 
ii. 11, 12), with Christ, since His Incarnation 
(see on ver 2), has been already referred to in 
ch. v. 10; cf. ch. i. 6:—it includes also the 
Office of judging. Hence it follows that it is 
only the faithful who have been born since the 
date of the Incarnation, who both “/ive”’ (z. e., 
receive spiritual life) and “reign” with Christ: 
—the rest of mankind are spoken of in ver. 5. 

Auberlen (see Note A) holding that Christ 
has taken up His Bride, the Church, with 
Him to heaven, regards the free commu- 
nion of the heavenly and earthly Churches, 
to be one of the glories of the Millennium. 
As a type of this communion between the 
Church on earth and the glorified Saints, 
visible in their risen bodies, he takes the 
appearances of the risen Saviour to His dis- 
ciples during the Forty Days which preceded 
the Ascension (/.c., p.334). This same com- 
parison with the Forty Days is made by 
Ebrard, who, however, considers that the 
Saints reign, not from heaven, but over the 
“ nations” on earth, near to whom is “the 
camp of the Saints,” ver. 9 


REVELATION. XX. 


Iv. 5- 


5 But the rest of the dead lived 
not again until the thousand years 


Burger considers that this verse conveys a 
literal prediction; but he declines to discuss 
any question connected with it (“ Wie sie 
zu denken, womit sie ausgefillt sein wird, 
haben wir nichts zu besprechen”). 

On theabsence of the article Bengel founds 
his theory of z¢qwo Millennial periods—see 
Note A. The art. is omitted in ver. 2, and 
is inserted in vv. 3, 7; and Bengel takes 
these ¢4ree verses to mark the frst ‘“ Thousand 
Years,” or the binding of Satan. He connects 
vv. 5,6 with ver. 4, this second group of 
three verses marking the second “ Thousand 
Years,” or reign of the Saints—the art. being 
doubtful in ver. 6 (see vv. //.). On its 
omission Bengel notes: “versu 6, quasi in 
elogio, seorsum posito.” 


5. The rest of the dead) (Omit “ But” — 
see vv. //.). Compare, as on ver. 4, John 
v. 25: “The hour... . mow és when the 
dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God” 
—when “ Jesus sees Himself as the only 
really Living One, in the midst of mankind 
who are sunk in death and in sin” (Godet im 
Joc.). On this, the spiritual sense of ‘ being 
dead, compare “Let the dead bury their 
dead”—Luke ix. 60; see also Luke xv. 24; 
Rom. vi. 2; Eph. ii. 1, 5; Col. ii. 13. The 
spiritual sense of “ death,” as wellas of “ life,” 
implying a moral Resurrection, is to be re- 
tained here. “The rest of the dead” St. 
Augustine takes to be those who have sof 
heard the Divine voice, John v. 25 (“qui- 
cunque non vixerit, id est, isto toto tempore 
quo agitur prima resurrectio, non audierit 
vocem filii Dei,” #.). And so Hengst. and 
Bisping, &c.,—‘‘ the godless dead.” 

I. Williams understands the Saints of the 
Old Test., those under the ff Seal who 
“died for the word of God,” but not for the 
testimony of Jesus ; and who are to rest “ yet 
for a little season” (ch. vi. 9, 11); cf. also 
Heb. xi. 39, 40. De Wette and Disterd. 
include among “the rest of the dead” all 
godly or ungodly who had literally died, but 
had not been called to reign with Christ during 
the Millennium ;—and so De Burgh, who exe 
cludes from those who “ reign,” “all the con- 
verts of the Millennial period.”—p. 364. 

The meaning, however, seems to be, 
‘ All mankind from the beginning who have 
not shared on earth in that “ Li” which 
Christ came to confer, and which He alone 
could bestow (John i. 4; v. 40),—whether 
holy men of old who had not received the 
promise (cf. the case of John the Baptist, 
Luke vii. 28; and also Heb. xi. 39, 40); or 
those among the heathen ofall times who have 








v. 6.] 


were finished. This zs the first 


resurrection. 


REVELATION, XX. 


6 Blessed and holy zs he that hath 
part in the first resurrection: on 





ever shewn “ the work of the Law written in 
their hearts” (Rom. ii. 15); or, in fine, the 
ungodly of all ages and of all nations.’ 


lived not until the thousand years 
should be finished.| Note, we do not read, 
“Tived not again” (see vv. //.), as the A.V.: 

—see on ver 4. Alford, however, and others 
still interpret, as before, “lived not (again),” 
xe. did not rise, literally speaking, from the 
dead—according to their notion of the “ First 
Resurrection”: see below. Words. notes: 
‘‘ After the crisis of the last struggle they will 
revive ‘to shame and contempt’ (Dan. xii. 2) 
at the General Resurrection.” 

Dean Vaughan explains: “ ‘ The rest of the 
dead lived not’—in that sense of /ife which is 
alone the Gospel’s and the Christian’s sense.” 
Till after the “ Thousand Years ” “ they exist 
only in that suffering of the lost soul. which is 
separation from God, and therefore also from 
life and from hope ; and when they are finally 
reunited to the resurrection body it will be 
for them not a ‘ body of glory’ (Phil. iii. 21) 
but... . a body suited to that future life 
which is called more properly the second 
death ” (ii. p. 219). 

It may well be doubted whether an ex- 
pression so comprehensive as “the rest of the 
dead” is to be thus restricted in its meaning. 
Carefully preserving, however, throughout 
this passage the same meaning for the words 
“life” and “ death,’ the result is rather as 
follows :—‘“ The rest of the dead” who are at 
length to attain to spiritual /ife do not receive 
that gift until the end of the present Dispensa- 
tion,—until the end of the “‘ Thousand Years,” 
—until the eve of the General Judgment. 
They are then to “ /ive,” but not to “ reign” 
with Christ (see on ver. 4). Accordingly the 
“ First Resurrection” (see below) includes 
those only who both “dive” and “ reign.” 
They who only “ /ive ” with Christ hereafter 
do not share in what is here called the 
“ First Resurrection”; but they are to share in 
the “ Resurrection of the Just” (Luke xiv. 14). 

This clause of ver. 5 is parenthetical. 


This ts the first resurrection.| The fourth 
verse is resumed here. These words Millen- 
Narians rely upon as rendering their system 
secure. Dean Alford writes: “If in a passage 
where two resurrections are mentioned,.... 
the first resurrection may be understood to 
mean spiritual rising with Christ, while the 
second means /itera/ rising from the grave ;— 
then there is an end of all significance in 
language; and Scripture is wiped out as a 
definite testimony to anything. If the first 
Tresurrection is spiritual, then so is the second, 


which I suppose none will be hardy enough 
to maintain.” 

As opposed to this reasoning one may ask, if 
“‘ the second death” is to be taken in a spiritual 
sense in ver. 6, why may not the “ First 
Resurrection” in the same verse be, in like 
manner, so taken? Here the reader is to 
note, (1) That, from beginning to end, St. 
John nowhere uses the words relied upon, 
‘the second resurrection ;”—as indeed neitheris 
the phrase “ the first death ” employed by hims 
while he uses here, and repeats in ver. 6, the 
phrase, the’ “ First Resurrection,” and also 
repeats more than once the phrase, “ the second 
death” (see vv. 6, 14; ch. ii. 11; xxi. 8). 
In ver. 12 the Universal Resurrection is 
spoken of in the most general terms,—and 
similarly in vv. 12, 13 and, elsewhere, /iteral 
death (e.g. “ Twill kill her children with death,” 
ch. ii. 23); but St. John abstains pointedly 
from writing the “second resurrection” or 
“the first death.” In other words, he abstains 
from language which would have been so 
natural had the supposed parallel between 
two literal resurrections been intended :— 
i.e., had the “ First Resurrection” which he 
speaks of been literal, as is that other Resur- 
rection to which he merely refers in the most 
general terms. So too St. John nowhere 
uses “the first death” to signify the literal 
death of the body ; while he carefully dwells 
upon “the second death,” or final doom of the 
wicked (ch. ii. 11 ; xxi. 8)—a figurative sense 
which is evident from ver. 14, where “ the 
second death ” follows the Resurrection of the 
body, and does not precede it, as the literal 
event referred to in vv. 12, 13 (which we 
call death) precedes the future rising from 
the grave. 

(2) In this figurative sense “the second 
death” is connected, in ver. 6, with the 
“ First Resurrection” :—and thus, as in vv. 
12, 13 we do not scruple to take the word 
“ dead” literally, or to understand a literal 
Resurrection (although not expressed) ; so, in 
like manner, we need not scruple, as Alford 
does, to interpret in a spiritual sense the 
“First Resurrection,” just as all interpret 
spiritually “‘ the second death.” 

(3) We do not read of “the frst birth,” 
but we do read, and notably in Johniii. 3, 5, of 
being “ born again,’ “ born of water and of 
the Spirit””—in fact of Regeneration or “the 
second birth”; and this is precisely what the 
“First Resurrection” means. Thus, speaking 
of those who are “born of God,” St. John 
writes: “ We have passed out of death into life” 
(1 John iii. 14). Hence the antithesis of ver. 
6: The “ First Resurrection,”—The “ second 


797 


798 


such the second death hath no power, 
but they shall be priests of God and 


REVELATION. XX, 


[v. € 


of Christ, and shall reign with him a 
thousand years. 





death.” In Jobnv. 24, 25, our Lord “ borrows 
trom the physical Resurrection images whereby 
He depicts the moral work which is to pave 
the way to it. He seems to allude to that 
magnificent vision of Ezekiel (ch. xxxvii.), in 
which the prophet, standing in the midst of a 

lain covered with dry bones, calls them to 
Fife, first by his words, and then by the 
breath of Jehovah” (Godet, én /Joc.). In John 
v. 25, in the words “the hour that zow is,” 
Christ speaks of what takes place in this life; 
and then He goes on to speak (wv. 28, 29) of 
that future hour “ in the which all that are in 
the graves shall hear His votce.” And so St. 
John teaches in this present passage, following 
the stream of New Test. doctrine. Thus St. 
Paul: “We were buried with Him through 
baptism into death” (Rom. vi. 2-4) ; “ Buried 
with Him in Baptism, wherein ye were also 
raised with Him” (Col. ii. 12); or as St. 
Paul applies the images of death and resurrec- 
tion: “ Awake thou that sleepest and arise from 
the dead” (Eph. v. 14). Hence it is that in 
harmony with all New Test. teaching, we 
have symbolized here, under the figure of 
the “First Resurrection,” that “death unto 
sin and new birth unto righteousness” in the 
Sacrament of Baptism, of which the Lord’s 
death and Resurrection are the pledge and 
the efficient cause. 

(4) Further,—the words of Christ, John 
v. 28, 29, are decisive against the opinion that 
there is to be a First, literal, Resurrection of 
certain of the dead distinct from that of all: 
“ Theehour cometh in which a/] that are in the 
graves shall hear the voice of the Son of Man, 
and shall come forth.” Here we are to note 
(1) that the event spoken of is wholly future, 
the words “and now is” of ver. 25 being 
carefully omitted ;—(2) that we read not 
merely of “ the dead,” but of “ all that are in 
the graves ;’—(3) that it is not merely “ they 
that hear,” which implies a division of classes, 
but “ a// that are in the graves shall hear ;’— 
(4) that Christ is not speaking in ver. 29 of 
“life” only—as in ver. 25; in ver. 29 two 
opposite issues are proposed, /ife and judgment. 
In a word, at that one, Jast “ hour” the right- 
eous and the unrighteous are to rise together 
from the dead: see Godet in Joc. 

The conclusion, then, is as follows :—The 
subjects of the “First Resurrection” are 
those who are specified in ver. 4, of whom 
Christ had already spoken in John v. 25; 
while “the rest of the dead,” —who are referred 
to in the parenthetical clause at the beginning 
of the present verse,—though they do not par- 
take of the “First Resurrection” until the 
end of the “ Thousand Years,” are also in- 


cluded in the announcement of John v. 29: 
They shall come forth from their graves, “ they 
that have done good unto the resurrection of life; 
and they that have wrought evil, unto the re« 
surrection of judgment.” 


6. Blessed and holy} For similar words of 
consolation and encouragement cf. ch. i. 3; 
XIV. 13; XVL. 15,; XIX. 9); Xxtuonas 

is he that hath part in the first resurrection 3] 
The phrase “to save part” is peculiar to St. 
John; see John xiii. 8, in which verse alone— 
although with another preposition, “ qwith” 
(nerd not év), as referring to a person—do we 
find it elsewhere in the New Test.: see ch. 
xxi. 8. Cf Luke xi. 36; xii. 46; Acts viii, 
21; and Introd. § 7, Iv, (c). 

Note,—They that have “part in the First 
Resurrection,’ as shewn on vv. 4, 5, “live 
and reign with Christ a Thousand Years” 
(ver. 4). They who, from among “ the rest 
of the dead,” shall “ ive” with Him after the 
“Thousand Years” are finished, will share in 
the blessedness of the former, although they 
have not reigned with Him. 

It is no objection to the interpretation 
here given of this passage that, among those 
who “are buried with Christ through Baptism 
into death,” and who like Him are “ raised from 
the dead” (Rom. vi. 4), there are some—nay 
many—who fall away. It is characteristic of 
St. John to assume that the gifts of Divine 
grace actually produce that spiritual change 
which the God of love designed that they 
should produce in man. ‘Thus he writes: 
“Whosoever is begotten of God doeth no sin” 
(1 John iii. 9); while this same Epistle opens 
(i. 8) with the assertion of the general prin- 
ciple: “ If we say that we have no sin, we dee 
ceive ourselves”: see also John x. 28, 29; 
xiv. 15 :—“Ipse est autem particeps ejus, q 
non solum a morte, que in peccatis est, ree 
viviscit, verum etiam in eo quod revixerit, 
permanebit.”—St. August., ibid. 


over these the second death hath me 
power ;| Gr. no authority. In ver. 14 
we are told that “the second death” is “the 
lake of fire”—see also ch. ii. 11; xxi. 8: and 
ver. 15 proves that not those only who “ ave 
part in the First Resurrection” are released 
from “the second death,’ but those also who 
are “ found written in the Book of Life,”?— 
is, all who shall ultimately “/ive” with Christ. 

On the spiritual as well as the literal signie 
fication with St. John of the expressions, “ #o 
die,” “ death,” see John xi. 25, 26; t John 
v. 16, 17. 


but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, 


* 





Vv 7—8.] 


7 And when the thousand years 
are expired, Satan shall be loosed out 
of his prison, 


and shall reign with him] See ch. 1. 6; v.10. 


Note that the expressions being “ priests,” and 
the “ reigning,” or having “a Kingdom,” are 
always used of this present life. 

St. Augustine points out that it is briefly 
intimated here that Christ is God; “ Deum 
esse Christum, dicendo sacerdotes Dei et 
Christi ”—id., c. 10. 

a@ thousand years.]| 
Years,’ —see vv. ll.; 
quoted on ver. 4. 

For the interpretation which connects this 
passage with an earlier Vision, see the re- 
marks of Todd quoted on ch. xi. 18. 

From comparing the blessing in this verse 
with that in Dan. xii. 12, 13, some have 
inferred that the 1335 (1260+30+30+15) 
days of Dan. xii. 12, will be immediately 
followed by the Resurrection of the Just, and 
the Millennial reign of Christ. Thus some 
ancient writers held that the 1260 days (Rev. 
xii.6) or “three and a half years” (the duration 
of Antichrist’s power—Dan. vii. 25), the 1290 
days of Dan. xii. 11, and the 1335 days, will 
commence together’ after the delivering up of 
the Saints to the antichristian “ Horn” (Dan. 
vil. 21) ;—that at the end of the 1290 days 
(.e., in thirty days after the “three and a half 
years”) Antichrist “shall be broken without 
hand” (Dan. viii. 25) ;—and that at the end of 
the 1335 days the dead shall be raised with 
their bodies:—see Todd’s Lectures on Anti- 
christ, p. 117. 

Referring to the “ Pre-millennial scheme” 
of modern times Dr. David Brown asks: 
“When Christ appears at the beginning of 
the Millennium, He will raise all the Saints 
that shall have died before that time, and 
change all that shall then be alive. But 
what is to become of the myriads of Saints 
that are to people the earth during the 
Millennium? ... This whole subject is a 
blank in the system. It has positively got no 
Scripture on the subject. . For the most 
part the subject is avoided ” @. Ce, P. 155)» 


Or “the Thousand 
and cf. Bengel’s note 


THE JUDGMENT ON SATAN (7-I0). 


7. And when the thousand years are 
finished,] See on ver. 3:—the narrative of 
ch. xix. 19-21 is here resumed. A clear 
proof of the parallel nature of the two 
passages is supplied by the quotation in 
ch. xix. 17, 18, of those words of Ezekiel 
(ch. xxxix. 17, 18) on which ver. 8 (see 
below) is founded. The two passages, in- 
deed, a-e but different accounts of the assem- 


REVELATION. XX. 


8 And shall go out to deceive the na- 
tions which are in the four quarters of | 


the earth, *Gog and Magog, to gather , cian 


bling “unto the war of the great day of God, 
the Almighty,” described in ch, xvi. 14-16; 
the hosts being gathered together by the 
evil spirits proceeding from “the Dragon,” 
“the Beast,’ and “the False Prophet.” The 
destruction of “The Dragon,” or Satan is 
described here ; and the destruction of “ the 
Beast” with the “False Prophet” is de- 
scribed in ch, xix. 20. For the order in which 
the Three Enemies of God are punished set 
the remarks introductory to this chapter. 


Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,| On 
this revival of Satan’s power at the end, com- 
pare the words: “ When the Son of Man 
cometh, shall He find faith on the earth?” — 
Luke xviii. 8. As to the dinding of Satan, 
see On ver. 2. 

Here we have no longer a Vision, intro- 
duced by the words “ And I saw;” buta 
distinct prediction of what will come to pass 
hereafter. We have now the prophetic future; 
in ver. 9 the Aistoric form is resumed with 
aorists. This instance (together with shall 
come forth, ver. 8), as Hengstenberg observes, 
is the only case in the Apoc., where the 
future, as such, is announced beforehand. In 
ver. 9 St. John returns to his Vision. The 
future in ch. ix. 6 but reflects Jer. viii. 3 ;—in 
ch. xi. 3, St. John is not the speaker ;—in 
ch. xiii. 8 the future follows from what was 
seen. 

According to Reuss (see on ch. xvi. 18), the 
Third great Conflict is described here in vv, 
7-10. 


8. and shall come forth ¢#o aeceive] 
See ver. 3. How Satan accomplishes his de- 
ception at this stage, has been explained by 
commentators generally by a reference to ch 
xvi. 13. 

the natwns which are in the four corners 
of the earth, | As to the sense in which “ te 
nations” areto be taken, see onver. 3. Asto 
“ the four corners of the earth,” see on ch. 
vii. 1,—2.¢., the whole earth to its four corners 
(cf. 1 Sam. xiv. 38, LXX.). Others take the 
meaning to be, “the nations occupying the 
most remote parts of the earth” (so Vitr. 
“extrema terre ord,” p. 870) ;—“ the peoples 
outside the scene of historical development ze 
(Burger). Who these “zations” are, and 
whence they are to come, are questions which 
cause Millennarians great perplexity. Not to 
mention the difficulty as to the existence, 
during the Millennium, of members of the 
Church who are born and die, marry and 
are given in marriage, there remains the 


799 


800 


REVELATION. XX. 


[v. 8 


them together to oattle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. 





further difficulty as to unbelieving “ nations.” 
Vitr. suggests that they may be “ beri, Colchi, 
Albani, Moschi, Sarmate, Turci, &c.—id. ;— 
Mede conjectures “Orbis Americani, Arctici et 
Antarctici incole;” and generally the Anti- 
podes (/. c., p. 575) ;—Hengst., as before (see 
on ver. 3), refers to the Aeathen as such; and 
he notes how Bengel “ perceived, even in his 
day, the beginnings of the germinating heathen- 
ism;”—Ebrard explains that they are the un- 
converted heathen who dwell all round the 
region assigned to the Saints as their dwelling, 
see ver.9; and so Bisping ;—De Burgh (p. 
366): “ That enemies will be suffered to exist 
during [Christ’s] reign, for the exhibition of 
His power, is intimated in other Scriptures 
(Ps. cx. 2,3). The only question is, Why 
should this be permitted?—To prove the 
undoubted security of the Saints. . . as also 
finally to consummate the guilt of the enemy 
himself.” And yet, as Disterd. objects, Millen- 
harians generally consider that all ungodly 
nations and rulers had already been annihi- 
lated (ch. xix. 21). 

Besides the connexion of this verse with 
the prophecy of Ezekiel (see below), Hengst. 
also connects it with Daniel's prophecy of 
the “ Little Horn” (Dan. vil. 8, 21, 24), or 
Antichrist. 


Gog and Magog,| ‘These names appear in 
Ezek. xxxvili.; xxxix.; where, however, we 
read “ Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince 
of Meshech and Tubal” (Ezek. xxxviii. 2). In 
Gen. x. 2, Magog isa son of Japheth father 
of the Gentiles (ver. 5), as distinguished from 
the race of Shem (ver. 21); Gog being (see 
above) “the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal,” 
who are also sons of Japheth. In Gen. x. 2 
(see note iz Joc.) Magog is placed between 
Gomer and Madai (ancestors of the Cim- 
merians and Medes)—evidently as the name of 
a people of the North—see Ezek. xxxvili. 15 ; 
xxxix. 2. In Cuneiform inscriptions “ we find 
side by side with ‘a chief of Madai (Media) ’ 
‘Sariti and Pariza, sons of Ga-a-gi, a chief of 
the Saka (Scythians),’ whom Mr. Smith (Hist. 
of Assurbanipal, p. 97) identifies with Gog” 
(note on Ezek. xxxviil. 2). The statement of 
deeepine (Antt. 1. 63) that the descendants of 

agog were the Scythians is generally ac- 
cepted as true. The great irruption of the 
northern races from beyond the Caucasian 
range, who are known by the general name 
of Scythians, is recorded by Herodotus (B. 1. 
C. 103-106); and, although the fact has been 
questioned, the influence of those races in 
Western Asia is confirmed by the Cuneiform 
records (see Rawlinson, Hist. of Herod., vol. i. 
Essay xi., p. 648). This invasion lasted from 


B.C. 633 to B.C. 605;—see Larcher (Hist. 
d’Herodote, t. vii. p. 151), who places the 
Scythian devastation of Judza in B.C. 628, 
or the year after Jeremiah prophesied (in the 
thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign) the coming 
of evil “‘ out of the North” (Jer. i. 14; iv. 6; 
vi. 22-24). Although not mentioned in the 
historical Books of the Old Test., we have, 
as Ewald concludes (Hist. of Israel, Engl. 
tr. vol. iv. p. 230), clear evidence of this 
devastation of Judza, during the Scythian 
invasion of Egypt, in Jer. iii—iv., and in 
Zephaniah: while the name Scythopolis, given 
to the ancient Bethshan, or Beth-shean 
(Judges i. 27; Judith iii. 10; 2 Mace. xii. 29), 
which lay on the great road between Nineveh 
and Egypt, perpetuated the memory of the 
event. (Dr. Pusey, however, dissents from 
this reference to Zephaniah—see his Minor 
Prophets, p. 439). Ewald, arguing from Ps, 
lix. 6, also considers that this Psalm was come 
posed by Josiah as the record of his having been 
besieged in Jerusalem by this nomad horde.— 
Die Dichter des A. B., ii.s.164. This terrible 
invasion of the northern nations, which left 
such traces and memories behind (see St. 
Jerome, in Ezek. xxxviii., t. v., p. 444), supplied 
the foundation of the imagery and language 
of Ezekiel. Ezekiel expressly states (ch. xxviii. 
17) that Gog and Magog had been the 
subjects of earlier prophecy,—intimating 
thereby that these names were but symbols of 
the enmity of the world to the people of God, 
The later jewish theology also explains the 
names as signifying the nations which shall 
come up in the Last Days to Jerusalem, and 
shall fall by the hand of Messiah (Jerus. 
Targum on Num. xi. 27, ap. Wetst. ); and later 
still, the Talmud applied the names to the 
Goths (Neubauer, La Géogr. du Talmud, 
p- 422). See also St. Ambrose, De Fide, IT. 
C. XVi., ft. i. p. 495. 

Renan notes: “ Gog et Magog, personifi- 
cations mythiques des invasions barbares”;— 
and he notes: “ Chez certaines tribus parlant 
l'osséte, Gogh ‘montagne’ et Mughogn ‘ia 
grande montagne’ désignent deux massifs du 
Caucase.” The two names were applied to 
the Scythian populations of the Caspian and 
the Black Sea.—p. 447; see Koran, xviil. 94; 
xxl. 96; Carm, Sibyll. iii. 319, 512 (see Note E 
on ch, il. 20). 

The result, then, is that the catastrophe 
which St. John is now about to describe hag 
led him to borrow once more, and with 
greater minuteness, that imagery of Ezekiei 
(Xxxix. 17-20) which he had already employed 
to signify this same destruction of the powers 
of the world, leagued with Satan, in their last 
assault on the City of God :—see on ch. xix, 





v. 9—I0.] 


g And they went up on the 
breadth of the earth, and compassed 
the camp of the saints about, and the 


REVELATION. XX. 


from God out of heaven, and de- 
voured them. 
1o And the devil that deceived 


beloved city: and fire came down them was cast into the lake of fire 





17. And thus, in “ Gog and Magog” we have 
an epithet, taken from the symbolism of the 
Old Test., to represent the heathen and God- 
opposing nations of the earth. 

St. Augustine (/.c., c. xi.) understands by 
Magog the ungodly in whom, as in an Abyss 
(see on ver. 3), the Devil—symbolized by Gog 
—is shut up (‘‘ Gog tectum, Magog de tecto”). 
Others, he adds, took them to be barbarous 
Nations outside the Roman Empire; some, 
from the initial letters, applying the names to 
the Gete and the Massagetz. 

Luther, Grotius, and others refer to the 
Saracens ;—Bellarmine (De Pont. Rom. ili. 17) 
refers generally to Antichrist ;—Bossuet to 
the Albigenses and Manicheans ;— Mede 
regards the Gog and Magog of Ezekiel and 
St. John as type and antitype, relating to 
the first and second Resurrections respec- 
tively (cf. Ezek. xxxvii.): “ Each resurrection 
has for its forerunner (prodromus) its own 
Gog and Magog” (“illa Scythicum illum et 
Aquilonarem, hac vero mysticum”’—p. 571). 

to gather them together tothe war:] The 
article (see vv. //.) is emphatic, as in ch. xix. 
19. Here is the last great struggle, under 
the sixth “Vial,” ch. xvi. 12-16; xvil. 14. 
This conflict, notes Burger, is to take place 
long after the conversion and restoration of 
Israel—see Ezek. xxxviil. 8. 

the number of whom] The pronoun (see 
wv. Ij.) is repeated for emphasis—cf. ch. 
ii. 7. 

1s as the sand of the sea.| ‘“ Like a cloud 
to cover the land”—Ezek. xxxvili. 9, 16 :— 
ef. Josh. xi. 4; Judges vii. r2; 1 Sam. xiii. 5. 
See also ch. ix. 16. 

9. And they went up| The past tense, the 
bistoric aorist, is resumed here ; see on ver. 7. 
The verb is that employed when an army 
proceeds to attack,—Judges i. 1; 1 Kings 
xxii. 4. 

over the breadth of the earth,| To over- 
spread it:—the phrase is taken from Hab. 
i. 6, LX X.; and is used in contradistinction 
to the “ corners of the earth ” in ver. 8. 


and compassed the camp of the saints about, | 
The word rendered “camp” (mapepBodn, 
ef. Heb. xiii. 11, 13) is that which expresses 
a station of soldiers—see Acts xxi. 34. 
There is also an evident reference to the 
state of the “ Church Militant ”—cf. Eph. vi. 
11-17. The terms ‘Camp’ and ‘City’ are 
images borrowed from the condition ot 
Israel in the Wilderness and in the Promised 


New Test—Vou. IV. 


Land (Ex. xiv. 19; Ps. cvii. 36). Here the 
“‘ Camp” is to be understood as surrounding 
and defending the ‘ City,’ —cf. Luke xix, 
43- 

and the beloved city:] I.e., Jerusalem—so 
styled in Ecclus. xxiv. 11; cf. Ps. lxxvili. 68 
Jerusalem throughout the Apocalypse is the 
symbol of the Church:—the nations, writes 
St. Augustine, do not come together into 
one place, when they come to attack the camp 
and the City, ‘‘ because the City is none other 
than the Church of Christ diffused throughout 
the whole world”:—so also Beda, Vitr, 
Hengst. 

Of Millennarians some understand “the 
metropolis of the Church during the Thousand 
Years’ reign,” the symbolical Jerusalem (see 
Bisping) ;—Others understand the literal, 
earthly, Jerusalem (so Alford). It is gene- 
rally agreed that it is not the “New Jeru- 
salem,” cf. ch. xxi. 2: Mede, however, takes it to 
be so; and “ the Camp of the Saints” he sup- 
poses to be ‘‘the nations who shall walk in the 
light of it,’—ch. xxi. 24. Grotius takes “ the 
Camp” to denote ‘“‘ the Seven Churches” (ch. ii. ; 
iii.) ;—and “‘the City” to be Constantinople;— 
Gog (see on ver. 8) represents the house of 
Othman, which first appeared in Lydia ;—and 
the “earth” means the inhabitants of Asia 
Minor,— Mohammed II., of the race of Oth- 
man, being the conqueror of Constantinople. 
The “ jire from heaven” (see below) signifies, 
adds Grotius. the destruction, still future, 
of the Turkish Empire, “re” denoting 
such catastrophes,—see Isa. ix. 5; x. 16; 
XXVi. II. 


and fire came down out of heaven,]| 
(Omit the words “from God,” see vv. Il.; 
and cf. ch. xxi. 2). This feature of the Vision 
is also taken from Ezek. xxxvili. 22; xxxix. 6 
On frre as the instrument of Divine punish= 
ment, see Gen. xix. 24; Lev. x. 2; Num 
xvi. 35; 2 Kingsi. 10; Luke ix. 54. 


10. And the devil that deceived them] 
Disterd. thinks that emphasis should be laid 
on the present participle here, “that de- 
ceiveth them,” in order to mark the con- 
tinuous and peculiar agency of Satan :—see 
VU. 2, 3. 


was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone,| 
See Matt. xxv. 41; and also the words “ Art 
Thou come hither to torment us Jdefore the 
time,” —Matt. viii. 29. 

This, according to Bengel, is the fourth 
stage of Satan’s punishment,”—see on ver. 3. 


EEE 


801 


802 


anc brimstone, where the beast and 
the false prophet are, and shall be 
tormented day and night for ever and 
ever. 

1r And I saw a great white 





where are both the beast and the 
false prophet;] As stated in ch. xix. 20. 
On the addition of “both,” see vv. J). 
It has been suggested that this casting of 
the Devil— the Prince of the power of the air” 
Eph, ii. 2)—into the “ Lake of Fire” after the 
east and the “ False Prophet,” is implied in 
the pouring out the seventh “ Vial” “ upon the 
air” (ch. xvi. 17). The conflict at Ar- 
Mageddon, however, was under the sixth 
“Vial” (ch. xvi. 16); and consequently the 
conflict here is not the same. 


and they shall be tormented day and 
might for ever and ever.| See on ch. i. 6. 
The eternal torment :—cf. ch. xiv. 11; and 
also ch. xix. 3; Matt. xxv. 46; Mark ix. 48; 
Isai. Ixvi. 24. 

The Three great Enemies of God’s King- 
dom have now disappeared. 


THE UNIVERSAL JUDGMENT (11-15). 


A new Vision begins here,—the Last, and 
Universal Judgment of “all that are in the 
graves,” described by our Lord in John v. 28, 
ag. See above on ver. 5. 

Hengst. would see here the final decision 
as to those only who had submitted to the 
influence of the Three Enemies of God’s King- 
dom,—ver. 11 referring to the irrational Crea- 
tion, and wv. 12-15 to mankind. According 
to Ebrard, there are on earth, at this crisis, 
only the glorified Saints who reign with 
Christ during the Millennium: all the other 
inhabitants of earth had perished (see ver. 9) ; 
and now comes the “Second Resurrection,” 
viz. of those who had never heard Christ’s 
name, as well as of those who, having heard, 
were positively unbelieving (ch. xix. 21). 
There must be a “‘ docta ignorantia,” he con- 
cludes, as to unbelievers who have been con- 
verted and who have died during the Millen- 
nium; we are only told that they are among 
those who are to be “judged according to their 
works” (vv. 12, 13) :—believers, he adds, are 
not judged, Johnv. 24. The conclusion is yet 
more dogmatic of those who hold the doctrine 
of “the Pre-millennial Advent,” as a writer 
quoted by Dr. Brown (/.c., p. 196) states it: 
“All the dead whose names were in the 
Book of Life will have been raised a 1000 
years before this, and not one shall perish 
or be again judged; while all the dead 
will be raised afterwards to a Judgment 


REVELATION. XX. 


fv r1—12, 


throne, and him that sat on it, from 
whose face the earth and the heaven 
fled away; and there was found no 
place for them. 

12 And I saw the dead, small and 


at which no one shall be saved.” A 
strange conclusion indeed in the face of such 
a picture as that given in Matt. xxv. 31-46. 


ll. And I saw] Cf. vv. 1, 4,—and also 
ch. xix. 1, 6 (“ I beard”); and ch xix. 11,17, 
19 (“I saw ”),—introducing the new Vision. 
See on ch. iv. 1. 


a great white throne,| This is the true 
order, as inthe Greek (see vv. //.):—the A. V, 
changed the order of the Textus Receptus, 
“Great” as compared with the thrones of 
ver. 4; “white” (cf. the “‘white cloud,” ch. 
xiv. 14) as being the colour of heaven, see 
on ch. ii. 17:—* The great white throne is 
equivalent to the throne of glory of Matt. 
xxv. 31, for /ight at the utmost intensity is 
white; from this, too, we may further ex- 
plain Dan. vii. 9; Rev. i. 14,’—Trench, 
Studies in the Gospels, p. 194. 

and him that sat on it,| Clearly the Person 
referred to in Matt. xxv. 31; John v. 22; 
Rom. xiv. 10; 2 Cor. v. 1o—namely “The 
Son of Man,” Christ, He Who is the 
Source of the New Creation (ch. xxi. 5). 
The true reading in ver. 12, “before the 
throne” is also to be noted:—the sense of 
this passage being expressed in the words of 
the Te Deum, “ We believe that Thou shalt 
come to be our Judge.” 

According to Hengst., “ God in the Undi- 
vided Unity of His Being ;” “not the Father 
in fellowship with Christ,”"—see ch. iii. 215 
vii. 17; xxii. 1; and so Ztllig. De Wette, 
Dusterd., Alford, and Bisping conclude that 
it is “ God the Father,” ch. i. 8; iv. 23 ch 
Dan. vii. 9. 

from whose face the earth and the heaven 
fled away;| Cf. ch. xvi. 20. Not from one 
locality to another, but so that “there was 
found,” &c. 

and there was found no place for them.| See 
ch. xxi. 1:—The present earth and the pre- 
sent heaven give place to the “ New Heaven 
and the New Earth.” 

On thescene here referred to, cf. 2 Pet. iii. 
7, to-12. The old world disappears, notes 
Burger, through the fiat of that Omnipotence 
which at the first called all things into existe 
ence (Heb. xi. 3). 

12. And Isaw] Another scene now opens 
(ee on ver. 11) continuing the i 

ision. 








1 


¥. 12.) 


great, stand before God; and the 
books were opened: and another 


Oday 5. ’book was opened, which is the book 


REVELATION. XX. 


of life: and the dead were judged out 
of those things which were written in 
the books, according to their works. 





the dead, the great and the small,]| (See 
wv. H.). The Seer now beholds those of 
“ the dead” who had been raised from their 
graves as ver. 13 describes. This is clearly a 
description of the General Resurrection—see 
John v. 28. That we have here an exhaustive 
specification of the human race—of all who 
have ever lived, the just and the unjust—is 
plain from ch. xi. 18; xix. 5. 

Hengst. argues that “the dead can only 
be the ungodly dead”—“ the dead” being 
understood of those who are spiritually dead 
(Matt. viii. 22) according to John v. 24; 
viii. 51 ;—Bengel understands those who sur- 
vive the Lord’s “ Parusia” ;—Alf. and Bisping 
see here “ the rest of the dead” of ver. 5 ; ie., 
the (assumed) Second Resurrection is now de- 
scribed, of all “ the great and the small” who 
had not part in the ‘‘ First Resurrection” (cf. 
ch. xi. 18). “If ‘the dead great and small,” 
observes Dr. David Brown (/.c., p. 198), 
mean merely ‘ the rest of the dead, seven verses 
before, “why was not the same expression 
retained, or at least an equivalent expression, 
Jooping one clause with another at some 
distance from it”—as in ch. v. to compared 
with ch. xx. 4; or ch. vii. 15-17 with ch. xxi. 
3, 4; or ch. xiv. rr with ch. xix. 3, 20; 
&ce., &c.? 


standing before the throne;] See 
wv. Il. The codex of Erasmus follows 
Andreas in reading “ before God” :—Cf. Rom. 
Xiv. Io, and see on ver. 11, 

These words are related to ver. 13 where 
t is told whence “ te dead” have come, just 
as ch. xv. 1 is related to ch. xv. 6. 


and books were opened:| This fea- 
ture of the Vision is borrowed from Dan. 
Vii. to. We have here, notes Ebrard, “a 
symbolical representation of the Divine Om- 
niscience.” 

Observe, not “ the books” as below, but 
“ books” indefinitely, such as are spoken of 
throughout Scripture as the register of all 
human actions— Ps. lvi. 8; Isai. Ixv. 6; 
Mal. iii. 16; cf. Deut. xxxii. 34. See Matt. 
xii. 37. 

St. Augustine explains the “dooks” as a 
symbol of the “ Divine memory” (De Civ. 
Dei, xx. 14) :—[* Illi libri quos priore loco 
posuit, intelligendi sunt sancti et veteres et 
Novi, ut in illis ostenderetur que Deus fieri 
sua mandata jussisset: in illo autem qui est 
vite uniuscujusque, quid horum quisque non 
fecisset sive fecisset. Qui liber si carnaliter 


cogitetur, quis ejus magnitudinem valeat 
wstimare?...... Non ergo unus liber erit 


omnium, sed singulisingulorum.... Quedam 
igitur vis est intelligenda divina; qua fiet ut 
cuique opera sua in memoriam revocentur 
. . - Que vis Divini libri nomen accepit ”]. 
Beda who, on the whole, copies St. Au- 
gustine here, sees a reference to the Old 
and the New Testaments, according to which 
men, under both dispensations, are to be 
judged. 


and another book was opened,| These 
words seem to point to “the Manifestation (or 
rather “the Revealing ”) of the sons of God,” 
—to “the redemption of our body,” spoken of in 
Rom. viii. 19, 23,—to the literal Resurrection 
to glory of the Saints, as distinguished from 
their spiritual Resurrection in this life, de- 
scribed in ver. 5; see also ver. 15. -A// the 
dead are judged (see below) out of “the 
books”; the names of the Redeemed alone 
are inscribed in “ the Book of Life.” 


which is [the book] of life:| See ch. iii. 5; 
iil. 8 ; xvii.8; xxi. 27; and compare Ps. lxix, 
28; Dan. xii.1; Luke x. 20; Phil. iv. 3; 
cf. Ex. xxxii. 32; Ezek. xiii. 9. 

Beda notes that the reprobate are self-con- 
demned, as they now read of the good which 
they might themselves have done. This may 
be part of the “judging” ascribed to the 
Saints in ver. 4, when “judgment was given 
unto them” (I. Williams). 


and the dead were judged| All the dead? 
“We shall all stand before the judgment seat 
of GOD.’—Rom. xiv. to. On the part to 
be taken by the Saints in this judgment of 
the human race, see on ver. 4. 


out of the things which were written 
the books,| We have here the article omitted 
above—“ the 5ooks,’ in which all human 
actions are inscribed. 

Alford does not really differ from Disterd., 
when he takes “ the books”? to be “ vouchers 
for the dook of life;’—Hengst. takes “ the 
books” to be “those of guilt, condemnation, 
death.” .. . “ A name cannot be written both 
in the 4ooks, and in the Book of the Lamb:” 
the single ‘ 400k’ in this phrase denotes either 
that few are saved, or that the Book of 
Life contains simply the szames ;’ while “ the 
books contain the long array of their evil 
deeds ”’;—Bisping makes “ the books” to cone 
tain a record of words and deeds, disclosing 
the characters of all ; while “te Book of Life” 
gives to those inscribed in it the right to be 
received into eternal bliss. 


according to their works.| The constant 
EEE2 


803 


804 


13 And the sea gave up the dead 
which were in it; and death and 
thell delivered up the dead which 


doctrine of Scripture—see e.g. Rom. ii. 6; 
a Cor. ventos.'Gal.pviin 75) Gol: sill. wa45na5)5 
and especially of this Book,—cf. ch. ii. 2, 5, 
19; ili. 1, 8, 15. 


18. And the sea gave up the dead which were 
in it:| On the imagery which the “ Sea” has 
suggested throughout the Apocalypse, see 
the remarks of Dean Stanley as quoted in the 
Introduction, § 4. It is scarcely possible 
to understand in this verse the literal, phy- 
sical sea. To do so would be to interpret 
contrary to the analogy of the whole Book. 
But if the “ Sea” is symbolical here, of what is 
it the symbol? Are we to say, with Hengst., 
that “the sea can only be referred to in this 
place as the receptacle of the lost dead?” or, 
with Ebrard, are we to explain: “ All who 
have died in the heathen-world, so far as that 
world has not been reached by the preaching 
of the Gospel; and who, therefore, could 
not commit the sin of positive unbelief?” 
Both senses are unsatisfactory. The terms 
“ Death and Hades” are sufficiently compre- 
hensive to include a// who had ceased to live 
before this hour of Judgment; and thus we 
are constrained by the context itself to un- 
derstand “the dead” in this place to mean 
those who are spiritually dead—those who, 
as St. Paul teaches (Eph. ii. 1), “ were dead 

’ (vexpovs) through their trespasses and sins,” 
and who are to be found among the living 
nations of the earth when the Lord returns 
“to be our JUDGE.” See Introd., § 10, (b) 
on ch. vii. 1-3. The ving must, surely, be 
included here. Compare also the condition 
of the New Heaven and the New Earth as 
described in ch. xxi. 1: “And the Sea is no 


more.” 
As examples of the literal interpretation, 
Stuart writes:—‘‘ Not only those who have 


been buried beneath the earth, in the proper 
domains of Death and Hades, but all who 
have perished and are buried in the ocean, 
will be raised to life ;’—and Bishop Horsley 
(Sermon on 1 Pet. iii. 18-20) suggests that not 
the comparatively few who perished by ship- 
wreck are referred to here, but “the myriads 
who perished in the general Deluge, and found 
their tomb in the waters of that raging 
ocean.” 

In order to account for this separate men- 
tion of the “ Sea,” writers (after Wetstein), 
quote words of Achilles Tatius (v. p. 313), 
which describe the souls of those whose 
bodies lie in the sea as not going to Hades, 
but as continuing to wander about the 
waters. 


REVELATION, XX. 


tv. 13—14 


were in them: and they were judged 
every man according to their woiks. 
14 And death and hell were cast 


and death and hell gaye up the dead 
which were in them:| (See vv. //.). On the 
similar conjunction of “ Death and Hell” (or 
“Hades”—the receptacle of the dead) see 
on ch, i. 18; vi. 8. 

All living and dead shall stand before he 
JUDGE,—1 Thess, iv. 16, 17. And so St. 
Augustine explains (/. ¢., c. 15). He under- 
stands by “the Sea giving up its dead,” the 
existing world exhibiting those who had not 
yet died ;—by “ Death giving up its dead,” 
its giving up the good “qui tantummodo 
mortem perpeti potuerunt, non et infernum;” 
—by “Hell giving up its dead,” its giving up 
the wicked “qui etiam poenas apud inferos 
pendunt.” 


and they were judged each one according to 
their works.| The words of ver. 12, here 
repeated, are ever the burden of the Judg- 
ment. 


14. And death and hell were cast into the 
lake of fire.| “‘ Death, and Hell” (“Hades”) the 
follower of death, represented locally in ver 
13 and in ch. i. 18, are here personified as in 
ch. vi. 8. St. Augustine (é:d.) takes “ Death 
and Hell” to signify the Devil whose punish- 
ment was stated more literally in ver. 10. St. 
Paul had announced, “ Te last enemy that is 
destroyed is death” (1 Cor. xv. 26); and here, 
with “ He/l” or “Hades” its companion, 
“ Death,” the product of sin, receives the 
punishment of sin. Their destruction is the 
guarantee of the life of the blessed,—ch. 
XXI. 4. 

It is to be noted that, according to Christ’s 
words, “Hades” includes both Paradise (Luke 
xxiii. 43) and Gehenna (Luke xii. 5),—“ déra- 
ham's bosom,’ and the state of “ torment” of 
“ anguish,” of “anguish in flame” (Luke xvi. 
22-28). Here “Hades,” without any distinc- 
tion between the two regions,—although be- 
tween them “there is a great gulf fixed” 
(Luke xvi. 26),—is “‘cast into the Lake of Fire.” 
Burger’s explanation is not to be disregarded; 
—Neither “‘ Death,” nor the abode of the de- 
parted, “Hades,” has place any longer in the 
New Creation. “ Death” and in its train 
the abode of the dead belong to the present 
Creation. In the New, which God will 
restore, “ Death” ceases, and consequently 
“Hades” has nothing more to do. There 
is no personification intended here: the things 
themselves, called “ Death” and “ Hades,” no 
longer exist. Nevertheless the question re- 
mains, Why should “ Paradise” —“ Abra- 
hams bosom”—be cast “into “the Lake of 
Fire’? 





v. 15.] 


into the lake of fire. This is the 


second death. 
15 And whosoever was not found 


This is the second death, [even] the lake 
of fire.] See wv. //. The apposition of the 
two clauses, as now to be read. denotes that 
“the second death” (see ver. 6; ch. ii. 11; and 
cf. on ch. ti. 7), which is foliowed by no Resur- 
rection, consists in the being cast into “the Lake 
of Fire,”’—see ch. xxi. 8. In other words, 
“Death” and “ Hell,” being here personified, 
will be treated like the two Beasts and Satan, 
ver. Io; ch. xix. 20. All the misery and con- 
demnation which accompanied them as “ the 
wages of sin,” is now cast into “the Lake of 
Fire,’ the abode of the condemned. Their 
destruction points onwards to the bliss of the 
Redeemed, in ch. xxi. 4. 

Ebrard understands “‘ Death and “Hades” 
“in the concrete,” viz., the men—positive un- 
believers—who are there found and judged 
and condemned “according to their works :” he 
adds,—“ Of the dead in the ‘ Sea’ nothing ex- 
press is said ”; and he regards this silence asa 
confirmation of his interpretation of the “‘ Sea ” 
—viz. that class of the dead which consisted 
of those among the heathen who had either 


REVELATION. XX. 


written in the book of life was cast 
into the lake of fire. 





never heard of Christ; or who had been con= 
verted during the Millennium :—see on ver. 
13. He applies ver. 15 to explain “how it 
will fare with the heathen who die in igno- 
rance.” How such persons are saved “we 
find in ch. xxii. 2, where we read of ‘ the heal- 
ing of the nations, ”—cf. Acts x. 35. 


15. And if any was not found written 
in the book of life,| See on ver. 12; and also 
the remarks on ver. 6, as to those who shall be 
released from “ the second death.” 

Ebrard (see on ver. 14) applies this verse 
to the heathen who had never heard of Christ. 
Hengst. observes: “In ver. 14 the final hell 
is, as it were, erected; here it receives its 
wretched inhabitants.”— John xv. 6. 


he was cast into the lake of frre.| Im 
this verse, the doom of unbelievers is de= 
scribed ; and “the Judgment of condemna- 
tion” is ended, in order to introduce, for 
the comfort and encouragement of believers, 
the picture of eternal happiness which now 
occupies the rest of the Book. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Chap. XX. 


Note A ON VER- 2—THE MILLENNIUM. 


I. The principles of Millennarianism were 
borrowed by the first generations of Chris- 
tians from Jewish theology (see the Excursus). 
They rest on the literal interpretation of the 
two phrases—a “Thousand Years,” and the 
“First Resurrection.” Babylon, it is said, having 
fallen (ch. xviil.), and judgment having over- 
taken the Beast and the “‘ False Prophet,” to- 
gether with “the kings of the earth and their 
armies” (ch. xix. 19-21), there immediately 
follows a preliminary judgment on Satan him- 
self, previous to his fiza/ judgment. Upon 
this, he is bound for the literal period of a 
“Thousand Years” (ver. 2), during which the 
“ First Resurrection” (ver. 5) takes place. 
That is to say, a literal Resurrection from 
the dead takes place,— either of all “‘ the dead 
in Christ” (1 Thess. iv. 16), all “that are 
Christ's at His Coming” (1 Cor. xv. 23); or, 
at the beginning of the Millennium, of those 
only who had suffered for Christ in preceding 
times, and then—‘“each in his own order” 
(a Cor. xv. 23)—of the rest of the righteous 
who had not obeyed the Beast (so Mede, 
p. 572). After this follows, during the Mil- 
lennium, the reign of the Saints, 0” earth, with 
Christ, Who is to exercise there in Person 


His sovereignty, from Jerusalem as the centre, 
and by means of the revived theocracy and 
kingdom of Israel (so De Burgh, p. 359, and 
others). Mede, however, while he considers 
that the Saints are to reign on earth with 
Christ during the Millennium (p. 573), 
yet is careful to add that he does not dare 
to imagine (as some of the Ancients did) 
that Christ will Himself reign on earth. His 
is ever “Regnum Czlorum” (p. 603). 
Throughout this Millennial age, nevertheless, 
of perfect felicity, besides the Saints who reign 
with Christ and judge the world, there still 
exist nations on earth (ver. 8), “who during 
the binding of Satan have been quiet and 
willing subjects of the Kingdom ” (Alf.) ;—or 
(as others more naturally explain) who are 
avowed enemies of the kingdom, or, at least, 
who are still unconverted. To these, count- 
less “as the sand of the sea” (ver. 8), Satan, 
“Joosed out of his prison” when “the Thou- 
sand Years are finished” (ver. 7), before the 
end, and before his final overthrow, turns 
with all his powers of seduction, and leads 
them to assail the Saints (ver. 9). Hence, 
we are told, it follows that the risen Saints 
are to dwell in the earthly Jerusalem, where 
they are to be assailed by hosts of heathea 
nations still living on ears ; and this, although 


805 


806 


all the inhabitants of the earth—the enemies 
of God, and adherents of the Beast and “ False 
Prophet ”—had already been slain: see ch. 
xix. 21. Such a result leads Diisterd. to un- 
derstand this “apocalyptic drama” to be a 
purely “ideal representation ” of a long series 
of events occurring on the Day of the Lord’s 
Coming, comprising the general Resurrection 
and the Last Judgment; “no special period 
of time” being signified by the Millennial 
reign, for ‘a thousand years in God’s sight 
are but as yesterday.”—Ps. xc. 4. 
Auberlen—here following Piscator (A.D. 
1627), Petersen, Joachim, Lange, Hebart (see 
Semisch, art. Chiliasmus, in Herzog’s Real- 
Encycl.)—meets this objection by supposing 
that the whole congregation of believers who 
have died in Christ are to be clothed, at 
the “ First Resurrection” (ver. 5), with their 
glorified bodies, whereby they are rendered 
visible to earth, and are manifested together 
with Him; while living believers, freed from 
everything earthly, are to be caught up to 
meet the returning Lord in the air (1 Thess. 
iv. 16, 17). The Elect, thus gathered to- 
gether by the Angels (Matt. xxiv. 31; xiii. 
43), “live and reign with Christ a Thousand 
Years” (ver 4). It is from heaven, how- 
ever, that the Saints exercise their rule; for 
earth, not yet renewed, is not suited for the 
glorified Church (p. 334). At the beginning 
of the Millennium the state of the world will 
be what it was at the date of Christ’s Ascen- 
sion,—Israel and the Gentiles, who still 
remain on the earth (see on ch. xix. 21), 
opposing the Church, but being gradually 
converted by the influence of the Church in 
glory, and by the sight of the judgments on 
Satan and his adherents (ch. xix. 11-xx. 2). 
From the religious point of view, in their 
relation to God, Gentiles and Jews stand on 
a perfect equality; from the stand-point of 
the history of Revelation, however, Israel is, 
and ever shall be the chosen people through 
whom God’s designs are executed :—Ex. iv. 
22; xix. 5,6; Rom. xi. 21-24 (p. 343). The 
Last Times shall prepare a thorough change 
of heart in the people of Israel; and to this 
change of heart the Lord’s words in Matt. 
xxiii. 39 clearly point (p. 347). Inthe Millen- 
nium Jews and Gentiles are united ; and thus, 
the whole human race becoming one, the full 
and true life of humanity is at last realized— 
Rom. xi. 30-32. Still, during the “ Thousand 
Years,” there is a separation between earth 
and heaven—between humanity glorified and 
humanity still living in the flesh. Hence it 
is possible that an apostasy should take place 
at the end of the Millennial period (p. 356). 
In this description we recognize many 
features of the older Chiliasm. ‘This system 
assumes that there are to be ¢wo future Ad- 
vents of Christ, of which the former is to be 


REVELATION. XX. 


preparatory :—the texts relied upon are John 
xxi. 21-24; Acts i. 1o, 11. In acc ce 
with Zech. xiv. 4, Christ is to descend on 
Mount Olivet, whence He had ascended to 
heaven :—there the Chiliast expects the 
former of the two Advents to take place; 
and there Antichrist is to meet his final 
overthrow. The Jews are now to be con- 
verted as a nation (Zech. xii. 9, 10; Luke 
xi. 34, 35; Rom. xi. 25-27; 2 Cor. ili. 13— 
16), and the Kingdom restored to Israel 
(Jer. xxxiii. 17, 20, 21; Luke i. 32, 33; xxi. 
24)—the kingdom consisting of Jews and 
Gentiles, with Christ as the Head (Matt. 
xix. 28; xx. 23; 1 Cor. vi. 1-4). 

Vitringa contented himself with explaining 
the Millennium to signify “a long time, not 
less than a Thousand Years” (p. 853); an 
with placing its beginning in those times 
when the empire of the Beast is to terminate, 
—the Millennium itself being a figure of that 
long duration of the Church’s peace, and 
happy condition on this earth, of which the 
emblem is that silence of “ 4alf-an-hour” in 
heaven, under the Seventh Seal—ch. viii. 1 
(p. 844). And Bengel represents as the 
chief excellence of his apocalyptic system 
that, following Vitringa, he had “restored 
the old, true order,—Antichrist, Millennium, 
End of the world” (/. c., pp. 661-675). 

On the doctrine of “ Pre-millennarians” 
who distinguish between “those Christians 
whom they style te Bride, and the rest of the 
Saved ”—see Dr. David Brown (/. ¢., p. 91) 
who, in illustration of this doctrine, quotes as 
follows: “ This elect body,” says Mr. Bonar, 
“of believers before the Millennium is the 
Bride, and shall be complete at the Lord’s 
coming. Not one other shall be added to 
this body after the Lord’s coming—not one” 
(P. 123). See Note A on ch. xix. rr. 

II. According to the second system of inter= 
pretation,—of which St. Augustine is the 
ablest exponent (De Civ. Dei, xx., 7, &c.)— 
Christ had gone forth, in the first Seal 
“ conquering and to conquer” (ch. vi. 12). 
Foes, however, are still to be encountered 
as the other Seals and the Trumpets and the 
Vials describe. The Church is to be ever 
militant on earth; a form of Antichrist is to 
continue until the end; and although the 
agents of the evil one are at length overcome 
(ch. xix. 20), Satan himself still remains un- 
destroyed. Has Christ, then, not conquered ? 
In order to answer this question, the Seer 
now re-ascends (“recapitulando quid in 
istis mille annis agat Ecclesia”—St. August., 
1. c., XX. 9) to the beginning, and recounts 
the work of Christ at His First Advent, 
and what He still continues to do. Christ 
was the Woman's promised Seed Who 
bruised the Serpent’s head (Gen. iii. 15 
This, the first promise in the Bible, was 





REVELATION. XX. 


filled by the Incarnation, when “the Son of 
God was manifested that He might destroy the 
works of the devil” (1 John iii. 8). At His 
First Advent Christ declared: “ If I cast out 
devils by the Spirit of God, then the Kingdom of 
God is come unto you. Or else, how can one enter 
into the strong man’s house, and spoil his goods, 
except he first bind the strong man?” (Matt. 
Xli. 28, 29). St. John, accordingly, now 
explains (ver. 2) that Christ had already 
“ laid hold on the Dragon, the oldSerpent, which 
is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a 
thousand years.” From the date of the First 
Advent, therefore, the “Thousand Years ”— 

mbolizing a great but indefinite period of 
time—take their beginning (“mille annos pro 
omnibus annis hujus seculi posuit, ut perfecto 
numero notaretur ipsa plenitudo temporis ”— 
St. August., /.c., c. 7). During this period 
the power of Satan is restrained, and the 
opposing power of the “ First Resurrection” — 
the spiritual Resurrection of the soul, “the 
death unto sin, the new birth unto righteous- 
ness ”—is the strength and support of the 
Church. Again :—The Church being always 
in conflict with the powers of evil (for Satan 
has been “ 4ound” merely, not destroyed) ; 
and these powers manifesting themselves, 
with ever renewed intensity at successive 
periods of history, St. Paul has announced 
that before the end of all things “that Wicked 
shall be revealed whom the Lord shall consume 
with the breath of His mouth, and destroy 
with the brightness of His Coming” (2 Thess. 
ii. 8):—a time which Christ Himself fore- 
shadowed when He said: “‘ When the Son of 
Man cometh, shall He find faith on the earth?” 
—Luke xviii. 8. 

This interpretation of vv. 1-6 assumes that 
the two phrases, a “Thousand Years” (ver. 
2), and the “ First Resurrection” (ver. 5), are 
to be understood figuratively, in accordance 
with the general character of the Apo- 
calypse (see Introd. § 10). Inver. 7 St. John 
resumes the course of his narrative, and 
recounts once more what he had already told, 
in ch. xix. 11-21, of the last conflict of the 
Church with the hosts of Antichrist. This 
conflict is now followed by the absolute de- 
struction of the powers of evil (ver. 10). Then 
comes the Universal Judgment (vv. 11-15). 

An interpretation has also been proposed 
which is founded on the symbolical meaning 
of the number Tez (100co=105). This number, 
as stated in the Introduction (§ 11, (a)), 
signifies completeness and perfection. The 
number 1000, it is said, denotes here merely 
the perfection and universality (Gcumenicitat) 
of the victory of Christ over Antichrist ; and 
the “Thousand Years” are not intended to 
represent any space of time. The passage 
(vv. 1-10) is inserted between ch. xix. 21 
and ch. xx. 11 only in order to separate the 


destruction of the Beast—together with the 
overthrow of Gog and Magog—from the Last 
Judgment, so that each of these events, 
according to its importance, may appear in 
its true light. It is plain, however, that this 
manner of giving a symbolical signification 
to the words, does not bring out the sense of 
this mysterious Episode. 


The majority of Millennarians place this 
period of the Church's felicity altogether. in 
the future. Many, especially in ancient times, 
in accordance with Jewish theology, under- © 
stand the Millennium to be the seventh “ Thou- 
sand Years” of the world; and thus the 
world’s Sabbath (Gen. ii. 2, 3). On this aspect 
of the doctrine, see Gibbon, ch. xv. Hofmann, 
however, understands not the seventh Thou- 
sand Years, “but the eig4th,—the “Day” of 
the Lord, at the beginning of which the Church 
has risen again” (ii. s. 373). Bengel finds 
here wo periods of a thousand years (see on 
ver. 3) :—the former of which or third stage of 
Satan’s punishment (see on ch. xii. 12) begins 
A.D. 1836 with the destruction of the Beast 
Se xix. 20), and the binding of Satan; the 
atter begins, A.D. 2836, after the reign of the 
Saints on earth, and when Satan is loosed (ver. 
7). It is closed A.D. 3836, immediately before 
the end of the world—ver. 11. (This twofold 
Millennium had been already taught by St. 
Barnabas—see the Excursus at the end of this 
Note). Ebrard explaining the number mys- 
tically regards the interval between Christ’s 
Ascension and His Second Advent as. the 
“ half-week” (3% years); and the duration of 
His visible rule in His Kingdom on earth asa 
“Thousand Years,” or twenty Jubilee periods 
of fifty years (Lev. xxv. 10). ‘The age ac- 
cordingly in which we now live—the period 
of the ecclesia pressa et militans—is insignifi- 
cant when compared with the duration of the 
visible glory of Christ’s Kingdom on earth. 

Others place the Millennium in the past :— 
E. g. Bossuet understands the first “ Thousand 
Years” of the Christian Era ;—Brightman, 
Cocceius, Grotius, Hammond, see the begin- 
ning of the ‘‘ Thousand Years” in the time of 
Constantine the Great, and its end under 
Lewis the Bavarian (A.D. 1313-1347), the 
last opponent of the Popes ;—Others—e. g. 
Luther, count this period down to Pope 
Gregory VII. (A.D. 1073-1085), in whom they 
recognize Satan let loose;—We have the 
“Thousand Years’” reign behind us, writes 
Hengst. (ii. p. 285), and stand now at the 
loosing of Satan out of his prison (ver. 7): the 
Millennium counts from Christmas Eve, A.D. 
800, the coronation of Charles the Great— 
under whom the German Tribes were con- 
verted to Christ and the Christian Empire of 
the West founded—down to the reign of 
Napoleon (Apollyon).—#., p. 304. 


809 


808 


From the rationalistic point of view, 
Wetstein concluded that the Apocalypse de- 
scribed prophetically the Jewish war—the 
duration of which he restricted to the “ three 
and a walf years” (1260 days) ;—“ Ita tamen 
ut que cum illis connexa sunt, paulo altius 
repetat, subjungatque que non diu postea 
consecuta.” He did not shrink from reducing 
the “‘ Thousand Years” to the f/ty years from 
the death of Domitian to the Jewish war 
under Hadrian. Gog and Magog he found 
in the revolt under Barchochab. The 
Heavenly Jerusalem, in the happy state of 
Christianity, and the spread of the Gospel 
after the complete suppression of the Jewish 
nationality. 

Volkmar appeals to “ the day of the Lord’s 
vengeance,”—‘‘the year of recompenses ;”’— 
“the day of vengeance,”—“ the year of my re- 
deemed” in Isai. xxxiv. 8; Ixiil. 4; where the 
“Day” and the “ Year” are identical, accord- 
ing to Ps. xc. 4. Hence, “the day of ven- 
geance”—“the year” of the first triumph of 
Christianity after Nero’s death—extends, in 
God’s sight, fo a 1000 years. Thus the day of 


REVELATION. XX. 





an imperial triumph used to extend to several 
days—under Trajan to 120; and accordingly 
here “the day” of triumph extends to 365 x 
1ooo. Reuss sees here an exact expression of 
the “ Judzo-Christian Eschatology” of the 
age, the first rudiments of which true Chris- 
tians must leave behind (Heb. vi. 2): to this 
popular belief the Apocalypse adds “the 
double Resurrection, and a Millennial era 
between the two.” ‘This theory ingeniously 
combines the conflicting systems taught by 
the Jewish doctors—the political element in 
the ancient hopes of Israel, and the religious 
element (ch. ii. 27; xii.5; xix. 15; Actsi. 6; 
ii. 30); and assures to the Martyrs privileges 
above all others. Such a doctrine, adds 
Reuss, “ needed to be counteracted by all the 
force of the spiritualistic reaction which had 
its root in the Pauline Gospel, and its scien- 
tific basis in the Alexandrine School” (p. 
366). Renan contents himself with referring 
to his theory that the Beast cast into the 
“ Lake of Fire” (ch. xix. 20) is Nero, the Anti- 
christ ; adding that Satan still remains chained 
during the “‘ Thousand Years” (p. 445). 


EXCURSUS on THE MILLENNIUM. 


It is of some importance to trace the early 
history of the doctrine of the Millennium 
(“ mille anni”), or Chiliasm (yiAca érn!), or 
the “ Thousand-years’ reign of the Saints 
with Christ,” inasmuch as the consensus of 
the Primitive Church is the stronghold of 
Millennarianism. Dean Alford, for example, 
writes on Rev. xx. 5: ‘Those who lived 
next to the Apostles, and the whole Church 
for 300 years, understood them {the ‘ Thou- 
sand Years’] in the plain literal sense.” It 
is necessary, therefore, to examine the facts. 

The expectation of an order of things 
entirely new founded on the language of 
Messianic prophecy, however misapplied, lay 
at the root of every form of Chiliasm among 
the Jews. It was the same hope of a re- 
novated earth, prompted by the instinctive 
longing—may we not say the memory ?— 
of the human soul, which suggested even to 
those outside the pale of Revelation, in the 
picture of a world from which the curse had 
been withdrawn, the Vision of a second “‘Gol- 
den Age.” The history of human thought 

roves that the fact has ever been acknow- 
edged of “a primal perfection, of a present 
disorder.”? The old poet of Greece,’ though 


1 ««Fii qui spirituales sunt istos ista credentes 
X'Auacrds appellant Greco vocabulo: quod 
verbum e verbo exprimentes nos possumus 
Milliarios nuncupare.”—St. August., De Civit. 
Dei, xx. 7. 

2 See Trench’s Hulsean Lectures, p. 231. 

® Hesiod, Op. e¢ Dies, 120, &c. 


fully conscious of the tokens of suffering and 
decay which darkened the face of nature, 
seeks to bridge over the chasm between the 
gods and degenerate man by the supposition 
of previous races, each more degenerate than 
its predecessor, during the five Ages from the 
Golden Age in the past to the existing Age 
of Iron :—the first Age, altogether pure, when 
good, perfect, and happy men lived from the 
spontaneous abundance of the earth, in ease 
and tranquillity like the gods themselves, 
The later verse of Virgil in the West testifies 
how the return of this Golden Age was the 
goal and the ideal of human hope.’ And as 
if to remoye all shade of difference between 
the expectations of the Gentile world and the 
Jewish anticipations of Millennial enjoyment, 
the same period of a “ Thousand Years ”"— 
which St. John has here taken as the symbol 
of a sacred period—again and again recurs in 
the religious speculations of the heathen. In 
the. Piedrus of Plato we read how the soul 
of the true philosopher is excused from seven 
of the Ten Millennial probations through 
which the rest of mankind have to pass; 
while in the Republic is given an account of 
the allotment and selection of the second life 
at the close of this period of a “ Thousand 
Years,”2 this same duration being assigned 


1 «*Ty modo nascenti puero, quod ferrea 
primum 

Desinet, ac toto surget gens aurea mundo,” 

(o Eclog. iv. 

* «Ten thousand years (ove adixveira: erar 


REVELATION. XX. 


by Virgil for the purification after death 
from the stain of sin :— 


‘* Has omnes, ubi mille rotam volvere per annos, 
Letheum ad fluvium Deus evocat agmine 
magno,” &c. ZEN. Vi., 749. 


According to Jewish theology, as collected 
from the Talmud, Messiah is to gather in 
from the Dispersion all the scattered de- 
scendants of the Tribes, to discomfit their 
foreign oppressors, and fromm Jerusalem as a 
centre to rule over the whole earth which is 
to be a scene of temporal enjoyment and 
prosperity. Even the doctrine of the Resur- 
rection was harmonized with the exclusive 
nationality of the children of Abraham. Of 
the chosen race, if not all, at least the 
more virtuous are to be summoned from 
Paradise, from the abode of departed spirits ; 
and under their triumphant King are to 
enjoy for a “ Thousand Years” glory and bliss 
upon the earth:—see Wisd. iii. 1-8. Here 
comes in another feature of Jewish Theo- 
logy :—Liicke (/. c., s. 309 ff.) considers that 
Chiliastic conceptions appeared among the 
Jews, in the times before Christ, as soon as 
they began to distinguish between the fe- 
poral and the eternal kingdom of Messiah ; 
or rather the “ days” of Messiah’s appearance 
(jpepat Tt. viod r. dvOpe@rov, Luke xvii. 22), and 


uuplwy) must elapse before the soul can return to 
the place from whence she came, for she cannot 
g.ow her wings in less; only the soul of a 
philosopher, guileless and true....may acquire 
wings in the third recurring period of a thousand 
years (tpitn mepidd@ tH XtAcere?) ; and if they 
choose this life three times in succession, then 
they have their wings given them, and go away 
at the end of three thousand years ”—Phedrus, 
249 (Jowett’s transl. vol. i. p. 583). See also 
on the source of this period of 1000 years 
Dr. Thompson’s note, Brblioth. Classica, p. 54. 

The choice of lives (aipecis Biwv), which takes 
place at the end of each Millennial period (7¢ 
XtAvooTs), is described circumstantially in the 
Republic. The slain warrior who has returned to 
life records in its pages his vision of the souls of 
those on whom judgment had passed :—Some 
sorrowed and wept at the remembrance of what 
they had endured beneath the earth during their 
journey of @ thousand years ; while others de- 
scribed heavenly blessings, and visions of incon- 
ceivable beauty. “For every wrong which 
they had done to any one they suffered tenfold ; 
the ‘thousand years’ answering to the hundred 
years which are reckoned as the life of man.”— 
De Republ. x. 615 (Jowett’s transl., vol. ii. p. 
458). And the conclusion is: ‘* Wherefore my 
counsel is that we hold fast to the heavenly 
way, and follow after justice and virtue always. 
..- And it shall be well with us both in this 
life and in the pilgrimage of ‘a thousand years’ 
(€v 7H xtAtere? opel) which we have been 
reciting ” (#4., 621, p. 464). 


the ai@v peAXN@v—a distinction which does not 
appear in Messianic Prophecy. The “ days” 
of Messiah form the epoch when the, present 
world has its end, and the future has its 
beginning (see Ziillig, /.c., i. s. 38, 43 ; Gfrérer, 
I.c., S. 212, 252). But how, it was asked, 
was the duration of this period to be de- 
termined according to Scripture? Some took 
as its type, according to Ps. xcv. 10, the “ forty 
years” in the Wilderness ;—others the “ four 
hundred years’” sojourn in Egypt, according 
to Gen. xv. 13 ;—others, again, took as their 
chronological type the ‘‘ Week” of Creation, 
as Daniel (ix. 25) has done; and as the world 
was created in six days, and as a “ Thousand 
Years ” in God’s sight are but as one day (Ps. 
xe. 4), so the duration of the world is the 
“ Week” of Creation distributed through time 
—each “ Day,” or “ Age” of this “ Week” being 
equal to a “ Thousand Years.” As there was 
a Sabbath of Creation, moreover, which began 
after man was formed, so must there be a 
Divine Sabbath of the Messianic era of Salva- 
tion beginning as soon as the human race, re 
stored to its primitive innocence, shall stand 
on the earth as Adam did in Paradise. Thus 
R. Salomon writes : “ It is fixed that the world 
shall stand for 6000 years, according to the 
number of the days of the week; but on 
the seventh Day is the Sabbath, and during 
the seventh Millennium the world has rest.”? 

All Jewish conceptions of a Millennial 
Kingdom of Messiah were reflected in the 
system of the Ebionites, and with the other 
errors of that system injuriously affected the 
early Church ;? but this tenet of the later 
Judaism was conveyed more directly to the 
Christian community by the Epistle of St. 
Barnabas, where it is repeated almost literally.? 
Here, however, in accordance with the essence 
of the Gospel, a condition of spiritual, blissful 
rest is described,—a restored harmony of 
Humanity, and a glorified state of Nature. 
Neither St. Barnabas, however, nor the 
Fathers who subsequently held this doctrine 
conceived that the roco years’ reign was to 
be the end of all things, but merely a Millen- 
nary Sabbath,—a stage of transition to eternal 
life.‘ 


1 Talm., Avoda Sara, fol. 9, col. 1,—see 
Eisenmenger, Zntd. Fud.,ii. p. 652. See also 
Gfrérer, Das Fahrb, des Heils. 2tes Abth., Kap. 
x. S. 219, ff. 

2 Neander, Allg. Gesch. d. Kirche, i. s. 191. 

3 Referring to the LXX. Version of Gen. ii. 2, 
kal cuverédccey 5 @eds ev TH Tuepa TH ExT 
xk. T. A. St. Barnabas (c. xv.) writes: tovdro 
Aéye: 71 cuvrerc? 6 Oeds Kipios ev EkaxioxiAloss 
Zreoi 7a wdvta* 7 yap Nucpa wap’ avre xlaua ery. 

‘ Having further quoted Isai. i. 13, St. Bar- 
nabas (iéid.) concludes that, after the seventh 
Millennium of rest, an eighth day succeeds 
(apxhv jucpas oyddns rorhow, 8 dort, dAAOU Kéouev 


809 


810 


But there also passed over to the early 
Christians from the Jewish system a coarser 
belief embodying gross pictures of an earthly 
kingdom. The Christian conception naturally 
differed from the Jewish in this that it repre- 
sented the Millennial reign as brought in by 
Jesus of Nazareth, and as including both 

ews and Gentiles:—what was common to 
th was the period of blessedness on earth; 
and the selection of Jerusalem once more as 
the City of God. That such a belief should, 


&pxfv), foreshadowed by the day of the Lord’s 
Resurrection, when all that is earthly is to 
cease, and a new and eternal world to begin. 
St. Augustine thus describes this opinion, as 
held in his day :—‘‘ Qui propter hzec hujus libri 
verba (Apoc. xx.) primam resurrectionem futuram 
suspicati sunt corporalem, inter cetera maxime 
numero annorum mille permoti sunt, tanquam 
oporteret in sanctis eo modo velut tanti temporis 
fieri Sabbatismum, vacatione scilicet sancta 
post labores annorum sex millium ex quo creatus 
est homo... ut quoniam scriptum est [2 Pet. 
iii. 8]...sex annorum millibus tanquam sex 
diebus impletis, sequatur velut Sabbati septimus 
in annis mille postremis, ad hoc scilicet Sabba- 
tum celebrandum resurgentibus sanctis.”—De 
Civ. Dei, xx. 7. 

1} That immediate contact with the early Chili- 
astic literature of the Jews existed in the primitive 
Christian times, is manifest from the similarity 
between the statements of Papias and those of 
the ‘‘ Apocalypse of Baruch” :—see the Intro- 
duction, § 9, where the publication of this 
work by Ceriani is referred to. This Apocryphal 
writing has also been published by O. F. 
Fritzsche in his edition of the ‘* Apocryphal 
books of the O. T.,” Leipzig, 1871, p. 654. 
Ceriani (Zc., t. i., fasc. 2, p. i.) observes of the 
** Apocalypse of Baruch:”  ‘* Antiquissimis 
quidem accenserem ex indole libri Judzeo-Chris- 
tiana, ex ejus cum quarto Esdre arcta affinitate 
in pluribus, ac demum ex loco illo Papiz insigni 
de Chiliasmo apud Irenzum, Contr. Her. v. 
33, collato cum nostro libro No. 29.” Fritzsche 
also concludes as to the date: ‘‘ Hac Judeum 
non multo post Hierosolyma a Tito eversa con- 
scripsisse inanifestum est” —/raf, p. xxxii. 

The remarkable coincidence of the Millen- 
narianism of Papias with that of Jewish writers 
is thus shown :—‘‘ In Papia,” continues Ceriani, 
“ enim superadditur fabulosze jam nostri narra- 
tioni, quod in hujusmodi rebus serioris etatis 
indicium videtur.” In chapter 22 Baruch is 
addressed by a voice from heaven, and Baruch 
in answer styles the speaker ‘‘ Lord” (Domi- 
nator Domine). In ch. 24 the voice tells 
Baruch: ‘* Ecce autem dies veniunt et aperien- 
tur libri, in quibus scripta sunt peccata omnium 
qui peccaverunt, et iterum etiam thesauri, in 
quibus justitia eorum qui justificati sunt in 
creatura collecta est.” A great “tribulation ” is 
to fall on the inhabitants of the earth in the last 
days (ch. 25); and Baruch asks (ch. 28): ‘* Utrum 
in uno loco, aut in una ex partibus terre futura 
sant ista, an tota terra sentiet?”” And then 


we 
Hees, 


REVELATION. XX. 


for a time, have been popular in the ear 
Church was altogether natural. Christ 
declared it to be His mission to found a 
Kingdom ; and never was the contrast between 
the Kingdom of God, and the kingdom of the 
world exhibited more forcibly than in the 
days when the first Christians lived. Then, 
as at all times, the Lord’s Second Advent was 
looked for in the future—whether near or 
remote ; and as the efforts of the heathen to 
crush out the Christian Faith grew more 
cruel, and persecution waxed more fierce, so 
did the early believers cherish more 7 
the hope of a speedy deliverance and of a ri 
reward. All was changed, however, as soor 
as the Christian Religion was recognized by 
the powers of this world. When the age of 
persecution passed away, Chiliasm ceased to 
form an element of the popular belief. It 
was only with the cessation of outward 
oppression, and still more with the growth 
of that new relation of the Church to the 
State under which men actually enjoyed 
the peace that had once seemed to be 
hopeless on earth, that the motives died 
out which prompted the longing for the 


we read (ch. 29): ‘‘Respondit et dixit mihi; 
Totius erit terre quod eveniet tunc. Propterea 
omnes qui vivent sentient. Illo autem tempore 
protegam tantum eos qui reperientur illis die- 
bus in terra ista. Et erit postquam completum 
fuerit quod futurum est ut sit in illis partibus, 
tunc incipiet revelari Messias. Et revelabitur 
Behemoth ex loco suo, et Leviathan ascendet 
de mari, duo cete magna que creavi die quinto 
creationis, et reservavi eos usque ad illud 
tempus ; et tunc erunt in escam omnibus qui 
residui fuerint. Etiam terra dabit fructus suos 
unum in decem millia, et in vite una erunt mille 
palmites, et unus palmes faciet mille botros, & 
botrus unus faciet mille acinos, et unus acinus 
faciet corum vini. Et qui esurierunt jucunda- 
buntur,” &c., &c. (p. 80). 

The words of Papias [‘‘ De temporibus: regni 
Domini”] quoted by Irenzeus (Contr. Her. v. 
33, P- 333) are as follows :— 

‘*Venient dies, in guibus vinee nascentur, 
singule decem millia palmitum habentes, et in 
uno palmite dena millia brachiorum, et in uno 
vero palmite dena millia flagellorum, et in 
unoquoque flagello dena millia botruum et in 
unoquoque botro dena millia acinorum, et unum- 
quodque acinum expressum dabit vigintiquinque 
metretas vinij Et quum eorum apprehenderit 
aliquis sanctorum botrum, alius clamabit: ‘ Bo- 
trus ego melior sum, me sume, perme Dominum 
benedic.’” &c., &c. (af. Routh, i. p. 9). Irenzeus 
refers to this quotation in the words alread 
cited, Introd. § 2 (a), No. (6); and he walle 
that, to the inquiry ‘ How can these things be?’ 
Papias replied by referring to the days spoken 
of in Isai. xi. 6, &c. ; lxv. 25. A literal and 
carnal interpretation of the ideal picture thus 
presented by Isaiah was clearly the source of the 
coarse Chiliasm of the Jewish school. 


REVELATION. XX. 


“ Thousand Years’” reign of believers with 
Christ. 

There are four chief stages in the history 
of Chiliasm :—I. The earliest stage is that of 
the first four centuries, when the doctrine 
was both popular and. earnestly insisted on by 
many distinguished Fathers of the Church; 
—II. Then came the period from St. Augus- 
tine to the Reformation;—III. In the age of 
the Reformation Chiliasm was revived among 
the enthusiastic and fanatical sects which then 
started into existence ;—IV. And next followed 
the time from Joseph Mede, in Cent. xvii., 
down to the present day. 

I. The same influences that moved the 
orthodox among the primitive Christians,— 
the tradition, namely, which had passed over 
to them from the Jews, as well as the gloomy 
aspect of the times,—acted upon the early 
heretics also: e.g. Cerinthus, the Ebicnites,} 
Montanus.? Chiliasm, or the doctrine that 
the Saints were to reign with Christ on earth 
for the literal period of a Thousand Years, 
now became the common, although by no 
means the universal belief. With the excep- 
tion of the Epistle of St. Barnabas, no trace 
of this doctrine is to be found in the writings 
of the other Apostolic Fathers. Athenagoras, 
Tatian, Theophilus of Antioch, Clemens 
Alex.* are silent on the subject. 

Justin M., who came next after Papias of 
Hierapolis as teacher of Millennarianism— 
ardent supporter though he was of this doctrine 
—expressly writes that “there are many Chris- 
tians of pure and devout minds who do zot 
admit this ””—Dial. c. Tryph. c. 80.5 


1 For Cerinthus, see Euseb. iii. 28, vii. 25 ;— 
for the Ebionites, see St. Jerome, J Jsaz. lx. 1 ; 
Ixvi. 20. 

2 For the Montanists, see Tertullian adv. 
Mare. iii. 24. Tertullian’s words are : ‘‘ Nam et 
confitemur in terra nobis regnum repromissum, 
sed ante czlum, sed alio statu, utpote post 
Resurrectionem in mille annos in Civitate Divini 
operis Hierusalem czelo delata.’”’ See also the 
writing of the presbyter Caius, against Proclus 
or Proculus (af. Euseb. iii. 28) as well as the 
Test. xit. Patriarch. (Fudah, c. 25; Benjamin, c. 
10) ;—Lvangel. Nicod. (II., c. iii. (xix.) 15) ;— 
Stbyll, Orac. ii. 27-313 iii. 743-7843 v. 413, 
&c. ; viii. 206, &c. 

® An echo of the doctrine has been thought 
to exist in Hermas, i. 3; iii. 8. 

“In Clemens Al, (Zx. Script. Proph. 
Ecloge, c. 57, t. il. p. 1004) we read :—oi yap é& 
GvOpémwy cis ayyeAous petacrdytes, xtra ern 
ualnrevovra: td TOY ayyeAwy K. T. A. 

5 Trypho had taunted Justin M. with holding 
the doctrine that Jerusalem was to be restored, 
and that Christians were to lead a life of happi- 
ness in union with Christ, together with the 
Patriarchs and Prophets and the Jewish people. 
To this Justin replies: ‘‘‘Quoadynoa oty co 
a) mpdrepoy, dtt ey pey Kal KAAOL FOAAO) Taira 


The leading advocates of Millennarianism 
in the Early Church were,—Papias (ap. Eus, 
iii. 36, 39) who, as has been pointed out, bor- 
rowed from Jewish sources ;—St. Jrenzus! (v 


Ppovotuey ws Kal mavrws éemioracde rvdTo “yevn= 
oduevoy * [viz. that the doctrine of the Millennium 
owed its origin to the Jews, and was held 
by them] moAAovs 8 ab Kai Tay THs Kabapas Kab 
evocBovs byrwy Xpictiavav ywsuns tovto ph 
yropl(ew, eofpuavd oo (c. 80); and then he 
goes on to speak of the Gnostics. 

Mede in his Dissertation on this passage (O/. 
P- 533) has suggested a rather startling emen- 
dation, which has given rise to some controversy, 
He would insert a negative, ov, in this clause, and 
read ‘‘of Christians that are [not] of pure and 
devout minds ;”’—this, he argues is required by 
the context. In his edition of the ‘‘ Dialogue with 
Trypho,” Thirlby (2 loc., p. 311) observes :— 
“*Medus (quem sequitur Tillotsonus, Reg. Fide, 
par. iii. sect. 9, p. 756 et seqq.) legit ray ov 
THs Ka8apas, Vehementer errant viri preeclari.” 
And similarly, in his ed. of the works of Justin, 
Otto (i Joc., ii. p. 274) notes: ‘‘ Dalleeus (De 
penis et satisf. human. p. 453, Amst. 1649), Miin- 
scherus (Handb. d. chr. Dogmengesch. ii. 455), 
aliique recentiores (vid. Semisch, Fustin der 
Martyr., ii. p. 469) Tov wh Tis KaOapas [legunt]. 
Sed Martyr, ut jam Thirlbius indicavit, aperte 
distinguit inter duas orthodoxorum partes.” Déol- 
linger, also referring to Minscher who would 
insert the negative, writes :—‘‘ Many moderns 
have entered into this view, and have inserted the 
particle 7 in the text. But.... St. Justin does 
not, as Miinscher pretends, speak of only swo 
classes of Christians—the Gnostics, who denied 
not only the Millennium but likewise the Resur- 
rection of the flesh, and orthodox Christians 
who admitted both. He evidently distinguishes 
three classes: (1) those who believe with him 
in a future Resurrection, and in the Thousand 
Years’ Kingdom ;—(2) those true Christians who 
believed in the Resurrection, but zof in the 
Millennium ;—and (3) the Gnostics, who were 
in name Christians, but were in truth impious 
heretics, who blasphemed the God of Abraham, 
who denied the Resurrection of the flesh, and 
who did not, therefore, merit the name of Chris- 
tians. He does not object to these last the re- 
jection of the Millennium, as, in comparison with 
their fundamental errors, this was of no import- 
ance... . According to St. Justin, therefore, the 
belief in the Resurrection of the flesh, not in the 
Millennium, was a proof of true orthodoxy” 
(Hist. of the Church, Cox’s transl., i. p. 196). 
** Although Justin,” writes Mohler (Patrologze, 
s. 251), ‘‘favours Chiliasm, he will not represent 
it as a generally received dogma, but openly 
acknowledges that many other orthodox and 
pious Christians are not of this opinion.” 

1 Trenzeus notices three different stages which 
man passes through before he attains to the 
“© Vision of God” (otrws éAcboovrat cis Thy Ow 
Tov @cov, Adv. Her. v.31, 2) ; viz. :(1) The souls 
of the righteous, in happy converse with Christ, 
await the revival of their bodies;—(2) After 
the judgment of the wicked, follows the Resurnec- 


811 


812 


34-36) ;—Tertullian, in his lost work De Spe 
Fidelium (see also Adv. Mare. iii. 24; De 
Resurr. Carn. c. 25; De Monogam. c. 10: 
De Spectac., c, ult.) ;—St. Cyprian, De Exhort. 
Mart., Pref. (on the authenticity of this work, 
see Smith’s Biogr. Dict.);—St. Methodius, 
De Resurrect., lib. contr. Origen.; Conviv. x. 
Virgg. ix. 1 (ap. Galland. iii. p. 730) ;—Nepos 
(ap. Eus. vii. 24; St. Dionys. Al. i. 43) ;—Vic- 
torinus (ap. Routh, Re/. Sacr. iii. 458) ;—Lac- 
tantius, Jrst. Div. vii. 14,24. It is to be borne 
in mind, moreover, in confirmation of what 
has been noted as to St. Justin M., that in the 
writings of Tertullian before he became a 
Montanist, we find nothing to favour the 
doctrine of the Millennium. On the con- 
trary, in “ The Rules of faith” given by him 
(De Virg. Vel. c. 1.3; adv. Prax. c. 2; De 
Prescript. Her. c. 13), as well as by so 
decided a Chiliast as Irenzus (see Her. i. 10; 
iii. 4), no reference whatever is made to 
Chiliasm as a necessary article of belief. Nor 
should it be forgotten that Dionysius Alex., 
who resisted with success the teaching of 
Nepos (A.D. 255), speaks always respectfully 
of his opporient ;—a fact which proves that 
Nepos did not hold the gross and carnal 
aspect of Millennarianism. ‘This controversy, 
indeed, with Dionysius proves that, under its 
most favourable aspect, Millennarian doctrine 
was now, in the middle of Cent. iii., positively 
discountenanced in the Church.! 

It has been already apparent from the 
words of St. Justin M. quoted above, that 


tion of the righteous, who will then reign with 
Christ on earth in the enjoyment of happiness, 
not excluding corporeal pleasure ;—(3) The being 
taken up to enjoy ‘‘the Vision of God.” To 
the earthly kingdom of Christ succeeds the 
great apostasy, and the rule of Antichrist— 
tb. V. C. 25-30. 

 Gennadius of Marseilles (A.D. 459) thus sums 
up the opinions of the Millennarians of the fifth 
century :—‘‘In Divinis repromissioribus nihil 
terrenum vel transitorium expectemus, sicut 
Meletiani sperant. Non uuptiarum copulam, 
sicut Cerinthus et Marcion delirant. Non 
quod ad cibum vel ad potum pertinet, sicut, 
Papia auctore, Jreneus, Tertullianus, et Lactan- 
tius, adquiescunt. Neque per mille annos post 
resurrectionem regnum Christi 7 ¢erra futurum, 
et sanctos cum illo in deliciis regnaturos spere- 
mus, sicut Vegos docuit, primam justorum resur- 
rectionem, et secundam impiorum : et inter has 
duas mortuorum resurrectiones, gentes ignorantes 
Deum in angulis terrarum in carne reservandas : 
quz post mille annos regni in terra justorum, 
instigante diabolo, movende sint ad pugnam 
contra justos regnantes; et Domino pro justis 
pugnante imbre igneo compescendas : atque ita 
mortuas, cum Ceteris in impietate ante mortuis, 
ad <eterna supplicia in incorruptibili carne resus- 
citandas” (af. St. August., Of. ed. Bened. t. 
viil., Aff. p. 78). 


REVELATION. XX. 





Chiliasm was not the universal belief of the 
primitive Church. So early as the year 196 
an earnest opponent of the Millennarian 
doctrines was found in Caius, a Roman Pres« 
byter, who, writing against the Montanist 
Proclus, declares that the “ Thousand Years’” 
Kingdom was a vain fable invented by the 
heretic Cerinthus (see Introd. § 5). Even 
thus early the tendencies to which Chiliasm 
gave an impulse,—as exhibited chiefly in the 
extravagances of the Montanists,—contributed 
to the growing opposition to this doctrine. 
It was from the Church of Alexandria, how= 
ever, with its famous school of theol 
that the most strenuous resistance to Mi 
lennarianism proceeded. Origen speaks in 
terms of strong condemnation respecting 
those who interpret Scripture in a Jewish 
sense. He was the first—so far as we know 
—who directly impugned the doctrine. He 
charges the Chiliasts with holding that 
“strangers should be given to them as 
ministers of their delights” (Isai. li. 3-5); 
with looking for ‘“ promises consisting in 
bodily pleasure and luxury;” &c.:—see his 
Sel. in Psal., vol. ii. p. §703; tom. xvii. in Matt. 
vol. iii. p. 827; Prolog. in Cantic., iii. p. 28; De 
Princip. 1. xi. 2, where, in reply to the favourite 
references of Chiliasts (Matt. v. 6; xxvi. 29), 
he writes: “ Multa alia ex scripturis exempla 
proferunt, quorum vim figuraliter intelligi 
debere nen sentiunt.” 

Nepos of Arsinoe wrote in reply to Origen; 
and was in turn answered by St. Dionysius of 
Alex. (Introd. § 5). The last echo of Chiliasm, 
however, in the Eastern Church is given 
from the writings of the younger Apollinaris, 
the heresiarch (A.D. 370), who went so far 
in his Jewish sympathies as to teach that the 
Temple was to be rebuilt, and the entire 
Jewish worship to be restored—men still 
living, as they do now, but observing the 
Mosaic Law (67: év +7 mparn avacrdoet xiAt- 
ovraernpida Tiva exttehovpev). In support of 
this Millennial period he referred to Rev. xx. ; 
which, nevertheless, as Apollinaris admits, 
“the greatest number and the pious” (of 
meioro! kal evAaSeis) understand in a spi- 
ritual sense:—see Epiphan. Her. Ixxvii. 26, t. 
i, p. 1031. See also St. Basil, who thus de- 
scribes the opinion of Apollinaris——€or: 8é 
aiT@ kal ta wepi avaotdcews, pvOiKas avy= 
keiweva, wGddov d€ “lovdaixas (Ep. 263, ed. 
Ben. t. iil. p. 406). 

And thus we see that from an early period 
Chiliasm was neither held universally, not 
imposed as an article of faith; while, as 
Apollinaris admits, it had almost died out in 
his day. So little is Dean Alford’s assertion, 
already quoted, to be accepted—namely, that 
the whole Church, for 300 years after the 
Apostles believed in a literal Millennium; and 
so little true is Gibbon’s sneer, that the doe 


REY EAZATT VOIN, XDS 


trine of a life of enjoyment for 1ooo years 
greatly accelerated the progress of Chris- 
tianity (ch. xv.). 

II. From the fourth century to the age 
of the Reformation, the interpretation of the 
“Thousand years” advocated by St. Augustine 
prevailed in the Church. At one time he was 
himself disposed to be a Chiliast, in the 
strictly spiritual sense of the doctrine—‘* etiam 
nos hoc opinati fuimus aliquando” (/.c., xx. 7 ; 
see also his“ Sermo 259, in die Dom. Octav. 
Pasch.,’ c. 2),“‘ Regnabit Dominus in terra 
cum sanctis suis,” &c. (Opp., t. vil. pars 2). 
The spiritual sense he allows to be “ tolerable” 
(“que opinio esset utcunque tulerabilis”) ; 
but of other aspects of the doctrine he writes: 
“ Nullo modo ista possunt, nisi a carnalibus 
credi” (i4.). In this carnal sense Chiliasm 
is reckoned among the heresies of the age 
by Philastrius (A.D. 380, Her. 106); and 
Stephanus Gobarus (A.D. 600) records the 
existence in his time of this carnal doctrine, 
without, however, expressing his own opinion.! 
The sentiments of St. Jerome may be inferred 
from his reference to the work of Dionysius of 
Alex., whom he describes as mocking at the 
fable of the ‘‘ Thousand Years” (“irridens mille 
annorum fabulam,”’—Comm. in Isat. Pref. in 
libr. 18, t. iv. p. 767). The existence of Mil- 
lennarianism may for a time be traced in the 
Medieval belief that the world was to come 
to an end in the year tooo. Subsequently to 
this date various ideals of the Millennial 
kingdom were proposed—by the Mendicant 
Orders (A.D. 1200) as a return to Apostolic 
poverty ;—by the Abbot Joachim (A.D. 1202) 
as a union of contemplation with the inspira- 
tion of love ;—by Peter de Oliva (A.D. 1297) 
as the more energetic action of the Holy 
Ghost. 

If]. With the Reformation Millenna- 
rianism entered on its third stage. In the 
Apocalypse many recognized a prophetic com- 
pendium of the history of the Church. In 
the supposed downfall of the Papacy, they 
saw sure tokens of the near return of the 
Lord. Among the wild imaginations of the 
time, the Anabaptists embraced Millenna- 
rianism in its grossest forms, and used this 
belief as a plea for lawlessness and crime. 
Hence the repudiation by both the Foreign 
and the English Reformers of this doctrine, 
which was expressly condemned in the 
original Articles of the Church of England: 
“They that go about to renew the fable of 
heretics called Millennarii, be repugnant to 


1 “Ort mpétepoy of dixaior avaorhcovTa, Kab 
ovy avtois mévra Ta (Ga, Kal emi xfAia ern 
Tpudijcovot Kal eaOiovres Kal mivovtes, Kal TEK= 
yoovres, Kal wera TODTO 7H KaBOALKh emoTHoETAL 
&vdotacis. Kal éx tov évayttov, bri Tay Sikaiwy 
mpoavdotagis ovk eotw, ovde 1 XLALovTaeTys 


Tpugh, ovde 6 yauos.—ap. Photium, Codex 232. 


Holy Scripture, and cast themselves head- 
long into a Jewish dotage” (drt. xli.) —see 
also the Augsburg Confession, Art. 17; the 
Swiss Confession, Art. 11. 

IV. During the sixteenth century no writer 
of repute defended Millennarianism; and the 
question was not revived till the learned Joseph 
Mede (A.D. 1627), in his Clavis Apocalyptica, 
introduced the subject once more into the 
field of controversy. The chief impulse how- 
ever to the revival of this doctrine was given 
by Bengel in 1740; and the chief importance of 
Bengel’s system, according to Auberlen (/. ¢.; 
.P. 373) “consists in this, that he brought to 
light again a truth of Scripture which had 
been misapprehended for nearly fifteen cen- 
turies, viz. the doctrine of the Millennial 
kingdom.” According to Bengel’s chronolo- 
gical system (see Introd. § 11, b., IV.) the 
former of the two periods of a “ Thousand 
Years” which he assumed, was to begin in 
year 1836;—Jurieu placed the date of the 
Millennium in 1785;—Stilling in 1816;— 
Sander in 1847;—an anonymous writer 
(quoted by Ebrard in Herzog’s Rea/-Encycl.) 
between 1879 and 1887. In early times 
the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus!’ had 
shortened this period to 500 years ;—certain 
anonymous writers referred to by Philastrius 
(Her. 106) interpreting Isai. lxi. 2—eviavrov 
kupiov Sexrdv—according to “the Year-day ” 
theory, placed its beginning in the year 365 ;— 
and St. Hippolytus, apparently following 
“the~Gospel of Nicodemus” (see below, 
note’), placed it in A.D. 500. 

Several modern Chiliasts (e. g. Rothe, 
Ebrard, P. Lange) interpret merely as a 
symbolic prophetical number; and will fix 
nothing more nearly as to the duration of the 
Kingdom of Glory. 

The tendency to Millennarianism lies deep 


1 That is to say 500 years defore the end of 
the szxth Millennium from the Creation:—see 
Cooper’s transl., c. iii. (xix.), p. 303. In this 
apocryphal ‘‘Gospel of Nicodemus” the Arch- 
angel Michael tells Seth that the Son of God is to 
come in 5500 years; and the High Priests tell 
Pilate that they had found this in a certain col- 
lection of writings (7b/otheca) belonging to the 
first book of the Septuagint (#7 “bro primo de 
Septuaginta). They add together the successive 
generations from the time ‘‘ quo fecit Deus 
celum et terram et primum hominem,” and 
these together make up 5500 years: ‘‘Sicut 
invenimus scriptum in bibliotheca przenuntiasse 
Michael Archangelum ad tertium filium Adz 
Seth in quinque et semis millibus annorum 
advenisse Christum Filium Dei.” — Zvzang. 
Nicodemi, P. ii., c. xii. (xxvili.): cf. c. i. (xvil.), 
“6 Descensus Christi ad Inferos,” Latine A (ed. 
Tischendorf, p. 391). Mr. B. H. Cooper (Ajocry- 
phal Gospels, Introd. p. c.) is inclined to believe 
that the Jews really possessed the collection 
(Bibliotheca) here spoken of. 


813 


$14 


m human nature. Man feels that he is him- 
self weak ; too utterly powerless in his own 
strength to win Paradise back again. It was 
the ingenuous creed of the heathen Greek or 
Roman that the restoration of the “ Golden 
Age,” when earth would be all fertility and 
bounty, and man all perfect and happy, could 
only proceed from the favour of the gods. It 
was the belief of the Jew that his expected 
Millennium of carnal enjoyment and worldly 
dominion was to be brought in by Messiah. 
Neither Jew nor Gentile dreamed that human 
efforts could remedy the evils of life. In our 
modern philosophy, however, ‘ Man,’ or rather 
the abstraction ‘ Humanity,’ is invested with 
the character of Godhead. Our new prophets 
speak of ‘ Man,’ of his future, of his dignity 
Civilization is merely the gradual evolution 
and successive attainment, so to speak, by 
mankind, of the Divine Nature. We are not 
indeed told precisely where this progress 
begins, or where it ends: but nevertheless, 
according to this doctrine earth alone remains 
for man; it is no longer his place of exile,— 
it is his only dwelling-place, his only country. 
To the ancient conceptions of a “Golden 
Age,”—or of an earthly Messianic reign,—or 
of a carnal triumph of Christianity,—has suc- 
ceeded the kindred doctrine of the perfecti- 
bility of the human race. In short, worldly 
as well as religious speculation has its Millen- 
nial dream ; inasmuch as it assumes that there 
is a goal of perfection to which mankind can 
attain within the present conditions of things. 
Many Chiliastic enthusiasts appeared during 
the great French Revolution, who thought 
that the ideal of earthly bliss would be at 
once attained by establishing the principle of 
the “rights of man ” ; and there is little doubt 
that the crudest Chiliasm lies at the root of 
the socialistic and communistic tendencies 


REVELATION. XXI. 





which are now menacing the very existence 
of European civilization" For man has need 
of an ideal. If once he abandons the religion 
of Christ,—if heaven is a blank for him,—if 
there is no other life in which he believes or 
hopes,—he will transfer his ineradicable idea 
of the Infinite to the present life; and strive 
in imagination to enlarge the narrow horizon 
that bounds his earthly career. He will 
transport to this world his conception of 
supreme happiness; and imagine for himself a 
Paradise on earth, having no hope to find it 
elsewhere. It is thus, from the denial of 
religion, that the notion of ‘progress’ has 
arisen—that “ Golden Age” which the pro- 
phets of these latter times. Condorcet, and 
Priestly, and Turgot, and Comte, so pom- 
pously announced in recent generations, and 
of which Mr. J. S. Mill has been the 
apostle in our own. Amid all the declama- 
tion of our modern philosophers—their great 
words as to spiritualism, and progress, and 
reason—one single thought, one single aspira= 
tion, may be clearly disengaged ; and that, an 
ideal of material happiness, and of sensual 
enjoyment. Morality has no place, or at best 
but a very secondary place, in the new dogma, 
the great end of which is the amelioration of 
physical life. And this, in the mystical lan- 
guage of these thinkers, is “the New Apo- 
calypse” :—an Apocalypse, indeed, but one 
which has neither an Apostle of Christ for its 
author, nor the Spirit of God as the source 
of its Inspiration. 

(On the subject of the Millennium, see 
Greswell’s Essay in his Exposition of the 
Parables, vol. i. p. 142 ; Herzog’s Real-Encyel., 
Art. Chiliasmus: Martensen’s Christliche Doge 
matik ; Trench’s Hulsean Lectures, Lect. v.). 


1 See Martensen, Dogmatik, Engl. tr. p. 473 





CHAPTER XXI. 


1 A new heaven and a new earth. 10 The 


heavenly Ferusalem, with a full descrip. 
tion thereof. 23 She needeth no sun, the 
glory of God is her light. 24 The kings 
of the earth bring their riches unto her. 





[Ver. 1 dw7Oov. Ver. 2 om. eye “lwavyns.—eidov is to be read after xawny [Er., followed 
by A. V., here departs in both cases from his codex, and re-translates from the Vulg. ege 


Toannes vidi|.—aré rod Qcod is to be read after cx rod ovp. Ver. 3 ék tov Opdvov (cf. ch, 
xix. 5; xx. 12).—[N, A, 1 read A\aoi,—B, P read Xads].—[A, P read, and §, B, 1 omit atray 
@cés. Er. supplied the words from the Vulg. eorum Deus}. Ver. 4 om. 6 Oeds.—ex TOY 
—[A, P om. éri]. Ver. 5 [A, B om. pot].—muorol Kai dnd. Ver. 6 yéyovav [with &*, A, Iren. 
—wk, B, P read yéyova— reads yéyova 14, @ kai rd, o. After the Vulg., “ Factum est. 
Ego sum a et w,” Er. reads yéyove, ym ciut rd A kul 7d O,—“ Videtur Erasm. ad vg. confor- 
masse,” Tisch.]—[A reads éyo eius 7d A,—N, B, P, 1 omit ejut]. Ver. 7 radra —[A, 1 read 
airay|.—I[Er., altering the airot écovrat por viol of his codex, after the Vulg., erit mihs filius, 
inserted without authority the art. before vids]. Ver. 8 rois dé Sethois.—é Ody. 6 der. 
Ver. 9 om. mpés pe (inserted by Er. without any authority, and adopted in the A. V.).— 
éx trav énrd.—rtav yeusvrav.—ryy yuvaixa rod dpviov. Ver. 10 om. tiv peyddnv. Ver. 18 
om ist xai. Ver. 12 €xovea reixos.—éxovoa mudavas. Ver. 13 xai is to be read 


v. £.) REVELATION. XXI. 815 
gg ND ‘<I saw a new heaven and a_ and the first earth were passed away; 
3. 1 
t3. new earth: for the first heaven and there was no more sea. 





and, 3rd, and 4th damd.—[A reads Boppa,—dvopav,—vorov]. Ver. 14 ¢xav.—én’ aitov.— 
8addexa Gvop. Ver. 15 pérpov, kaAauov. Ver. 16 om. rogodrdy éorw.—[After dcov A reads 
xai|.—[The words et longitudo ejus tanta est quanta et latitudo of the Vulg., which are 
wanting in 1, Er. rendered: kai 76 pnkos avrov togotroy eotw (sic) 6codrov Kai To mAdTOS]. 
Ver. 18 om. jv.—opoiov. Ver. 19 om. kai. Ver. 20 capduov. Ver. 21 diavyns [so also 1: 
“T hold d:apavns,” writes Delitzsch—“ which has no authority and which is a usual epithet 
of vados,—to be ein erasmisches Quid pro quo”). Ver. 23 om. ev. Ver. 24 kal mepuratnoovot 
ra €6vn dia Tod dwros avtns [The A. V. here follows the reading adopted by Erasmus, who 
omitted to correct by aid of the Vulgate the confusion of his codex, in which the scribe had 
mixed up as follows the comment of Andreas on ver. 23, with the text of ver. 24 :—The words 
of Andreas are, ra pev yap ca lipeva €Ovn Kabas eipnra, ev TO hori avtns TEepuTatnoovcw. 
This is thus given by the scribe int: kai rd €Oun TOY Galopevar, TO Harti adtns TepiTatTHaovet’ 
(with these words the Gomment. on ver. 23 ends; and then follows the text of ver. 24, 
Viz. kat mepur. Ta €Ovn, dia TOD wrtds adtns Kat oi Bac. kK. tT. d.). Luther’s transl. “‘ Und die 
Heiden, da sie selig werden” u. s. w., rests on this same confusion in codex 1 between the 
comm. of Andreas, and the Sacred Text,—see Delitzsch in Joc.|.—om. kai thy tyny (see 


ver. 26). Ver. 27 xowov.— 6 moray [A omits 6].] 


CuHap. XXI. 


THE GLORIES OF THE NEW JERUSALEM 
(Xxi.-xxil. 5). 


1. And Isaw] For the connexion of this 
closing scene of the Seventh chief Vision of the 
Revelation Proper with the previous scenes 
see Note A at the end of this chapter. 


a new heaven and a new earth:] In place 
of the earth and heaven which, according to 
ch. xx. 11, fled away from the face of Him 
that sat on the throne :—cf. Isai. lxv. 17; lxvi. 
22; 2 Pet. iii. 13. It is disputed whether an 
absolutely “‘zew” Creation is intended here, 
or ‘a renascence”—a reproduction as from a 
seed (1 Cor. xv. 42, 43)—ofa new earth from 
the old. In support of the latter opinion, 
St. Paul’s words (1 Cor. vii. 31) are quoted, 
where he says that, not “this world,” but 
“the fashion (axjpa) of this world passeth 
away” (St. Jerome writes: “ figura preterit, 
non substantia”). Weare reminded also of the 
“ Regeneration” which Christ spoke of (Matt. 
xix. 28); and writers dwell upon the creation 
of the old world out of “ water,” and the 
production of the new from the conflagration 
of the old—2 Pet. iii. 5-12; cf. Gen. i. 2. 


for the first heaven and the first earth are 
passed away;| (See vv. /j.). The result 
of the power revealed in ch. xx. 11:—cf. 
1 Cor, xiii. 10; 2 Cor. v. 17. “Flesh and 
blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God;” 
therefore, when “ the natural body” “is raised 
@ spiritual body” (1 Cor. xv. 44, 50), a new 
world is necessary for its abode. 


and the sea is no more.] As in ver. 
4, “the first things are passed away.” ‘The 
interpretations given to these words are 
various: (1) The literal,—“the sea” exists 


no longer, because the “ew earth” has arisen 
out of fire (Beda, De Wette, Ebrard, Alf., Bis- 
ping);—(2) The former “sea” has passed 
away like the former “earth,” but this does 
not preclude a “eq” sea, any more than a 
“new” earth (Diisterd.);—(3) “The sea” of - 
the nations, the wicked restless world, cf. ch, 
Xx. 13, and see ch, xvil. 15; Isai. lvii. 20 (St. 
Augustine, Hengst., Words.). [See on ver. 13 
what St. Augustine says of “ the sea giving up 
its dead.” Having observed, “De Mari novo 
aliquid me uspiam legisse, non recolo,”—he 
adds that ch. iv. 6 does not refer to this scene ; 
and he concludes : “‘ Non erit hoc seculum vita 
mortalium turbulentum, quod Maris nomine 
figuravit,” c. 15];—(4) Because in Para- 
dise there was no sea, and here all is Para- 
dise (Zillig); and so, in substance, Volkmar, 
and Renan who adds a ‘sterilization of part 
of the earth,—the “ Abyss” or domain of 
Satan, ch. xi. 7; xiii. 1 (p. 449) ;—(5) Because 
no longer required to separate and keep 
apart divisions of the human race (Andreas, 
Gerlach) ;—(6) The old Aeaven and earth 
of the former Israel having passed away, the 
“Sea,” the emblem of the Gentiles (Ecclus. 
XXxiX. 23), is no more (I. Williams). 

The interpretation of St. Augustine (No. 3) 
is that which best suits the symbolism of this 
Book. 

Auberlen notes :—Not under the Millen- 
nial Kingdom is the end of the development 
of God’s Kingdom. During the Church- 
historical era, nature and history pursue their 
wonted, unspiritual course. During the 
Millennial Kingdom the life of Christ be- 
comes manifest and visible (Col. iti. 3, 4); 
penetrating the whole world of history— 
government, civilization, art. Finally, after 
the Millennium, this life of Christ becomes 


816 


2 And I John saw the holy city, 
new Jerusalem, coming down from 
God out of heaven, prepared as a 
bride adorned for her husband. 


REVELATION. XXI. 


[v. a—3 


3 And I heard a great voice out of 
heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle 
of God zs with men, and he will 
dwell with them, and they shall be 





also the power which transfigures nature, in 
the time of the “ New Heaven” and “ The new 
Earth.” In all this process, Israel is once 
more the head of humanity; and this is why 
Prophets, intent on the future of the people 
of the Old Covenant, pass over the Church- 
historical period—which they only notice as 
the time of Israel’s Dispersion among the 
Gentiles (p. 358). 


2. And saw the holy city,| Omit “John” 
—see vv. i]. The “ Holy City” is the Church 
Triumphant, including, like the “Heaven ” and 
the “Earth” (ver. 1), the community consisting 
of its inhabitants who have in like manner 
become “ew.” The Church is represented 
as “ a City” in Matt. v.14; Heb. xi. 10, 16; 
xiii. 14. The epithet “ Holy” isnow supplied 
in addition to the reference in ch. iii. :2—cf. 
ver. 10; Ch. xi, 2; xxil. 19; Matt. iv. 5; xxvii. 
635, Usat. lit, 1, F 

new Jerusalem,| Or, Jerusalem coming 
down new. As the Seer beheld in the re- 
novated world “a new heaven and a new 
earth” (ver. 1), he now beholds in the glorified 
Church a “ew Jerusalem.” As the Theo- 
cracy, with its system of worship and its Sanc- 
tuary, had its type in “‘the City of the Living 
God” (Heb. viii. 55 ix. 235 xii. 22), so St. 
Paul speaks of the earthly Jerusalem in con- 
trast to the heavenly (Gal. iv. 26; Phil. iil. 
20). 

Tertullian writes: “Hance et Ezechiel 
novit et Apostolus Joannes vidit.” (ddv. 
Marc. iii. 24). See the note on ch. iii. 12. 


coming down out of heaven from God,] 
(See vv. //.). Not on the old, but on the 
“ new earth,” and therefore not of this material 
Creation: the language of ch. iii. 12 is re- 
peated ; — see also, below, ver. 10. This con- 
ception of the heavenly Jerusalem, familiar to 
St. Paul and St. John, occurs also in Jewish 
theology, where the thought of the City 
““ caming doavn out of heaven,” and of a world 
made new, is likewise to be met with. 
[Thus we read in Sobar Gen. f. 69, c. 271, 
“R. Jeremias dixit: Deus S. B. innovabit 
mundum suum, et edificabit Hierosolymam, 
ut ipsam descendere faciat in medium sui de 
ccelo, ita ut nunquam destruatur ” (see Wetst. 
on Gal. iv. 26; Schéttgen, Diss. de Hieros. 
Ge/., Hor. Hebr.i. 1205)]. The “new Jeru- 
salem” comes “down out of heaven,” because 
the Church is already there in triumph, al- 
though here below it suffers and struggles. 
St. Paul speaks of “the Jerusalem which 
ts above” as “ our Mother” (Gal. iv..26). 


“This is the City of God,” notes Burger, 
“which the pious Fathers of old waited for, 
and which will not pass away from them,— 
Heb. xi. 10, 16.” 

A threefold Jerusalem, notes Hengst., 
is peculiar to the N. Test.:—(1) The hea- 
venly community of the righteous (ch. xiv. 
1-5) ;—(2) The Church in her militant state 
(ch. xi. 2; xx. 9);—(3) The New Jerusalem 
on the renovated earth, as here; after whose 
descent from heaven, the two other forms 
are seen no more. In this third form Jeru- 
salem combines the heavenly character of the 
Jirst and the earthly existence of the second. 
The City, notes Bengel, comes down from God; 
and still His throne is in it, and He Himself 
is with men therein (ver. 3; ch. xxii. 3). The 
New Heaven has inclined to the New Earth; 
the New Jerusalem is the bond of union. 
As in Matt. v. 34, 35, the symbolical City 
has come between. 


prepared as a bride| As in ch. xix. 7; 
where see the note and the references :—cf. 
ch. xxii. 17; Isai. lxi. ro-Ixii. 5. The Holy 
City and the Bride are now contrasted with 
Babylon and the Harlot. 


adorned for her husband.| Notwithstand- 
ing the parallelism of this passage to ch. xix. 
7, Millennarians make a distinction. They 
place the marriage of the Lamb before the 
Millennium, although here, after the Milen- 
nium, the “Bride” is so called for the first time 
in this Book. Ebrard explains this by saying 
that the “ride” united to her “Husband” had 
been in heaven during the “‘ Thousand yeazs,” 
and now descends with Him to earth:—accord- 
ingly she is “ adorned for her Husband,” not for 
the Bridegroom ; and in ver. 9 she is styled 
both Bride and Wife. Bisping explains that 
the Millennial reign was the time of the 
Marriage Feast; and that it is only now that 
the Lord brings home His Bride. Even 
Bengel explains ch. xix. 7, “ His Wife hath 
made herself ready,” by “‘ hath begun to make 
herself ready ” (“ paravit se, i.e., coepit parare 
se. De nuptiis istis vide c. xxi. 2, 9.”) 

[It is surely enough in reply to those who 
place the union of Christ with His Church be 
fore the Millennium, to say that, after the Mil- 
lennium is over, the Church is here described 
as descending from heaven “as a Briat adorned 
for her husband.” “tt is rather awkward,” 
writes Dr. Brown (/.c.. p. 60), “to suppose @ 
bridal preparation ané a presentation of the 
parties to each other, a ‘ Thousand Years* 
after the union has bee: consummated.” 


% 


Sah. 7. 37- 


v. 4—5-] 
his people, and God himself shall be 
with them, and be their God. 

4 7And God shall wipe away all 
tears from their eyes; and there 
shall be no more death, neither sor- 





THE RESULTS OF THE JUDGMENT (3-8). 


3. And I heard] A new Vision—vv. 3-8 
forming an interlude, as it were, between 
ver. 2 and ver. 9; and exhibiting the results 
of the final Judgment (ch. xx. 11), as set forth 
in Matt. xxv. 34, 41. 

In ver. 9 the narrative of ver. 2 is resumed. 


a great voice out of the throne saying, | 
As in ch. xix. 5; cf. ch. xx. 12:—see vv. Ul. 
Compare the voice “‘in the midst of the Four 
Living Beings” (ch. vi. 6) who are “ round 
about the throne” (ch. iv. 6). Hengst. reads 
“ out of heaven,” referring to ch. xi. 15; xii. 
10; Xiv. 2; Xv. 2-4; xix. I, 6. 

Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men,]| 
His actual dwelling, the Heavenly Jerusalem, 
not the symbol merely of this, as in the wilder- 
ness, Lev. xxvi. 11, 12; see also Ezek. xxxvii. 
27, 28. Not a“ Tabernacle,” notes Burger, 
but tse “Tabernacle” of God; the true 
contrast to the shadow of heavenly things— 
the ‘‘ Tabernacle” of the Covenant and the 
Temple under the Jewish Law. Not “sen” 
but “the men,” #.e., redeemed and glorified 
humanity. 

and he Shall dwell with them,| Gr. 
make his tabernaole,—see ch. vil. 15; 
John i. 14; Ex. xxix. 45. The fact of God’s 
dwelling with His people, first manifested by 
the Incarnation, is now accomplished (see 
ch. vii. 15-17). This fact supplies the best 
exposition of the present Vision (cf. Ezek. 
Xxxvil. 28; xllii. 7). 

How God dwelt with His people of old is 
described in Ex. xl. 34-38. 


and they shall he his people,| ‘This is the 
frequent subject of Prophecy, e.g. Jer. xxiv. 
73 xxxi.1; Ezek. xxxvii. 27; Zech. viii. 8. 
Bisping considers the plural “an unhappy 
adaptation to the plural-subject (avroi), since 
God, as He can have but one kingdom, so 
He can have but one people.” The evidence 
however of* MSS. in favour of the plural, 
peoples” greatly preponderates,—see vv. //. 

and God himself shall be with them,] Cf. 

he name “Immanuel,” “God with us”— 
Matt. i. 23; Isai. vii. 14. 

[and be] their God:] (For the authorities 
which omit these words, see vv. //.). It is 
thus implied that the contrast between the 
Church and the world has now ceased. On 
this promise see Jer. xxx. 22; xxxi. 33; Ezek. 
xi. 20. 


New Test.—Vou. IV. 


REVELATION. XXI. 


row, nor crying, neither shall there 
be any more pain: for the former 
things are passed away. 

5 And he that sat upon the throne 
said, ‘Behold, I make all things new. ,7, 


4, ani he shall wipe away every tear 
from their eyes;| (See vv. /l.). Note the 
verbal agreement with ch. vii. 17; and cf 
Isai. xxv. 8; Ixv. 19. 


and death shall be no more;]| See 
ch. xx. 14. 

Death, as it had come into the world 
through sin (Gen. ii. 17; Rom. v. 12), must 
cease when the victory over sin shall have 
been won,—1 Cor. xv. 54. 


neither shall there be mourning, zor 
crying, nor pain, any more:] Isai. xxxv. 
nels IR Rie 

the first things are passed away. | 
(Or “for the first things,”—see vv. //.). 
As told in ver. 1. On this fact depends 
the great change implied in vv. 1, 5 :—evil 
has now ceased; and there is unimpeded 
union with God. 

Martensen (Christian Dogmatics, § 289, 
Engl. tr.) compares wv. 1-4 with 1 Cor. 
xv. 24-28, and observes, that it is by no 
means implied that the mmediatorial office 
of Christ is at an end: “ All communica- 
tions of blessing from the Father to His 
creatures pass through the Son, and now it 
is for the first time, in the full sense of the 
words, true that Christ is present in all 
Creation, for He now fills all with His own 
fulness” (p. 484). 


5. And he that sitteth on te iorone 
said,| Christ, as in ch. xx. 11 :—even in His 
state of humiliation the Lord Jesus an- 
nounced, “‘ Then shall the Son of Man sit upon 
the throne of His glory” (Matt. xxv. 31). On 
the other hand vv. 6, 7, are adduced in proof 
that it must be God the Father, as in ch. iv. 
3; Vv. 1, 7. The distinction need not be 
pressed, see 1 Cor. xv. 28. “The Commis- 
sion of the Son is perfected; His work has 
attained its object ; the scene of that work— 
the old world of sin and of death—hbas dis- 
appeared ; in its stead is the New Creation, 
in which Gop is All in All” (Burger): 

Behold, I make all things new.| He declares 
that to be His work which St. John had 
already beheld in ver. 1; and to which He 
Himself had, when on earth, referred as 
the “‘ Regeneration” (Matt. xix. 28). All 
things had been originally “sade by Him” 
(John i. 1); and now He makes “all things 
New.” On the earthly aspect of the “ New 
Creation,” see 2 Cor.v. 17; and on Christ 
as the Source of the “ New Creation,” see 


FFF 


817 


“2Con® 


818 


And he said unto me, Write: for 
these words are true and faithful. 
6 And he said unto me, It is done. 


fch. r.8./[ am Alpha and Omega, the begin- 


& 22.1 


REVELATION. XXI. 


{v. 6—7. 


him that is athirst of the fountain of 
the water of life freely. 

7 He that overcometh shall in- 
herit all things; and I will be his 


“Is'5s.r.ning and the end. #I will give unto God, and he shall be my son. 





Lee on Inspiration, Lect. iii. pp. 120-130, 
4th ed. 

According to Rom. viii. 18-25 we have 
here expressed the last and highest object 
of all Christian hope. 


And he saith,] Omit “unto me”—see 
vy, Il, 


Write:] For the third time in this Book 
the Seer receives the special command to 
“ cyrite” certain words, see ch. xiv. 13; xix. 9: 
—cf. on ch. i. 11. Who is the speaker here? 
The same indefiniteness as to the speaker, 
noticed on ch. i. 1, 10, appears in this place. 
The speaker may be regarded as the presiding 
Angel of the entire series of Visions,—see ch. 
xxii. 6, 16, 

In ch. x. 4; xiv. 13, the words proceed 
from a voice “from heaven ;” in ch. xix. 9 we 
read as here. Note also the present tense, 
saith, Aéyer—eirev being used immedi- 
ately before and immediately after in ver. 6. 

for these words are faithful and true.] 
(See vv. //.). We may also render (éru 
recitativum): Write, “These words are 
faithful and true;’—cf. ch. iii. 17, &c.; 
Matt. ii. 23; Johni. 20; 1 John iv. 20. 


6. And he said unto me,| The speaker is 
once more “ He that sitteth on the throne;” 
see on ver. 5. 


All is come te pass.] (See vv. //.). Gr. 
They are done, or They are come to 
pass, or They are accomplished —as 
the interpreter of St. Irenzus (v. 25, p. 336) 
read the text—“Et dixit mihi, Facta (cf. ch. xvi. 
17, where the same verb, yéyovev, is in the 
singular), ‘‘ The Divine promises and judg- 
ments” ( Words.) ;—‘ All things are become 
new” (Bisping) ;—“‘ The Divine Decrees” 
(Ebrard) ;—“ The words just described as 
faithful and true’’ (Burger). 

The expression “All is come to pass” 
places the promise and the menace which 
follows (see ver. 8) in connexion with the 
whole Vision :— What the Seer has beheld is 
now accomplished; the old world has passed 
away ; the New Earth has come into being. 

The reading of &, B, P, 1 (yéyova ey 76 
A kai 7d Q) “I am become the Alpha,” 
&c.—although the evidence for it is not 
weak—is opposed not only to St. John’s 
usage, see ch. i. 8 (the verb is wanting in 
ch. xxii. 13), and to sound theology (for 
Christ cannot decome what He has doctecdl, 
but renders the sense absurd: one cannot 


become the “ Alpha,” the “ beginning,” the 
“frst” (ch. i. 8,173 ii. 8; iil, 145 xxil. 13), of 
all things. Were the speaker God the Father, 
this inference would be, if possible, stronger. 

Twice, in this Book, notes Bengel, is it 
said “ It is done,”—at the completion of the 
wrath of God, ch. xvi. 17; and here, at the 
making of “all things new.” ‘Three times, 
notes Stier (on John xix. 30, vol. vili. p. 24, 
Engl. tr.), do we read in the Bible of the ree 
pose of God in Christ,—at the beginning, Gen. 
1. 31; in the “ It is finished” of John xix. 30; 
and here, in the final “Al! is come to pass.” 

T am the Alpha and .he Omega,| See 
chi i. 8s xargs 

the beginning and the end.| This transla- 
tion, as it were, of the preceding words is 
also given in ch. xxii. 13, where the third 
equivalent, “the first and the last,” also occurs: 
—see on ch. i. 8. 

T will give| The pronoun repeated,—* I 
am the Alpha,” “ J will give ;”—Christ s 
throughout. The ideas here conjoined are 
expressed separately in ch. xxii. 13, 17. 


unto him that is athirst) The thought is 
taken from Isai. lv. 1; see ch. xxii. r7, and 
John vii. 37. 

of the fountain of the water of life freely.| 
Cf. Isai. xii. 3; John iv. 10, 14: “Living 
water” (used in its natural sense in the Old 
Test., e.g. Gen. xxvi. 19) is not necessarily the 
equivalent of “ the water of life,” in the highest 
and spiritual sense of the words ;—but it is so 
in St. John iv. 10, as coming from Him in 
whom is the absolute life—Trench, Studies 
in the Gospels, p. 94. 

In ch. vii. 17 (as in Isai. xlix. 10) we read 
of “fountains of waters of life,’ which are 
now united into one stream proceeding from 
the Throne—see ch. xxii. 1. 


7, He that overcometh| Here only, since the 
Seven Epistles (cf. ch. ii. 7, 11, &c.), do we 
find the stimulating promise “to him that 
overcometh” (cf. ch. xii. 11)—in like manner 
uttered by Christ, see on ver. 5. 

sha!’ inherit these things;| (See vv. //.). 
Here only in St. John’s writings do we read 
of the everlasting inseritance—the constant 
theme of Evangelical promise (Matt. v. 5; 
xix. 29; xxv. 34; Rom. iv. 13; 1 Cor. vi. 9; 
&c.). This inheritance imports citizenship in 
the Heavenly Jerusalem (ch. iii. 12) ;—all the 
glory of the City of God (ver. 11);—the water 








v. 8—9.]} 


8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, 
and the abominable, and murderers, 
and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and 
idolaters, and all liars, shall have their 
part in the lake which burneth with 


REVELATION. XXI. 


fire and brimstone: which is the 
second death. 

g And there came unto me one of 
the seven angels which had the seven 


vials full of the seven last plagues, 





of life from the inexhaustible fountain (ch. xxii. 
17);—“‘all things” that have been created 
anew (vv. I, 5). 

ani I will be his God,| The Seer goes 
back once more, as in ver. 3, to the first great 
promise to the Church at its typical “ begin- 
ning” (Ex. xx. 2; Ley. xxvi. 12),—a promise 
fulfilled only in Him who is Immanuel, “ God 
qith us:” cf. 2 Sam. vii. 24. 

and he shall be my son.| ‘Vhese words 
of Christ point to that perfect equality of the 
Son with the Father, when GOD shall be all 
in all (1 Cor. xv. 28). Compare too Chirist’s 
title, “ Te Everlasting Father” (Isai. ix. 6): 
—see on ver. 5. 

The interpretation which makes the speaker 
to be God the Father relies upon 2 Sam. vil. 
14; Heb. i. 5; ii. 10—zroddovs viovs (see e.g. 
Ebrard). 

“ What 2 Sam. vii. 14 promised to the 
house of David, is fulfilled, through David’s 
Son, for all members of that new humanity 
which dwells in the Tabernacle of David, 
Amos ix. 11, 12” (Burger). 


8. But for the fearful,| (See vv. //.). As 
contrasted with those “‘ that overcome” in ver. 
7 :—cf. those who “ draw back,” Heb. x. 38. 
Hengst. refers to lack of faith, as in Matt. 
viii. 26; but this thought is expressly added 
in the next epithet. 

and unbelieving,| “Not apostates from 
Christ,” notes Diisterd., “ but the dwellers on 
earth who are hostile to Christianity (ch. xiii. 
8; xvi. 2, 21), to whom (cf. ch. ix. 21) the 
following epithets apply.” Some (e.g. Ziillig, 
Words.) read after “ unbelieving,” the words 
“and sinners”—a reading, however, which 
has for its authority the single Uncial B. 


and abominable,| (The Greck text 
has not the article). Gr. defiled with 
abominations, viz., those referred to in ch. 
xvii. 4; cf. ver. 27,—probably the “degs” of 
ch. xxii. 15; cf. 1 Tim. i. 10. 

We may note how the language of the 
Law (e.g. Lev. vii. 21) is here employed to 
signify those who are shut out from the City 
of God. The ancient Jerusalem is the 
divinely appointed symbol throughout. 

and murderers, and fornicators,] On 
this verse compare 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10. “The 
characters named form four pairs—the four, 
the ‘signature ’ of the earth, to which belong 
these different tendencies of those who live 
in the world, Col. ii. 20” (Hengst.). 


and sorcerers, andidolaters,| Cf. ch. ix. 213 
XVili. 23; I Johny. 21 :— Sorcerers” inclu 
all who took part in the magical arts of 
the heathen: the reference to “ idolaters” 
naturally follows,—cf. Gal. v. 20. 


and all liars,| Note the threefold refer- 
ence to this sin—here ; in ver. 27; and in ch, 
Xxli. 15; cf. ch. ii. 2. In illustration of St. 
John’s manner, compare also John viii. 44; 
XVill. 37. 

On this verse compare ch. xxii. 15. It 
takes up the scene described in Matt. xxv. 
41-46. 

their part [shall be] in the Jake that 
burneth with fire and brimstone;| (On the 
phrase “theirpart shall be,” see on ch. xx. 
6). This locality—so often described—is 
referred to simply in ch. xxii. 15, as being 
“ quithout.” The Apocalypse attesting “ The 
wrath of the Lamb” (ch. v1. 16), now returns 
to the judicial severity of the Old Test.:— 
see ch. xiv. 11; xix. 3; Isai. xxxiv. 10; Ixvi, 
24; Dan. vii. 11. 

which is the second death.| See ch. ii. 11; 
xx. 6,14. This, the Lord’s last word from 
the Throne, is nevertheless followed by the 
sublime appeal in ch. xxii. 17—“ The Spirit and 
the Bride say, COME;” and by the glorious 
close— The grace of the Lord Jesus be 
with all” (ch. xxii. 21). 

The Seer having now shewn us, under its 
two aspects In vv. 3-7 and in ver. 8, the 
scene introduced in ch. xx. 11, the narrative 
of ver. 2 is resumed. 


THE NEW JERUSALEM (9, Io). 


This passage is a typical Vision correspond- 
ing to the Vision of Babylon, in ch. xvii.:— 
Here one of the Seven Angels of Judgment 
shows the Seer the Bride (cf. Eph. v. 27); 
there one of the same Vial-Angels shows him 
the Harlot,—see on ch. xvii. 1 and ch. xvi. 
21. Hitherto these Angels had been the 
executioners of the Divine wrath (ch. 
xvi.); their work is now completed in a 
Vision of Divine Love. 

9, And there came one of the seven angels| 
Cmit “unto me.” Gr. one from among 
(see vv. //.); cf. on ch. vii. 11. 

who had the seven vials,| See on ch. 
xvii. 1. This second and last appearance of one 
of the Vial-Angels indicates that the Visions 
contained in ch. xvii. 1-ch. xxii. 5 form the 
continuation of the Vial-Visions. 


FFF 2 


819 


820 


and talked with me, saying, Come 
hither, I will shew thee the bride, 
the Lamb’s wife. 

10 And he carried me away in the 
spirit to a great and high mountain, 
and shewed me that great city, the 


whe were laden with the seven last 
plagues ;| Gr. who were full of. The 
true reading (see wv. //.) places the participle 
in concord with “ Angels.” (T. R. reads 
diddas tras yepovcas). 

and he spake with me, saying, Come 
bither,| Cf. ch. iv. 1. 


Iwill shew thee} This ninth verse follows 
ch. xvii. 1, almost verbatim, down to this 
point. 


the bride, the wife of the Lamb.] (See 
vy. /l.). 

In ch. xvii. 1 the Harlot is the false 
Bride, corresponding to the false Lamb of ch. 
xiii. 11. 

On vv. 9-27 Zillig notes: “The in- 
terpreting Angel shows the Seer the new 
City of God,—its appearance as a whole (wv. 
Io, 11) ;—its walls with their gates and found- 
ations (vv. 12-14) ;—its measurements (vv. 
15-17) ;—its special features also,—such as its 
magnificence (vv. 18-21), its unique charac- 
ter (vv. 22, 23), the life-movement within it 
(vv. 24-27).” 

10. in the Spirit] As in ch. xvii. 3 ;—the 
Seer is “carried away,” but not “‘into a 
wilderness.” 


to a mountain great and high,] St. 
John beholds the City there,—but not from 
thence : see Isai. ii. 2. 

and shewed me the holy oity Jerusa- 
lem,] (Omit “the great,”—see vv. //.) So in 
ver. 2; ch. xi. 2; xxii. 19. On the erroneous 
reading here, the “ Great City,” Words. cor- 
rectly notes : “ That phrase is restricted in the 
Apocalypse to the mystical Babylon :—see ch. 
xi. 8; xviii. Io, 16.”  Bengel comments: 
The Angel said he would show John the 
“ Bride,” and now he shows him a “ City; ” he 
had said (ch. xvii. 1) he would show him the 
great “‘ Harlot,” and he showed him “ Bady- 
Jon.” And again: Taken apart to the 
“ Wilderness” (ch. xvii. 3), the Seer be- 
held a City, the Harlot; here, to the 
“ Mountain,” he sees a City, the Bride. It 
was to the “ Wilderness” that the Apostolic 
“Woman” had fled (ch. xii. 6), and where the 
Harlot was found; and then we afterwards 
read of the “ Mountain” (cf. Heb. xii. 22). 
“ So was it with Israel of old.”—I. Williams 
(P. 452). 


coming down out of heaven from God,]| 


REVELATION. XXI. 


Vv. IO—II. ¥ 


holy Jerusalem, descending out of 
heaven from God, 

11 Having the glory of God: and 
her light was like unto a stone most 
precious, even like a jasper stone, 
clear as crystal ; 








Observe coming down,—not already de= 
scended:—compare ver. 2, and ch. ii. 12, 
Winer points out how the construction hence= 
forth frequently changes independently of the 
governing verb “ shewed” [xaraBaivovcay 
agreeing regularly with ryv mdédw,—then 
6 poornp (ver. 11) inserted independently,— 
then (ver. 12), reverting to wdéXs, a new clause 
begins with €yovoa] (§ 59. 11)—cf. ch. i. 15. 


Tue Hoty City (11-ch. xxii. 5). 


Here begins the description of the City, fol- 
lowing Ezek. xlviii. 30-35. In wv. 11-23 are 
described the structure and plan ;—in vv. 
24-27 what takes place within its walls;—in 
ch. xxii. 1-5 the felicity of the life within it. 

1l. having the glory of God:] Not a 
special, divinely caused, splendour, but the 
abiding Presence, the Shekinah (Ex. xl. 34; 
Num. ix. 15-23; 1 Kings viii. 11)—see ver. 
23; ch. xxii. 5; cf. xv. 8; John xi 41; 
Acts xxvi. 13; 2 Chron. v. 14; Isai. xxiv. 23; 
Ix. 1. Christ Himself has said: “de 
glory which thou gavest me, I bave given 
them” (John xvii. 22) 


her light) (Omit “ and,” see vv. /i.). Gr. 
luminary (6 dwornp), ‘the light of the City ;” 
‘that which gives her light, ‘that whereby 
she is illuminated ’—as by the sun and moon, 
see Gen. i. 14 (LXX.); of which the source 
was “the glory of God,”—see Ezek. xliii. 2 :— 
and so most expositors. The distinction is that 
between the “g/ory” which represents the 
Presence of Jehovah, and the derived “ /ight,” 
which is Messiah—the lamp (6 dvxvos) 
thereof is the Lamb” (ver 23); cf. Isai 
lx. 19. This word “/ight” (pwarnp, which 
occurs elsewhere in the New Test. only in 
Phil. ii. 15—cf. John ix. 5) Bengel takes in 
the sense of “an opening for light,” “a win- 
dow :” so also Bleek. 

See, on ver. 10, Winer’s remark as to the 
construction of this passage. 


[was] like unto a stone most precious, as it 
were @ jasper stone,| For the jasper, see on 
ch. iv. 3. 


clear as crystal:| See on ch. iv. 6:— 
Of a starry, diamond-like effulgence (xpve- 
radXiforrt); cf. “stellatus iaspide ”— An. iv. 
261. Mr. King, having observed that the 
Emerald “ ap to be generated from the 
Jasper,” adds: “ This explains the meaning of 


¥. 12—13.| 


12 And had a wall great and high, 
and had twelve gates, and at the gates 
_twelve angels, and names written 
thereon, which are the names of the 


the comparison of the gem illuminating the 


New Jerusalem to ‘a most precious stone’: i.e., 
one combining the Jasper’s green, with the 
Crystal’s lustre—an exact description of the 
true Emerald.”—Nat, Hist. of Precious Stones, 
p. 281. 

This description preserves the identity with 
Him that sat on the Throne, round which 
was a rainbow ‘‘like an Emerald to look 
upon ” (ch. iv. 3). 


12. having a wall great and high;| (Omit 
“and” at the beginning of the verse—see 
vv. ll.). The security is now represented of 
the New Jerusalem against the foes who in the 
latter days are to assail the Church,—see ch. 
xx. 9. Gog and Magog had of old time come 
up against those that dwelt “ without walls” 
—Ezek. xxxviii. 11. By the “ wail,” Beda 
understands the Lord protecting His Church 
(Isai. xxvi. 1; Zech. ii.5). This wall is of 
Jasper (ver. 18), and so is its first foundation 
(ver. 19), and so (ver. 11) is the similitude of 
the glory of God. 


having faelve gates,| (See vv. //.; and 
for the constr. Winer’s note, quoted on ver. 
Io). The word rendered “gates,” Gr. 
portals, means in the singular (see Matt. 
xxvinyis Luke xvi. 20>, Acts'x: 17; xii. 13; 
14) the “ portal” of a palace, or house ;—cf. 
“the door of the gate,’ Acts xii. 13. In the 
plural it means the “portal” of a city—as in 
this chapter ten times, and in Acts xiv. 13. 
Here the expression symbolizes how the 
citizens enter the New Jerusalem—see ch. 
xxii. 14. The number of gates denotes the 
freedom of access to the City. 


and at the gates twelve angels;| Repre- 
senting the one household of God, the Church 
of Angels and men. Or, as I. Williams 
notes (p. 454), “according to the symbolism 
of the Apocalypse, as we had before the 
Angels of the Seven Churches— Angelic 
watchers corresponding with the sacred 
‘keepers of the door’ of the Temple.” Or 
Spirits ministering to the saved—cf. Heb. i. 
14; Ps. xci. 11; Matt. xvili. 10; Luke xvi. 22. 
Some refer to Isai. lxii. 6; cf. Gen. iii. 24— 
denoting that everything unworthy and im- 
pure is to be excluded from the City. 

It is rather beneath the character of this 
imagery to conclude (with Disterd., and Alf.) 
that the Angels here spoken of serve merely 
“for the adornment of the City after the idea 
of a beautiful fortress.” 


and names written thereon,| Compare the 


REVELATION. XXI. 


twelve tribes of the children of 
Israel : 
13 On the east three gates; on 


the north three gates; on the south 





engraving of “the names of the children of 
Israel” —Ex. xxviii. 9, 29; xxxix.14. Weare 
to understand here the emblem of the City of 
the people of God. 


which are [the names| of the twelve tribes of 
the children of Israel:| The order of the 
Tribes as adopted by St. John in ch. vii. is 
doubtless followed here—see on ch. vii. 5. 
See Ezek. xlvili.31: “The gates of the City 
shall be after the names of the Tribes of 
Israel.” “ Tavelve,” the product of the Divine 
number Three, and the world-number Four, is 
the symbolic number, under both Covenants, 
of the Church—of the world penetrated by the 
Divine influence. As such it occurs under the 
Old Covenant in the Twelve Tribes; under 
the New, in the Twelve Apostles:—see Au- 
berlen, p. 355; and Introd. § 11 (a). Bahr 
(Symboltk, i., s. 208) notes that Jerusalem, as 
Josephus (B. J. v. 4, 2) describes it, was on 
Jour hills, with three gates on each side, as 
described in ver. 13. Bahr also refers to the 
“Camp” described in Num. ii., which repre- 
sented Israel symbolically as a people that 
had God in its midst. So it is, in like man- 
ner, here. Each “Gate” bears the name of 
one of the TwelveTribes. It is thus denoted . 
that the Church made perfect is no confused 
multitude, but an organized Body, ‘each 
member having its special vocation and peculiar 
glory ” (Ebrard). 

13. on the east [were] three gates;| 
“ Gates” being in the nom. case, it is simpler 
to supply the verb substantive, as in ver. 11, 
than to take the construction to be one pointing 
to the earlier clause, as in ch. iv. 1. According 
to Ezekiel (xlviii. 32) the names of the Tribes 
corresponding to the eastern gates are Joseph, 
Benjamin, Dan (note, that Manasseh is sub- 
stituted by St. John for Dan, in ch. vii. 6) ;— 
according to the encampment in Num. ii. 3-7, 
Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, had each “the 
standard of their camps,” “on the east side.” 
In Ezekiel the order is, North, East, South, 
West ;—in Numbers, East, South, West, 
North. 

and on the north three gates;| (“and” is 
to be added, see vv.//.). The Gates of 
Reuben, Judah, Levi, in Ezek. xlviii. 31;—the 
standards of Dan, Asher, Naphtali,in Num. ii. 
25-29. 

and on the south three gates;| (See vv. 
/.). Of Simeon, Issachar, Zebulun, in Ezek. 
xlviii. 33 ;—of Reuben, Simeon, Gad, in Num. 
ii, 10-14. 


821 


822 


three gates; and on the west three 
gates. 
14 And the wall of the city had 





and on the west three gates.| (The A. V. 
here supplies “and,” which is not in the 
Textus Receptus, see vv. Il.). Of Gad, Asher, 
Naphtali, in Ezek. xlviii. 34;—of Ephraim, 
Manasseh, Benjamin, in Num. ii. 18-22 (cf. 
Zech. xiv. 10). 

See Note B at the end of this chapter. 

On this arrangement, according to the four 
quarters of heaven, see Luke xiii. 29. We 
have here “the signature of Nature, pene- 
trated, glorified, hallowed, by what is 
heavenly” (Ebrard). In these four quarters 
Vitringa and Hengst. see an emblem of “the 
Ecumenical character of the New Jeru- 
salem.” 


14. And the wall of the city had twelve 
foundations,| (See vv. //.). Gr. having—the 
masc. part., nom. case, in irregular concord. 
See Heb. xi. 10, “the City which hath the 
foundations.” 

De Wette explains thus:—Every twelfth 
part of the walls, between the several gates, 
had a foundation stone stretching along the 
whole length, and exposed to view, see ver. 
19; and thus the names which were in- 
scribed were visible:—so Disterd., Words., 
Alf., &c. Four of these, notes Diisterd., are 
corner-stones, joining the third gate on one 
side, to the frst gate on the next. It is far 
more consistent, however, with the grandeur 
of the whole description to understand that 
the wall rests on a basis of twelve courses 
of stones; each course encompassing the 
entire city, and constituting one foundation : 
see ver. 19. 

The material of the whole wall is Jasper, of 
the whole City Gold (ver. 18). 


and on them twelve names] See 
wv. il. Cf. the “ Tavelve Stars,’ ch. xii. 1; 
and also the Twelve standards of the Tribes 
planted around the Tabernacle, Num. ii. ;— 
see On ver. 13. 


of the tawelve apostles of the Lamb.| See 
Eph. ii. 20; a passage which is itself based 
on Matt. xvi. 18 :—cf. 1 Tim. iii. 15. No 
one Apostle alone supports the City of God 
—Christ Himself is the One Foundation, 
1 Cor. iii. 11 :—see also 1 Pet. ii. 4-6, which 
passage carries out this imagery. 

On the Foundations of the New Jerusalem 
are inscribed the names of the Heads of the 
Church in the days of the “‘ Regeneration ”— 
Matt. xix. 28; cf. Luke xxii. 30. The sym- 
bolical number Twelve is all that is insisted 
upon here; and thus it is needless to discuss 
whether the twelfth Apostle is Matthias 


REVELATION. XXI. 





[ne 


twelve foundations, and in them the 
names of the twelve apostles c* the 
Lamb. 


(Acts i. 26), or, as Hengst. insists, St. Paul 

«See Note A on ch. iii. 19 where the op- 
position alleged to exist between St. John 
and St. Paul is discussed. This notion is 
defended by a reference to the present verse. 
It is argued that the number Twelve excludes 
St. Paul. Bengel has acutely noted that St. 
Paul, as Apostle of the Gentiles could not have 
been included here; and he justly refers to 
Matt. xix. 28. 

Rationalists, however, insist upon a de- 
signed exclusion of St. Paul—e.g. Volkmar 
(quoted on ch. ii. 2; xiii. 11), who argues 
that the Apostle of the Gentiles has expressly 
referred in Eph. ii. 19-22 to this passage 
of the Apocalypse ; and, in order to include 
himself, speaks merely of “the foundation of 
the Apostles” —not “the Tavelve Apostles.” 
So Renan: “ The author of the Apocalypse 
on the morrow of the death of the Apostles, 
is, of all the Jewish Christians, filled with the 
greatest hatred against Paul” (Saint Paul, p. 
367). Again :—‘ Note above all Rev. xxi. 14, 
which excludes Paul from the number of the 
Apostles.” —L’ Antechrist, p. 34. And to the 
same effect B. Aubé, Hist. des Persecutions de 
PEglise, p. 125. 

This inference is a favourite one with “ad- 
vanced critics” of modern times. The whole 
object, however, of the imagery here is to 
preserve the unity of the description. Jeru- 
salem, representing the Twelve Tribes, and 
having T'welve Gates, cou/d not be represented 
as resting on thirteen foundations. Again :— 
Liicke, Ewald, Bleek, and others argue from 
this verse that the author of the Apocalypse 
could not himself have been an Apostle,—as 
thus to style himself “‘a Foundation” would 
be inconsistent with Apostolic modesty, and 
consequently that he was not the Apostle 
John :—see Introd. § 6, (1). Thesymbolical 
character of this whole description, how- 
ever, sets aside all reference to individuals, 
and lies apart from every conclusion based 
upon the meaning of the words interpreted 
literally. 

On this verse, combined with Matt. xix. 
28; Luke xxii. 30, Mr. Elliott founds the 
conclusion that when Christ shall make all 
things new (ver. 5), and this earth is restored 
to paradisaical blessedness, the nationality of 
Israel is to be restored; and that the chosen 
People, while inhabiting Pales:me in flesh 
and blood, will be under the rule of the 
Twelve glorified Apostles—see Hor. Apot. 
iv. p. 167. In this conclusion, writes Dr, 
Brown (/. c., p. 448), Mr. Elliott stands 
alone. 


v. 15—16.] 


1§ And he that talked with me 
had a golden reed to measure the 
city, and the gates thereof, and the 
wall thereof. 


REVELATION. XXI. 


16 And the city lieth foursquare, 
and the length is as large as the 
breadth: and he measured the city 
with the reed, twelve thousand fur- 





15. And he that spake with me had 
for a measure] On the added words for 
@ measure, see vv. //. 


a golden reed to measure the city,| See ch. 
Zi. 1; Ezek. xl. 3,5, &c.; xlii.15, &c. The 
object of this act of measuring, as in Ezek. 
xl. 4, is to fix the attention of the Seer. The 
usual note is—‘“ The reed is of gold because 
the City is Divine, and an Angel measures 
it”—see on ver. 17. The details which 
follow are all to be understood spiritually. 

[** Neque enim putandum est secundum 
Judaicas fabulas Deum auro et gemmis 
edificaturum Jerusalem, et non vivis lapidi- 
bus,” &c.—St. Jerome, Comm. in Aggeum, 
ii, 7-9.] 


16. And the city lieth foursquare,| The 
Greek term signifies any figure in form 
quadrangular (ver. 13); here, as the sequel 
shows, the sides are at right angles and equal, 
—see Ezek. xlviii. 16, 20. The word 
rendered ‘“ foursquare,” is that used in 
heathen philosophy to denote the perfection 
or man (€. g. retpdywvos dvev oyod, cf. 
Arist., Eth. i. 10; Réet. iii. 11); and so 
Simonides in the Protagoras of Plato desig- 
nates the perfect man. 

We have here, notes I. Williams, “‘ The 
square of perfection . . . but the four che- 
rubic forms are not here, for there is no 
Temple; nor the Four Living Creatures, re- 
presenting His manifestation in the visible 
Creation; but the living stones, resplendent 
each with the Light of the Lamb.”—p. 457. 


and the length thereof is as great as 
the breadth:| (For the text here see vv. //.). 
That is to say, 12,000 furlongs. In Ezek. 
xlviii. 16,—the original of the symbolism here, 
—the length of each side is given separately. 
De Wette, however, considers that the 
measure of 12,000 furlongs, or stadii, refers 
merely to these two dimensions,—to twice the 
length and twice the breadth. 


and he measured the city with the reed, 
twelve thousand furlongs :| I.e., extending 
to—to the length of. On the constr. 
(émi with the accus. as ep’ dcov Rom. xi. 13) 
see Winer § 49, s. 363. For the word “ fur- 
long”’(76 araduov) see Note B on ch. xiv. 20. 

In the following description there is plainly 
a reference to the ancient Babylon, with which 
the “New Jerusalem” is now contrasted. 
Herodotus (i. 178-186;—cf. Strabo, xvi.), 
who had himself seen the grandeur of 
Babylon, tells us that it also was “ four- 


Square” (€ovons tetpaywvov);—that each 
side was 120 stadii in length [i.e¢., one 
hundreth part of the length of each side of 
the ‘“‘ New Jerusalem] ;”’—that its walls were 
200 cubits in height, and 50 cubits in thick- 
ness (see Jer. li. 58);—and that it had 100 
gates of brass (Isai. xlv. 1, 2). The ancient 
Babylon contained within its walls the vast 
temple of Belus, which was also “ foure 
square,” each side of its sacred precincts being 
two stadii in length. The Belus tower was 
built in stages, e7gh¢ in number, square being 
placed on square (Hdt. i. 181). Through 
the city flowed the Euphrates, dividing it 
nearly in half (61a tras modvos péons, Hdt. 
i. 185). Here too were the “hanging 
gardens” (6 kpejacros kyros), in the form 
of terraces (Berosus, ap., Joseph. Aziz. xii. 1), 
the highest of which was planted with trees 
of all kinds, some of the largest size (cf. ch. 
xxii. I, 2):—see Rawlinson’s Ancient Monar- 
chies, ii. 510-540. 

The description given in this verse does 
not decide absolutely whether 12,000 stadii 
(or 1378.97 English miles) is the length of 
each side of the “ New Jerusalem,”—as un- 
derstood by Andr., Bengel, Hengst., Ebrard, 
Ewald, Diisterd., Zillig, Words., Bisping, &c. 
According to Vitr., Wetst., Eichhorn, De 
Wette, Alford, the entire circuit of the City is 
meant, making the distance between each gate 
tooo stadit. This latter explanation is 
avowedly prompted by the desire to reduce 
the vast dimensions of the City; the difficulty 
being caused by forgetfulness that the whole 
picture here given is symbolical. In either 
case the dimensions surpass any natural exe 
planation; while in the latter case there is 
both a departure from the original picture by 
Ezekiel, and also a departure from the plain 
sense of the words which follow. In Apocas 
lyptic symbolism t1000 expresses a_ vast 
number; and, when multiplied by Twelve,— 
the number of perfection——there results a 
signification adapted to what we here read of 
the City of God. When tooo is multiplied 
by the square of Tave/ve the meaning is “a 
multitude which no man could number,?— 
see ch. vil. 4, 9; XIV. I. 

“The parallel,” notes Burger on ver. 9, “is 
not to be mistaken: what Babylon was to the 
anti-christian World-empire, viz. the brilliant 
centre of its earthly glory,—the World-city,— 
the seat of the Beast and his ally the False 
Prophet; that will the New Jerusalem be to 
Humanity born anew, viz. the Centre of the 
perfected, glorified Kingdom of God.” 


823 


824 


longs. 
and the height of it are equal. 


REVELATION. XXI. 


[v- 17. ! 


The length and the breadth thereof, an hundred and forty ana 


four cubits, according to the measure 


17 And he measured the wall ofa man, that is, of the angel. 


_.-. 


the length and the breadth and the beight 
thereof are equal.| The Holy of Holies 
(Ex. xxvi. 33) was a cubical chamber having 
each of its three dimensions equal to Ten 
cubits. Although not expressly stated in the 
Book of Exodus, Philo, Josephus, all tradition, 
and every consideration of probability, concur 
as to this:—see the Note on Ex. xxvi.; Ewald 
in loc.; Bahr, Symbolik,i.s. 225. In Solomon’s 
Temple also the Holy of Holies was a cube, 
each edge of which was Twenty cubits,—see 
1 Kings vi. 20. Here also each dimension is 
ofthe measure just specified, viz. 12,000 
stadii—the City being a vast cube. This 
is the only natural sense of the words. That 
it is high as heaven and includes the Throne 
of God, is implied in ch. xxii. 3, as Ewald 
(s. 349) notes. 

The Rabbinical books contain similar 
imagery :—We read in the Talmud Bava 
Bathra f. 75, 2: “Deus tempore futuro 
Hierosolyma evecturus est in altitudinem xii. 
milliarium S. D. Zach. xiv. ro. Quid est 
‘in loco suo’? talem esse futuram superne, 
qualis est infra.”—see Wetst. in Joc. 

The following interpretations have been 
suggested :— 

De Wette (see above) makes the circum- 
ference of the City to be equal to 12,000 
stadii, this measure having no reference to 
the height. When the height is now men- 
tioned, there is no thought as yet of how 
great that height is;—the height is not re- 
ferred to until ver. 17, and the word “ equal” 
(ica) is here used loosely,—signifying that 
the height is egua/ all round. The sense, 
therefore, is:—The length and breadth are 
each equal to 3000 stadii, and the height of 
the wall is 144 cubits (ver. 17) all round. 
Diisterd. distinguishes between the height of 
the City, and the height of its walls; the 
City itself, i.e, of the mass of houses con- 
tained in it (so Hengst.), being, as stated 
above, the cube of 12,000 stadii, and its wall of 
the height of 144 cubits. Alf. ridicules this re- 
sult, and supposes that the City is placed “on 
a hill or rock [of which the text says no- 
thing] which may be imagined as descending 
with it;” and thus taking the 12,000 stadt 
to be the circumference, and including this 
hill or rock, we get the cube of 3000 stadii. 
Luthardt supposes a City situated on a lofty 
mountain, with its houses in terraces around 
the mountain sides. The City would thus 
appear as a Pyramid; of which the apex 
attains to the elevation of 12,000 stadit, while 
at the mountain foot a wall surrounds it of 
144 cubits high. This certainly agrees with 


for her husband” (ver. 2). 





the words of the text, but not with the 
exigencies of the symbolism. 

The heavenly Jerusalem, observes Renan, 
“is in contradiction to all the sound rules of 
architecture.”—p. 473. 

It is quite plain that we cannot take a 
perfect cube to represent a material city; or 
compare such a structure to “ a Bride adorned 
This symbolic 
form, as already pointed out, is borrowed 
from that of “the Most Holy Place” (Ex. 
xxvi. 33); and, conjoined with the image of 
the “Bride” (Isai. lxii. 5), represents the idea 
of the Church as the spiritual abode of God. 
Accordingly all the other images which de- 
pend upon this,—the gates, the walls, the 
site of the City, the river which waters it, 
the trees on that river’s banks, and so fo: 
—can only be understood in a spiritual an 
symbolic sense. 


17. And he measured the wall thereof,| In 
vv. 12, 14, we read of the “gates” and 
“ foundations” of this “waill;” and now the 
height of the wall is measured. Some under- 
stand, its thickness, cf. Jer. li. 58 ; Ezek, xli. 9. 
The former sense is better suited to the 
nature of a Vision; and also better suited to 
the words “great and high” in ver. 12; cf. 
Deut. iii. 5; xxviii. 52. 


a hundred and forty and four cubits,| (On 
the genitive “ cubits ”—a constr. “ unknown to 
Greek prose’”—see Moulton’s Winer, p. 244). 
Again the sacred Tave/ve, raised to the second 
power. Solomon’s Porch, the highest part 
of his Temple, was 120 cubits (2 Chron. iii. 
4); and the general height of the Temple 
30 cubits (1 Kings vi. 2). With reference 
to the dimensions of the “ City” itself writers 
dwell upon the comparative insignificance of 
this height—less than the height, notes Stuart, 
of the walls of Babylon: the most incon- 
siderable wall' however, notes Dusterd., is 
sufficient to exclude all that is impure—see 
ver. 27. The height of the wall is, by design, 
comparatively insignificant, writes Zillig, in 
order not to obstruct the light radiating from 
the City. 

[according to] the measure of a man, that is, 
of an angel.] (Gr. a measure of a man— 
see ch. xiii. 18). The constr. is “a lax ap- 
position” to “the clause éeyérp. rd reixos 
(Winer, § 33, 7). Inch. xili. 18 we read of 
“the number of the Beast” that it is“the number 
of a man,”—as in Deut. iii. 11 mention is 
made of “fourcubits . . . after the cubit of a 
man,” —of which the meaning is ‘ not less 
the ordinary cubit.’ Here the explanation is 











v. 18—10.] 


18 And the building of the wall 
of it was of jasper: and the city was 
pure gold, like unto clear glass. 


REVELATION. XXI. 


19 And the foundations of the 
wall of the city were garnished with 
all manner of precious stones. The 





added “that is of an Angel,”—words which 

can only imply that in the Heavenly City men 

~ wiliur “equal unto the Angels” (Luke xx. 36), 
“and will reckon and measure all things by a 
spiritual and Divine arithmetic, and by a 
heavenly and Angelic mensuration” :— 
so Words. Thus too Ebrard notes: That 
which suits the New Jerusalem,—the measure 
not of men with mortal bodies but of glorified 
men when they become equal to the Angels 
(Matt. xxii. 30). ‘“ Measured,” writes I. 
Williams, “to suit human capacities, though 
it be of what is altogether incomprehensible 
and divine: . .. they that are accounted 
worthy to attain that life are equal to the 
Angels” (p. 458). Bengel calculates what this 
Angelic measure must be :—As in ch. xiil. 5, 
18, we could not explain the 42 months 
without the aid of the number 666 (see In- 
trod. § 11, (b), IV.); so in this chapter all 
would be obscure were we not to identify 
the 144 cubits, with the 12,000 furlongs, and 
take these two equal measures to represent 
the height of the wall. Hence one (“‘englisch- 
menschlich ”) cubit is equal to 832 furlongs ; 
and Bengel considers it important to note 
that 8 x 833=6662. 

Burger interprets as follows:—The sacred 
Twelve, the signature of the Church, which 
we have already met in the Iwe/ve Gates, the 
Twelve Foundations, the Zwe/ve thousand 
stadii,—is here multiplied by itself (cf. ch. 
vii. 4). The “ wail” is intended for the protec- 
tion of the City; and its true defence con- 
sists in this that it is the City of the per- 
fected Church of Christ, of which the sumber 
is 144. Burger, although he notes that the 
Greek article is absent, translates (with the 
A.V.) of the Angel, i.e., “the Angel” who 
“ spake” with St. John, and who used the 
well-known “measure of a man” such as 
men also employ. 

Mr. Maurice writes:—“ That measure of 
aman, which is not derived from his fallen 
nature, but from his angelic nature, is God’s 
measure. The City which lieth foursquare is 
His City. He knows the measure of it” 
(Pp. 420). 

Stuart notes: “It is an Angel who makes 
the measurement; and lest we might think it 
was a different measure from that in ordinary 

_ use (‘ofa man’), the writer guards us against 
such an error ”:—so Hengst., Diisterd., &c. 
. According to Volckmar “the golden reed” 
(ver. 15) regarded as the “ measure of an 
Angel,” measures by stadii; regarded as the 
“ measure of a man” its unit is a cubit. Both 
numbers (the 12,000 stadii for the City, and 


the 144 cubits for its wall) are to be measured 
by both scales: and thus we get for the 
height of the “wail” (by Angels’ measure) 
12X12 stadt; and forthe height of the City, 
which Volckmar makes to be 3 x 1000—4#.e., 
3X 4X 250=12 x 250—cubits (by the measure 
of a man). 


18. And the building of the wall thereof] 
The term rendered “ dui/ding” (€vdapnors) is 
found elsewhere only in Josephus (dnt. xv. 
9, 6), where it signifies the mole or break- 
water of the port of Czsarea, built by Herod 
the Great. It is variously expiained here to 
mean the ‘ superstructure’ as opposed to the 
‘ foundation, ver. 19; or simply the ‘materials,’ 
what is duz/¢ in the walls (“ materies in murum 
inedificata, h.e. ex quo murus extructus erat.” 
Grimm, iz voc.). 


[was] jasper:] (See vv. //. for the omis= 
sion of the verb). ‘The building consisted of 
one material, “ Jasper” ; on which see ver. 11 5 
ch. iv. 3. 


and the city [was] pure gold like unto pure 
glass.| See on ch. iv. 6. The Gold (see vv. 
i/., and ver. 21) was like glass not merely in 
brilliancy but transparency. 

Compare this description of the “New 
Jerusalem ” with the cherished ideal of the 
Jews:—“For Jerusalem shall be built up 
with Sapphires and Emeralds and precious 
stone: thy walls and towers and battlements 
with pure Gold. And the streets of Jeru- 
salem shall be paved with Beryl and Car- 
buncle and stones of Ophir” (Tobit xiii. 16, 
17). Cf. too, the apostrophe to the King of 
Tyre: “Thou hast been in Eden the garden 
of God; every precious stone was thy 
covering, the Sardius, Topaz, and the Diae 
mond, the Beryl, the Onyx, and the Jasper, 
the Sapphire, the Emerald, and the Carbuncle, 
and Gold” (Ezek. xxviii. 13). 


19. The foundations of the wall of the city] 
Omit “ And,” —see vv. J]. On the sense in 
which the “ Foundations” are to be understood, 
see on ver. 14. Each separate “ Foundation” 
consisted of one great precious stone going 
round the whole City, and underlying the 
entire wall ;—not merely an ornament set into 
the foundation, but a “ Foundation” itself. 


[were] adorned with all manner of pre- 
cious stones.| Gr. with every precious 
stone,—the noun is in the singular: see on 
ch. xv. 6. For the thought of the follow- 
ing description see Isai. liv. 11, 12 (cf. xxviii. 
16): see also David’s enumeration of the 
materials which he had accumulated for 


825 


826 


first foundation was jasper; the 


REVELATION. XXI. 


{v. 20, 


20 The fifth, saraonyx; the sixth, 


second, sapphire; the third, a chalce- sardius; the seventh, chrysolyte; the 


dony ; the fourth, an emerald ; 


eighth, beryl ; the ninth, a topaz; the 





Solomon’s Temple (1 Chron. xxix. 2). The 
Foundation, notes Words., was garnished with 
* every precious stone,’ and these Tave/ve pre= 
cious stones are specified, “ indicating that the 
Twelve Apostolic Foundations present every 
spiritual grace bestowed by God upon His 
faithful servants, who are His Jewels (Mal. 
iii. 17).” As a contrast Babylon also and 
the “Harlot” are adorned “ with gold, and 
precious stones and pearls.” Compare ch. xvii. 
43 Xvill. 12, 16; and cf. infra, ver. 21. 

The first foundation was jasper ;| The same 
as the material of the superstructure, or wall 
resting on the Twelve Foundations,—see ver. 
18. On the Jasper, see on ch. iv. 3; and cf, 
ver. 11. See Note B at the end of this 
chapter. 


the second, sapphire ;| Hebrew, Saphir 
(mDp) ;—cf. Ex. xxiv. 10; Isai. liv. 11; 
Ezek. i. 26. In the case of no ancient gem 
has the attribution of the name been so much 
disputed as of the Sapphire, or “ precious 
Corundum.” Mr. King decides that the 
Sapphirus of the ancients was our Lapis-lazuli. 
Pliny describes it as opaque, and sprinkled 
with specks of gold (“nest ei aliquando et 
aureus pulvis qualis in sappAiris. In iis enim 
aurum punctis conlucet. Ccerulez et sapphiri 
.... Corallo-achates guttis aureis Sapphiri 
modo sparsa ”’—Hist. Nat. xxxvii. 39, 54); 
and he states that it came from Media (i.e. 
Persia and Bockhara) whence the entire supply 
of Lapis-lazuli is brought to the present day. 
Epiphanius speaks of “the stone Sapphirus, 
like that of a dark blue beetle.” Andreas 
(/.c., p. 134), who considers that St. Paul is 
signified by this stone, says that some call it 
Lazurium (7d Naotprov), from its sky-blue 
colour. ‘“‘ Before the true precious stones were 
introduced from India, the Lapis-lazuli held 
the highest place in the estimation of the primi- 
tive nations of Asia and Greece; in fact it was 
almost the only stone known to them having 
beauty of colour to recommend it.”—King, 
Precious Stones and Gems, p. 294. The modern 
Sapphire is the ancient Hyacinthus, rendered 
in the A.V., ‘‘ Jacinth,” see on ver. 20, and 
ch. ix. 17. “The modern name Sapphire is a 
mere epithet expressive of its colour: the 
ancient Sapphirus or Lapis-lazuii furnishing 
the paint ultramarine, sapphirinus came to 
signify ‘ azure,’ exactly as ‘ Nila’ the present 
Indian name of our Sapphire does.”—King, 
Nat. Hist. of Precious Stones, p. 248. 

the third, ohaleedony;] “ The Chalce- 
donius of Pliny (xxxvii. 30) was an inferior 
species of the Syaragdus (Emerald), so called 


from being found in the copper mines near 
Chalcedon . .. He describes them as small 
and brittle, changing their colour when moved 
about like the green feathers in the necks of 
peacocks and pigeons... . It is evident that 
they were only crystals of transparent Chrysoe 
colla” (native verdigris—a carbonate of cop- 
per] “still popularly termed ‘the Coppere 
Emerald.’ . . . . It is difficult to trace the steps 
by which this name has been transferred from 
a substance of a brilliant green colour to one 
so totally distinct in all its characters as our 
“ Chalcedony” (White Carnelian), a semie 
Opaque quartz of a milky tinge.”—King, 
Precious Stones, p. 157. 

the fourth, emerald;| See ver. 20, on 
the word “ Bery/;” and also on ch. iv. 3. 


20. the fifth, sardonyx ;| “ The most beautte 
fuland rarest variety of Onyx, and that which 
was held in the greatest esteem by the ancients, 
for engraving into cameos” (Brande and Cox, 
Dict. of Science). Pliny (H. N. xxxvii. 23) de- 
fines this stone as originally signifying a white 
mark ina Sard, like the human nail placed upon 
flesh, and both of them transparent. ‘“ The 
Onyx is called from the resemblance of its 


‘white and yellow veins to the shades in the 


human finger nail. . . . Three colours were 
considered essential to the idea of Sardonyx. 
. . . The early Greeks make no distinction 
between the Onyx and the Sardonyx. Accord- 
ing to Kéhler, when the red, brown, or 
yellow ground is covered by white veins 
irregularly disposed, it is called Onyx ; if th 
are in regular strata, one over the other, it 
becomes the Sardonyx”—King, /.c., pp. 254, 
257, 302. Achilles Tatius (ii. 1) describes 
such a gem, of which the base was d/ack, the 
middle white, the rest red as fire. 


the sixth a sard:] See on ch. iv. 3. 


the seventh, chrysolyte ;| Or oriental Topaz 5 
see below on “ Topaz.” The description of 
Pliny “translucent with golden lustre” 
(“aureo fulgore translucentis ”—H. N. xxxvii. 
42) applies to no other gem so exactly as to 
this: “The Arabian Chrysolithi were most 
probably the modern Jacinths, for Pliny’s 
account of them applies exactly to the latter 
gem .... Chrysolithi, whatever they may have 
been, were in high esteem with the Romans.” 
—King, /.c., p. 165,&c. See Ezek. xxviii. 13. 

the eighth, beryl;| Pliny (H. N. xxxvii. 20) 
states that many were of opinion that the 
“ Beryl” was of the same or a similar nature 
with the Emerald. “This opinion,” writes 
Mr. King, “has been proved correct by 














v. 21.) 


tenth, a chrysoprasus ; the eleventh, 
a jacinth; the twelfth, an amethyst. 


modern analysis, the component parts of each, 
in the same proportions, being Silica, Alumina, 
and Glucina, coloured by the oxide of Chrome. 
. The Emerald is distinguished by its 
peculiar ‘ emerald-green’ which it derives from 
a small proportion of Chrome: all the varieties 
of other colours, tinged, more or less, yellow 
or blue, or altogether colourless, are Bery/s.” 
...“ Beryllus is the Low-Latin term for a 
magnifying glass: hence the German ‘ Brille,’ 
a pair of spectacles.” —ib., p. 130, &c. 
the ninth, topaz;| In colour a yellowish 
green,—our Peridot: “This gem derived \its 
name from the island in the Red Sea, thirty 
miles off the main land, where it was first 
discovered. ... The Roman lapidaries accu- 
rately discriminated the two varieties, the 
Chrysopteron, our Chrysolite ; and the Prasoides, 
our Peridot; the latter ‘aiming at the exact 
imitation of the colour of the leek-leaf.’ 
Although the same chemically, both being 
Silicates of Magnesia coloured by a Protoxide 
of Iron, yet, from the jeweller’s point of view, 
there is a great difference between the Céryso- 
lite and the Peridot. The former is much 
harder, and the yellow in it greatly predomi- 
nates over the green. .. . Inthe Peridot green is 
the predominant colour, but slightly modified 
by yellow. ... The modern Topaz is a totally 
distinct substance from the Topazius,.... it 
was totally unknown to the ancients.”— 
King, /c., p. 336, &c. 
the tenth, chrysoprase;| This word does 
not occur in the LX X.; elsewhere it is found 
only in Pliny (H. N. xxxvii. 20,‘ Fulgore vici- 
num genus huic [4ery/lo| est, sed pallidius, et a 
quibusdam proprii generis existumatum),” who 
accurately distinguishes the varieties of dery/. 
The most admired “ emulates the green tint 
of pure sea-water,” the modern aqua-marine. 
Next is the CAryso-bery/, in which this green 
is tinged with gold,—probably our Indian 
Chrysolite. There was a still paler kind 
known by the name of Chrysoprase, a variety 
only of the Cryso-bery]: “ Most certainly it 
was not our Chrysoprase, silica-coloured a 
beautiful apple-green by Oxide of Nickel.”— 
King, /.c., pp. 130, 163. In his Nat. Hist. 
(p. 335) Mr. King adds that here, for “ Caryso- 
prasus,” “ Marbodus has evidently read Chryso- 
paston [which is the reading of the cursive 
MSS. 40, 50, 92], a dark blue studded with 
gold dust:—if correct, the three shades of 
blue would then follow each other in order.” 


the eleventh, jacinth;| The modern Sap- 
phire,—Gr. Hyacinthus, see on ch. ix, 17. Of 
RO ancient appellation, notes Mr. King, has the 
proper attribution been so much and so 


REVELATION. XXI. 


21 And the twelve gates were 


twelve pearls; every several gate 





variously disputed as of this (Nat. Hist. p. 
242). [Diisterd. states incorrectly that in 
Ex. xxviii. 19 (LXX.) the Cod. Alex. gives, 
for the Hebr. Leshem (novi), iaxwéos in 
place of “/igure” (Aryipiov)]. Epiphanius 
suspected that the /igure of the LXX. 
(the Lyncurium of Theophrastus) was the 
Hyacinthus of his own time, because so impor- 
tant a stone could not have been omitted by 
Moses. Here we find the first germ of the sube 
sequent confusion between two very different 
things. There can be no doubt, observes Mr, 
King (4., p. 217), that the Lynzcurium of Theos 
phrastus “‘is our Jacinth (Zircon), the yellow 
Jargoon, distinguished by having for its chemi- 
cal base the earth Zirconia peculiar to this 
family. This exactly resembles Amber in 
colour.” 

“That the Hyacinthus of the ancients is the 
Sapphire of the moderns [see on ver. 19], will 
be perfectly evident to any mineralogist who 
will carefully peruse the minute description 
of the same gem given by Solinus [who lived 
two centuries after Pliny]. The modern 
name Sapphire is a mere epithet expressive of 
its colour.”—King, i., p. 194. See Note C 
at the end of this chapter. 


the twelfth, amethyst.| Violet or purple, 
“The common Amethyst, and the stone genes 
rally designated among the ancients by this 
name, is nothing more than rock crystal 
coloured purple by manganese of iron; in 
modern mineralogy, Amethystine Quartz ”:— 
see King, /.c., p. 60. Pliny thus distinguishes 
this stone from the preceding : “ Differentia 
hee, quod ille emicans in Amethysto fulgor 
violaceus dilutus est in Hyacintho” (H. N, 
XXxvil. 41). The name Amethyst, though most 
probably a mere corruption of the Eastern 
name for the stone, a trace of which seems 
preserved in Ex. xxviii. 19, in the Hebrew 
Achlamah (m1>nN),—perhaps the true origin 
is the Persian ‘ Shemest,—was interpreted by 
the Greeks as though formed from a and 
péOv, ‘wine-less ?>—see King, ibid. (“ Majorum 
vanitas ebrietati eas resistere promittit, et 
inde appellatas.’—Pliny, H. N., xxxvii. 40). 

Different interpretations have been given 
of the precious stones themselves, of their 
order, and of their symbolical meaning ; but 
these interpretations are purely arbitrary ; e.g. 
according to that which is most usually 
adopted—the Jasper, the last stone of the 
Breastplate (Ex. xxvili. 20) and which is the 
first “ Foundation” here, unites the Alpha and 
the Omega; the ending the Old, and the 
beginning the New. 


21. each one of the several gates 


827 


828 


was of one pearl: and the street of 
the city was pure gold, as it were 
transparent puass. 

22 And | saw no temple therein : 
for the Lord God Almighty and the 
Lamb are the temple of it. 





was of one pearl:| (On this idiom, cf. John 


ii. 6). For the word “ Pearl,’ see on ch. 
xvil. 4. In Isai. liv. 12, the “ gates” are “ car- 
buncles.” Here, notes I. Williams, “all are 


of the same celestial substance, as on every 
side of the world the entrance is but of one 
kind, the knowledge of God in Christ,—the 
Incarnation, which the pearl signifies,—the 
one pearl of great price” (p. 462). In Bava 
Bathra f. 75. 1 (see Wetst.), it is said that 
God will place gems and pearls (“* gemmas et 
margaritas ”) thirty cubits square, and hol- 
lowed out to the height of twenty cubits, and 
to the breadth of ten cubits, in the gates of 
geraions J. D. Michaelis is embarrassed 
y the size of such pearls. 

St. Augustine expounds this passage :— 
“The Apostles and Prophets are “ Founda- 
tions,” because their authority is the support 
of our weakness. They are the ‘ Gates,’ be- 
cause through them we enter into the kingdom 
of God; and while by their means we enter, 
we enter through Christ, Himself the ‘ Gate.’ 
The one ‘Gate’ is Christ, and the Twelve 
‘Gates’ are Christ; for Christ dwells in the 
Twelve ‘ Gates.’ There is a deep mystery in 
the number Twelve. ... The Twelve is here 
put for universality, as spoken of all who sit 
In judgment (Matt. xix. 28); in the same 
manner all who enter the City enter by one 
or other of the Twelve ‘ Gates.’ These are the 
Four quarters of the globe. Our Lord de- 
clares that He will call His sheep from the 
Four winds; from all the Four winds the 
Church is called. It is called in the Trinity, 
in the name of the Father, the Son, and the 
Holy Ghost :—Four, then, being thrice taken, 
the Twelve is found.”"—In Psalm. \xxxvii. 


and the street of the city] Gr. the 
broadway,—cf. ch. xi. 8; xxii. 2. The 
word is used collectively; all the streets 
compose one ideal “ street” :—so also in ch. 
xxii. 2. 


was pure gold, as it were transparent glass.] 
Or transparent as glass—see on ver. 
18. On the Greek word rendered “ trans- 
parent,” and introduced into the text by 
Erasmus, see vv. //. The transparency of 
glass is the sign of its purity; and such is 
here the purity of the Gold. 

22. And I saw no temple therein:| Or 
“Sanotuary”—see on ch. xi. 1. As noted 
On ver. 16 the City is in form a perfect cube, 


REVELATION. XXI. 


{v. 22—24. 


23 “And the city had no need of ?1* a 


the sun, neither of the moon, to shine 
‘n it: for the glory of God did 
lighten it, and the Lamb is the light 


thereof. 


24 ‘And the nations of them *™ 3 


like the Holy of Holies in the Temple of 
Jerusalem. The entire City is now that which 
the Holy of Holies had formerly been— 
the locality of the immediate Presence of 
God. The Temple and the Temple-service 
have hitherto supplied the symbols which 
denote the condition of the Church on earth 
before the Judgment. This has now ceased; 
the Temple is no more; there is none seen 
in Heaven. The Redeemed being all Priests 
(see ch. i. 6; v. 10; xx. 6) unto God, the 
New Jerusalem is without Temple, being all 
Temple. On the necessary imperfection of 
the earthly Sanctuary, see Heb. x. 1. 

Note :—In ch. iii. 12; vii. 15, the righteous 
are spoken of as serving God in the heavenly 
Temple,—the sense thereby conveyed bein 
no more than that they dwell in the Divine 
Presence. Here the description enters into 
details; the righteous, when all is accom- 
plished, “shall see His face” (ch. xxii. 4); 
there shall be no inner “ Sanctuary,”—no veil 
between God and the Redeemed. 


for the Lord God the Almighty, and the 
Lamb, are the temple thereof.] GOD is now 
“allin all” (1 Cor. xv. 28):—“a proof of 
Christ’s Divinity.”— Words. 


23. And the cityhath no need of the sun,) 
Compare Isai. Ix. 19, 20. 


neither of the moon, to shine upon it:] See 
vv. H, For the construction (with tva) see 
Introd. § 7, IV., (f). Cf. Johni. 19. 

for the glory of God did lighten it,| See 
ver. 11 :—the immediate Presence, the Shee 
kinah. The promise, in ch. vii. 15, 16, is 
here fulfilled: t4ere the Redeemed serve God 
“ day and night ;” but 4ere, in this final de- 
scription of the blessed, it is no longer amid 
the alternations of light and darkness. In 
ch. vii. 16, there is still need of a sun; here, 
there is need of neither sun nor moon. The 
true nature and essence of GOD (“God x 
light”—1 John i. 5) is at length discerned. 

andthe lamp thereof [is] the Lamb.] 
Or, the glory of God did lightenit, and 
the Lamb, the lamp thereof.] The glory 
of God is the Sun which illumines the New 
Jerusalem; and His light is reflected from 
the Lamb, Who is “the bel ari SEE 
effulgence,”—“ the reflexion” (aravyacpa 
of the Father’s Glory (Heb. i. 3). See 
also ch, vii. 17. 





v. 24.] 


which are saved shall walk in the 
light of it: and the kings of the 


REVELATION, XX. 


earth do bring their glory and honour 


into it. 





Compare the striking lines of Kosegarten 
(1758-1818) quoted in Trench’s Sacred Lat. 
Poetry, p. 314 :— 


‘* Dir scheint, O Stadt, der Sonne Antlitz nicht, 
Und nicht ihr bleiches Bild ; 
Es leuchtet dir ein himmlisch Angesicht, 
Das wunderlich und mild.” 


It is unsound theology to refer, with some, 
“ the glory of God” to the Sun; and to regard 
the Lamb as corresponding to the Moon, 
which throughout Scripture is regarded as 
“the lesser light.” 

St. John now assumes the tone of the elder 
Prophets,—see Ps. Ixxii. 10, 11; Isai. lx. 3, 11; 
lxvi. 12. 

24. And the nations shall walk amidst 
the light thereof:| Omit “of them which 
are saved.” On the confusion which the 
manuscript of Erasmus has here introduced 
into the Textus Receptus, and which is retained 
in the A. V.,see vv. //. Reuss would account 
as follows for this confusion in the text :— 
He considers it to be “ un trait bien curieux ” 
that “the nations” (é.e., according to him the 
heathen) should walk in the City of God, 
because there are now “no other dwellers 
on the earth than the inhabitants of the New 
Jerusalem, all previous national or religious 
distinctions having been effaced :”—the scribes 
felt this difficulty; and they tried to get 
rid of it by writing “Jes peuples (c'est a dire 
la foule) des sauvés.” 

We may also translate, “by the light 
ef it;” or (as Words.) “through her 
light.” The expression in the text (dva 
tov @.), notes Disterd., “gives the pictu- 
resque conception of the Heathen taking their 
way through the midst of the light which 
streams forth from the City illumined by 
the glory of God.” (Cf. Isai. ix. 2; lx. 3. 
Alf. renders “by means of her light,’— 
“7.e., she shall be so bright as to serve for 
sun and moon to the world that then is, and 
her inhabitants. For such inhabitants are 
clearly supposed ; see below and ch. xxii. 2.” 

By “the Nations” here—as in ch. xxi. 2— 
all the ‘‘ Nations” of the Redeemed are to 
be understood, in the sense of ch, v. 9; Vii. 9: 
—see on ch. xv. 3; and on ver. 26. Hengst. 
insists that we must not understand “ Nations ” 
generally ;—as "Evy, in the usage of the 
Apocalypse “are always 4eatben nations in 
their natural or Christianized state (see on 
ch. xx. 3)”; here, only “converted heathen.” 
Ebrard refers to those of the “ eathen,” out- 
side the City and on the “ New Earth,” who 
are nevertheless written in the Book of Life, 
—who while on earth had striven against sin, 


but had not come to a knowledge of the 
Saviour,—and who now, after their Resure 
rection from the dead, become willing sub- 
Jects of God and the Lamb: see on ch. xx. 13. 
To the same effect Zillig. 


and the kings of the earth do bring their 
glory intoit.] (Omit, “and honour,’—see 
vv. il.). “ Their” refers solely to the “ Kings ;” 
the homage of “ the Nations” is distinct,—see 
ver. 26. Some (e.g. Zillig) refer “their” to 
both “ the Nations” and “ the Kings.” 

There will still be “ Kizgs” writes Hengst.: 
“As among the Angels there are distinctions 
of rank and order (see ch. viii. 2), so shall 
there.be among glorified men. ... It is cone 
trary to allsound feeling that a David, that a 
Charles the Great, should there be lost without 
distinction among the general mass;” and he 
refers to the position assigned to the Apostles 
in vv. 14,19. Words. notes: “ Some ‘ Kings 
of the Earth’ will remain Christian unto the 
end and will not join in the rebellion against 
Christ (ch. xvi. 14; xviii. 9; xix. 19). Kings 
and nations (ch. xx. 8) are before mentioned 
as rising up against Christ, but here they are 
tributary to Him.” Words. is referring to 
‘the heavenly Jerusalem ;” but Millennarians 
interpret difterently,—e.g. Alford, who exe 
plains: “‘ The Kings ofthe earth (no longer hos- 
tile to Christ) bring,” &c. (see on ver. 26). 
And I. Williams: “ All that partakes of the 
true anointing shall thither be brought: ‘ rhe 
Kings of the East’ spoken of in the sixth Vial; 
the many crowns, with the King of kings, 
Whatever is precious, whatever is truly great 
and good upon earth . . . shall be brought into 
that City; all that the Prophets have spoken 
of the riches of the Gentiles shall flow into 
it; the Wise Men of the East with their 
first-fruits shall be there, the special gift of 
faith, more precious than of gold that 
perisheth” (p. 466). 

Hence it appears that writers are divided 
as to whether the heavenly state is meant, or 
a glorious state of the Church upon earth. 
When this verse wes applied in his day to the 
Church oz earth, St. Augustine’s comment 
on the opinion was: “Hoc de isto tempore 
accipere quo regnant [cives Ejus] cum Rege- 
suo mille annis, impudentie nimie mihi 
videtur ” (De Civ. Dei, xx. 17). Comparing 
such passages as “And the Gentiles shall 
come to thy light, and Kings to the brightness. 
of Thy rising,” Stuart observes that St. John 
“conceives of the New World after the simil’- 
tude of the old, ze., as having a great metro- 
polis, and all lands being in subjection to it.” 
Burger more suitably refers to the contrast 
between- the New Jerusalem and Ancient 


829 


830 


the. 60. 
Eo 


25 *And the gates of it shall not 
be shut at all by day: for there shall 
be nc night there. 

26 And they shall bring the glory 
and honour of the nations into it. 


REVELATION. XXI 


{v. 25—a7. 


27 And there shall in no wise enter 
into it any thing that defileth, neither 
whatsoever worketh abomination, or 
maketh a lie: but they which are 
written in the Lamb’s book of life. 





Babvlon. To Babylon flowed all earthly 
glory hostile to Heaven ;—to the New Jeru- 
salem the Kings of the “ New Earth” offer all 
their magnificence to the honour of God and 
the Lamb. 


25. And the gates thereof shallin no wise 
be shut by day (for there shall be no night 
there):| The reasonisadded parenthetically for 
not saying “day and night,” as in ch. iv. 8; 
Vii. 15 ; Xli. 10; xiv. 11; xx. 10. “There shall 
be no night there” because of the Divine 
glory, wv. 11, 23; ch. xxii. 5:—cf. Zech. 
xiv. 7. The open gates are an emblem of 
perfect security : “‘ What the ancient poets 
sang of as a vision of the Golden Age, with 
its ‘apertis otia portis,’ will then be fully 
realized” (Words.). Many refer to Isai, 
lx. 11, to prove that the reason why the 
gates stand open is to allow the nations to 
bring in their treasures to the New Jeru- 
salem,—so Hengst., Disterd. 


26. and they shall bring the glory and the 
honour of the nations into it:| ‘The verb is 
to be taken impersonally—cf. ch. x. 113 xii. 6: 
so Bengel, De Wette, Disterd., Alf., &c. 
Others (Zitllig, Ewald, Bleek) make “the 
Kings” (ver 24) the subject of the verb. 

For the inclusion of “ the Nations” among 
the Blessed, see ch. v. 9; vii. 9; and cf. on 
ver. 24. 

Alf., having noted at the beginning of this 
chapter that “the whole” of “ the remaining 
portion of the Book is subsequent to the 
General Judgment,” nevertheless observes 
here: ‘‘ This is set forth to us, that, besides 
the glorified Church, there shall still be 
dwelling on the renewed earth, nations 
organized under kings, and (ch. xxii. 2) saved 
by means of the influences of the heavenly 


City.” De Wette asks, “ Why do not these 
kings and nations dwell in the heavenly City ?” 
But assuredly they do so dwell; and as 
Words. concludes :—* All will dwell together 
as brethren, as children of the same Heavenly 
Father, in one Everlasting Home (John xiv. 
2).” See on ver. 24. 

Delitzsch mentions that Erasmus, misled 
by the transcribers of his manuscript, omitted 
this verse in his earlier editions. Hence this 
verse did not appear in any of the original 
editions of Luther’s translation :—Handschr. 
Funde, s. 51. 


27. and there shall in no wise enter into it 
anything unclean,] See vv. /i.: Gr. 
anything common—cf. Acts x. 14; and 
Mark vii. 2. See also Isai. lii. 1: and on the 
use here of expressions taken from the Law, 
see above on ver. 8. ‘The enumeration is 
comprised in the number ¢éree” (Hengst.). 

Compare ver. 8; ch. ix. 21; xxil. 15. 


neither he that doeth an abomination] See 
vv. il. Gr. and he that doeth. On the 
word “ abomination,” cf. ch. xvii. 4, 5; and see 
on ver. 8. 


and a lie:] All such had been “ cast into 
the Lake of Fire,”—ch. xx. 15. There seems 
to be a special reference here to the previous 
existence of Antichrist,—cf. 1 John ii. 22; 
2 Thess. ii. 11. See on ch. xiv. 5; xxii. 15. 
For the contrast, see John iii. 21. 


but only they which are written in the 
book of life of the Lamb.] See ch. xiii. 
Sand chichal 55 xxra ee 

The thought borrowed from Dan. xii. 1 
(“ At that time Thy people shall be delivered, 
every one that shall be found written in the 
Book ”) is preserved to the last. 


ADDITIONAL NOTES on Chap. XXI. 


Nore A ON VER. I—THE CONNEXION 
WITH THE PREVIOUS SCENES. 


L. In the earlier part (ch. xvii.—ch. xx.) 
of the seventh Vision of the Revelation 
Proper (see the remarks introductory to ch. 
xvii.) the enemies of God, of the Lamb, of 
the Church, have been judged; and Satan 
has been overthrown. In the concluding 
part (ch, xxi-ch. xxii. 5),—the last and 


highest object of Apocalyptic Prophecy,—the 
accomplishment of the mystery of God (ch. 
x. 7), and the fulfilment of the promises to the 
Seven Churches (ch. ii.; ch. iii.) are pre- 
sented to us, in contrast to the judgment of 
condemnation described summarily in ch. xx. 
15 (“Finito Judicio, quo prenunciavit judi- 
candos malos, restat ut etiam de bonis dicat.” 
August. De Civ. Dei, xx. 16). In the pice 
ture here given of the New Jerusalem we 








REVELATION. XXI. 


have once more before us the descriptions 
giver in Isai. lx., and in Ezek. xl—xlvii. St. 
John, however, follows the order in Ezekiel, 
who, after his account of Gog and Magog, 
exhibits, in Vision, the Holy City and the 
Temple, and the return to it of God’s glory. 

As to the connexion here Millennarians 
differ :— 
= According to Auberlen, the 144,000 sealed 
from the Twelve Tribes of Israel (ch. vii. 4) 
form the nucleus of glorified humanity, to 
which, during the Millennium, an innumerable 
company of the Gentiles are to be united iz 
beaven; while upon earth, the world of na- 
tions is added to the kingdom of Israel. The 
glorified Church in heaven, and the Church 
on earth, although separate during the Mil- 
lennium, are yet connected with each other ; 
and to this Christ refers in Matt. xix. 28; 
Luke xxii. 28-30; (see above on vv. 12, 14). 
“ After the Millennial Kingdom, after the uni- 
versal Judgment, when Heaven and Earth 
are renewed, and the New Jerusalem de- 
scends from above, then all limitations shall 
disappear and cease” (p. 356). 

Alford places ch. xxi. and ch. xxii. sub- 
sequent to the universal Judgment; and he 
takes them to describe the bliss of Christ’s 
people with Him in the eternal kingdom of 
God, which is situated on the purified and 
renewed earth. He does not understand 
the annihilation of the old Creation, but the 
passing away of its outward form, and its 
renewal to a more glorious one; and this by 
the means described in 2 Pet. ili. ro, through 
“a renovation by fre.” To the same effect 
De Burgh (p. 371): “The creation of 
the new heaven and earth, and the descent 
of the New Jerusalem take place after the 
Millennial reign of Christ ;’” and yet, he adds, 
“almost all who have had their minds turned 
to the subject” look upon ch. xxi., and ch, 
xxii. as “but a recapitulation of ch. xx. for 
the purpose of fuller detail ;’"—the renovation 
of heaven and earth, and of Jerusalem, being 
“parallel with the Millennium, and taking 
place at the Jdeginning of the Thousand 
Years.” “It is certain,” however, concludes 
De Burgh, that “the New Heavens and the 
New Earth come into existence after the 
general conflagration” (2 Pet. iii.).? 

In reply to the two latter opinions, Dr. 
Brown (/c., p. 273, &c.) brings together the 
texts 2 Pet. iil. 7, 10-13; and Rev. xx. 11; xxi. 


1 «During the Millennial Reign the inhabi- 
tants of the earth will be still in mortal flesh, 
the great object of Christ’s reign on Earth 
during this Thousand Years being to carry 
Christianity into effect in this world, to gather 
to Himself all the nations of the earth, and to 
bring about their conversion”? (De Burgh, 72., 
P. 373). See on ch. xiv. 6; xv. 4. 


1:—If the “conflagration,” described occurs 
before the Millennium, what, he asks, is to be= 
come of the inhabitants of the earth? (1) As 
to De Burgh [and Alf.] (to whom are to be 
added “Mr. Tyso and Mr. Ogilvy”) who 
place the “ conflagration” a Thousand Years 
after Christ's coming, how can they explain 
St. Peter’s words: “‘ The day of the Lord will 
come as a thief, im the which the heavens 
shall pass away,” &c.? To this question De 


Burgh (cf. pp. 375, 376) answers, that this 


“Day of the Lod” is a Thousand Years 
long, and as it is only ‘i the day,’ the “ con- 
flagration ” may be as well at the end as at the 
beginning of it,—an explanation opposed 
to the Apostle’s object, which is to warn 
scoffers who would deride the expectation of 
Christ’s coming, that the conflagration, like 
the Deluge of old, will burst upon them 
when least expected—Luke xvii. 27. (2) 
As to the other class of expositors, who make 
the Second Advent and the “‘conflagration” to 
be contemporaneous, and both to be pre- 
millennial,—Many restrict the “conflagration” 
“to the prophetic earth, or the territory of 
old Rome ;’—Others to the vast territory of 
the Papal Babylon, and the godless of its in- 
habitants ” (as Elliott iv. 217-227); orto “all 
Christendom become Papal:”—* Papal Europe 
only is flung into the crucible,” writes Mr. A. 
Bonar (Redempt., 117-118). (3) Some again 
suppose that the “conflagration,” likethe Judg= 
ment, will be broken up into two or more 
“ conflagrations” on a small scale (see Mr. 
Bickersteth, Guide, p. 284; Mr. Brooks, 
Elem. of Proph. Int., p. 239). As to what 
becomes of the existing inhabitants of the 
earth, “‘a modest conjecture” of Mede “is 
now the general understanding of Pre-millen- 
nialists :—viz. that “the rapture of the saints” 
(1 Thess. iv. 17) is intended to preserve them 
“during the conflagration of the earth and 
the works thereof,’ as Noah and his family 
from the Deluge (p. 776). Dan. ili. 25 is 
also quoted; and the words “I have covered 
thee in the shadow of mine hand.”—Is. li. 16. 

As to other interpretations of ch. xxi., it 
must suffice to note that Grotius refers to the 
time after Constantine, when the earth was 
no longer steeped in the blood of martyrs; 
—that Vitr. sees the Church renewed on 
earth, a completion of the Reformation ;— 
that Alcasar sees the future glory of the 
Church of Rome. 


Norte B ON VER. 19—THE TWELVE 
FOUNDATIONS. 


Mr. King, in his different works on Pre 
cious Stones and Gems has given a consistent 
explanation of St. John’s description here. 
He assumes that the Foundations of the 
Wall consist of Twelve courses of precious 


831 


832 


Stones ; and notices the fact that these Stones 
are not arranged here in the same order as 
in the “ Rationale” (Ex. xxviii. 15, Vulg.) or 
“ Breastplate” (Hebr. WN, LXX. oyeiov) 
worn by the Jewish High Priest, described in 
Ex. xxviii. 17-21. Mr. King goes on to say :— 

“Instead of this, St. John has most inge- 
niously disposed them according to their 
various shades of the same colour, as the 
following list will demonstrate, taking them 
in order from the bottom upwards :— 

(1) Jaspis, dark green. (2) Sapphirus, blue 
[our Lapis-lazuli]. (3) Chalcedony, a greenish 
sort of Emerald. 

(4) Smaragdus, bright green. (5) Sardonyx, 
red and white. (6) Sardius, bright red. 

(7) Chrysolite, golden yellow. (8) Beryl, 
bluish green. (9) Topazius, yellowish green. 

(10) Chrysoprasus, apple-green. (11) Hya- 
cinthus, blue. (12) Amethyst, violet or 
purple.” 

“Neither is this order of the colours sug- 
gested by the rainbow, as their heavenly posi- 
tion would naturally suggest,—red, orange, 
yellow, green, blue, purple, violet. Again, St. 
John being so close an imitator of Ezekiel, 
one might have presupposed him guided by 
the prophet’s most poetical apostrophe to the 
King of Tyrus (xxviii. 13) ... . Sominute an 
acquaintance with the nicest shades of colour 
of the precious Stones will more forcibly im- 
press the reader, if he should attempt to 
arrange from memory, and by his own casually 
acquired .knowledge alone, twelve gems, or 
even half that number, according to their 
proper tints. ... The ‘sainted Seer’ alludes 
in other passages to the proper colours of 
precious stones in a very technical manner: 
‘He that sat on the throne’ [ch. iv. 3] was 
like the Jaspis and the Sardius, and was 
crowned with a rainbow like the Smaragdus ; 
whilst the light within the Holy City [ch. 
xxi. 11] was like ‘a very precious stone, a 
Jaspis resembling Crystal,—or the green of 
the Plasma united with the brilliancy and 
lucidity of the Crystal——by which he pro- 
bably sought to distinguish the true Emerald, 
ever a special favourite with the Jews. Such 
allusions display that exact knowledge of par- 
ticulars only possessed by persons either deal- 
ing in precious stones, or from other circum- 
stances obliged to have a practical acquaint- 
ance with their nature, which could never 
have been found in a Galilean fisherman; 
unless [interposes Mr. King] we choose to 
cut the knot of the difficulty with the ever- 
ready sword of verbal inspiration.”— Naz. 
Hist. of precious Stones, p. 336. 

It is to be noted here that the expression 
“verbal inspiration ” is peculiarly unsuitable. 
St. John assuredly, like every other Jew, was 
familiar with t4e names of the precious Stones 
enumerated by Moses and Ezekiel. The 


REVELATION. XXI. 


upholder of the Divine Inspiration of the 
Bible maintains that the same influence which 
enlightened the native faculties, and guided 
the acquired knowledge of all the Sacred 
Writers, directed, in the present instance, that 
scientific selection of which Mr. King has 
given so clear, and learned an account. The 
phrase which correctly describes such an 
influence is ‘“‘ Dynamic Inspiration”; and of 
this no better illustration can be adduced 
than the language of the Seer in the present 
passage :—see Lee On Inspiration, Lect. iv. 

I. Andreas would assign each precious 
stone, in accordance with ver. 14, to some 
one of the Apostles :— 

(1) The Jasper is St. Peter; (2) The Sa 
phire, St. Paul (61a rotrou, éouxéros 7 odpavi 
copart, €£ ob pact Kal 76 AaLovpioy yiver Oat, 
Tov paxdprov TadAov oiwat onpatverbat); (3) 
The Chalcedony, St. Andrew; (4) The 
Emerald, St. John; (5) The Sardonyx, St. 
James; (6) The Sard, St. Philip; (7) The 
Chrysolite, St. Bartholomew; (8) The Beryl, 
St. Thomas; (9) The Topaz, St. Matthew; 
(10) The Chrysoprase, St. Thaddeus; (11) 
The Hyacinth, St. Simon Zelotes; (12) The 
Amethyst, St. Matthias. 

Andreas refers for this classification to 
Epiphanius, who discusses in a speci 
treatise (De xii. Gemmis) the nature of the 
precious Stones in Aaron’s Breastplate, but 
makes no reference to the Twelve Founda= 
tions in the Apocalpyse. Epiphanius also 
classifies the Gems according to the Tribes 
ot Israel,—e.g. to Reuben, the Sard ; to Simeon, 
the Topaz, &c. :—see Opp. vol. ii. p. 231. 

Coming to modern times :— 

II. Bengel places the Apostles in the fol- 
lowing order:—(1) Jasper, St. Peter; (2) 
Sapphire, St. John ; (3) Chalcedony, St. James. 

(4) Emerald, St. Andrew; (5) Sardonyx, 
St. Philip ; (6) Sard, St. Thomas. 

(7) Chrysolite, St. Bartholomew; (8) 
Beryl, St. Matthew; (9) Topaz, St. James, 
the son of Alpheus. 

(10) Chrysoprase, St. Simon Zelotes; fr 1) 
Hyacinth, S#. Jude the brother of James; (12) 
Amethyst, St. Matthias.’ 

Stern distributes as follows:—(1) The 
Jasper is the foundation on which Christ has 


1 Mr. Streeter (in his Precious Stones and 
Gems, 1877) gives another classification : 

‘¢ y.—The hard and solid Yasper, representit 
the Rock of the Church, was the emblem 
Peter. 

2.—The bright blue Sapphire was emblematic 
of the heavenly faith of Andrew. 

3.—The Emeraid, of the pure and gentle 

4.—The white Chalcedony, of the 


mes. 
ei friendly Sardonyx, of Philip. 
6.—The red Carnelian, of the martyr Bartho- 
lomew. 


An. 
oving 


REVELATION. XXI. 


built His Church—St. Peter; (2) The Sap- 
ire,—St. Andrew; (3) The Chalcedony,— 
James the son of Zebedee; (4) The 
Emerald,—St. John; (5) The Sardonyx,—St. 
Philip; (6) The Sard,—St. Bartholomew ; (7) 
The Chrysolite—St. Matthew; (8) The 
Beryl,—St. Thomas; (9) The Topaz,—St. 
lames the Less; (10) The Chrysoprase,—St. 
haddzus; (11) The Jacinth,—St. Simon 
Zelotes; (12) The Amethyst,—St. Matthias. 
A vain attempt this at an explanation, notes 
Bispi 


ISping. 

II. Ebrard justly observes that the twelve- 
fold colour of these ious Stones denotes 
symbolically how the one light of the Gospel 
is variously refracted through the medium of 
Apostolic teaching; and yet he seeks (as do 
also Vitringa, Zullig, Ewald, &c.) to identify 
the various precious Stones enumerated here 
with those in the High Priest’s Breastplate. 
This attempt of Ebrard is not successful. 
He takes the Stones of the Breastplate as 
represented in the LX X. version of Ex. xxviii. 
17-20. In the LXX., however, Jasper is 
substituted in ver. 18 for the jabalom or 
dGamond (see on Rev. ii. 17), although the 
Hebrew expressly gives “ Jasper” (Mv) in 
ver. 20. The order of the Stones, moreover, 
is entirely different :—e.g. in the Breastplate 
the Sapphire is the ft stone, and the Jasper 
the twelfth; while in the Apocalypse, the 
Jasper is the first Foundation, and the Sapphire 
the second ;—and it is only by an arbitrary 
interchange of the four “triads” of Stones 
in the Breastplate, and of the different stones 
in each“ triad,” that Ebrard can procure any 
approach to identity. Even for this he must 
assume that the three Stones in the Breastplate 
which do not occur here—the Anthrax, 
[LXX., Hebr. 153, Ex. xxviii. 18], the Ligure, 
the Agate (ayars),—correspond respectively 
to the Jacinth, the Chrysoprase, and the Chalce- 
dony. Compare the variety also in the 
order of the precious stones enumerated in 
Ezek. xxviii. 13 ;—see the note in /oc. 

Zullig (Excursus on Rev. xxi. 19, 20, B. 
ii. 8. 456, &c.) goes farther still than Ebrard. 
He seeks to assign a particular precious 
stone to each Tribe of Israel, in the order of 
the gates of the New Jerusalem as given in 
Ezek. xlviii. 31-34. He attains the following 
result: (1) The Jasper corresponds to Ben- 


7.—The Chrysolite, pure as sunlight, of 
Matthias. 

&—The indefinite Bery/, of the doubting 
Thomas. 

9.—The Zopas, of the delicate James the 
the Ch of d 

10.—The Chrysoprase, the serene an 
trustful Zhaddeus. 

11.—The Amethyst, of Matthew the Apostle. 

12.—The pink Ayacinth, of the sweet- 


tempered Simeon of Cana ”—{p. 19). 
New Test.—Vot. IV. 


jamin; (2) The Sapphire to Dan; (3) The 
Chalcedony to Simeon; (4) The Emerald to 
Issachar ; (5) The Sardonyx to Zebulun; (6) 
The Sard to Gad; (7) The Chrysolite to 
Asher ; (8) The Beryl to Naphtali; (9) The 
Topaz to Reuben; (10) The C prase to 
Judah; (11) The Jacinth to Levi; (12) The 
Amethyst to Joseph. This arbitrary arrange- 
ment begins on the East side in Ezekiel’s list 
of gates (see on ch. vii. 5), and there with 
the middle gate; it then goes round in the 
order South, West, North,—ending with the 
Jirst gate in the East side, that of Joseph. 

III. De Wette, Hengst., Disterd. agree 
in denying such applications to either the 
Patriarchs, or the Apostlesindividually And 
Hengstenberg thus sums up his aiterpre= 
tation: “So that we must here rest in the 
conclusion, that by the variety in the precious 
Stones is symbolized the richness of the 
glorious Gifts of God, which unfolded them- 
selves in the Apostles.” 

IV. Some ancient writers (e.g. Arethas, 
Beda, CEcumenius, Ludolphus, C. 4 Lapide) 
give a mystical and spiritual meaning to each 
of the Stones. The Jasper is the brigatness of 
faith; the Sapphire of Aope ; andso forth: cf. 
St. Gregory, Moral. in Job. xxviii. 16 ; but, as 
I. Williams notes, all such attempts are vain. 
The idea is well expressed by Words. that 
“in the variety and beauty of the precious 
Stones, is symbolized the zoAuzoixtAos copia 
of God (Eph. iii. 10).” 

There is doubtless here an order Divineiy 
intended—an order best expressed in the 
words of the ancient Hymn: 


‘* Suis coaptantur locis 
Per Manum artificis.” 


[On these precious Stones, see Pliny, H. N. 
xxxvil. ; Epiphanius, De xii Gemmis Rationaits, 
t. ii. p. 225, Ed. Petav. ; Marbodus, De Lapi- 
dibus pretiosis Enchir.; Faustino Corsi, 
Pietri Antiche, Roma 1828, p. 127, &c.] 


NoTE C ON VER. 20—JACINTH, HyAe 
CINTHUS. 


The name Jacinth has been transferred, as 
follows, to the modern gem from the ancient 
Hyacinthus which has thereby totally lost its 
original designation :—‘ Jacinth,’ the French 
‘Hyacinthe, comes to us from the Italian 
‘Giacinto,’ formed, according to the usual 
rule of that language, from the Latin ‘ Hyacin- 
thus’ (King, Pr. Stones, p. 220). Pliny writes: 
“ Multum ab [amethysto] distat Hyacinthus, 
ab vicino tamen colore descendens. Differ- 
entia hec est, quod ille emicans in Amethysto 
fulgor violaceus diluitur in Hyacintho, pri- 
moque gratus evanescit antequam 
satiet, adeoque non implet oculos ut pene 
non attingat, marcescens celerius nominis 


GGG 


833 


834 


wut flore.”—H. N. xxxvii. 41 ‘‘ What this 
flower (the Hyacinth) was,” adds Mr. King, 
“is fully as much a matter of dispute among 
the botanists, as is the nature of the gem 
with the mineralogists.” Plin a N. xxi. 
97) writes: “ Hyacinthus in Cali maxime 
provenit ; hoc ibi fuco hysginum tinguitur:”— 
the dye Aysginum is usually translated 
blue. “Sprengel defines it to be the common 
erg an explanation overthrown by 

liny’s distinction: ‘Post hanc gladiolus 
comitatus hyacinthis. Many others agree 
with La Chaux in considering it to be the 
tiger lily, with whom sides Milton, who has 


CHAPTER XXII. 


REVELATION, XXII. 


‘vr 


‘Like to the sanguine flower inscribed with 
woe.’ A few make it to be the /arkspur, a 
purple flower. . . . My own opinion, amidst 
this diversity, rather inclines to the blue 
Jteur-de-lys, the blossom of which lasts but 
for a day, and thus answers to one of Pliny’s 
characters of the disputed flower” (see 
Solinus, Polyhistor,c. xxx.):—WNat. Hist. p. 243. 

In Ex. xxv. 4 the colours of the 
Tabernacle are “blue [Hebr. nbn] and purple, 
and scarlet” (LXX., idxwOov cat mophupw 
kal kéxkwwov):—see the Note on Ex. xxv. 4; 
and on Rev. ix. 17. 


Nothing may be added to the word of God, 





nor taken therefrom. 


A ND he shewed me a pure river 
of water of life, clear as crystal, 


a The river of the water of life 2 The tree of 
Bfe § light of the city of God ts him- 
saf. 9 The angel will not be worshipped. 18 





[Ver. 1 om. xaOapdv. Ver. 2 évredOev nai exeiOev [Cf. John xix. 18; Ezek. xlvii. 7, 12, 
LXX,, evOev kai évOev. Shas merely évOev xai,—* excidit versus quo scripta erant évOey 
§0n. Co.”,—Tischend.].—om. va. Ver. 3 xatabepa[T. R. xatavdbepua, “ eine erasmische Erfin- 
dung,”—Delitzsch]. Ver. 5 ov« €ora: ért.—[A reads e£ovow].— ards Avxvov.—[A, P read 
das nriov].parice.—en’ avrovs. Ver. 6 6 Kip.—ray mvevpatav tov mpopnrav. Ver. 7 
cai i8ov. Ver. 8 6 dkovwy kai BXéerav tadra. Ver. 9 om. yap (inserted without any authority 
by Er.). Ver. 10 6 kaupds ydp, in place of drt 6 Karp. Ver. 11 kal 6 pumapds pumavOntw ere 
[These words, omitted from his MS., Er. supplied after the Vulg. (et gui in sordibus est 
sordescat adhuc) by kat 6 pum@v pumwcaro (sic) éru—1 omits all from adixnodrw em to 
kal 6 dytos k. tT. A.].—Adtkaroovyny momoarw [Here Er. rendered the justificetur of the Vulg. by 
SixarwOnra)]. Ver. 12 om. the 1st xai.—eoriv avrov. Ver. 13 om. ciyt.—1 apx7 Kal To TéAos 
(These words are to be read after 6 mp@ros kai 6 €xxaros, from both of which A omits 3). 
Ver. 14 0f mAvvovres Tas otokas avrav [So &, A, Vulg.;—B, 1, Cop. read of rosodvres ras 
évroas avtov. P is defective in vv. 7-21]. Ver. 15 om. dé.—zas gudav. Ver. 16 [A reads 
év Tr. €KKA.,— &, B éxi,—1 omits the prep. ].— om. tov before Aaveié. 

[After Aaveid the codex of Erasmus breaks off; and he supplied the rest of the chapter by 
his own re-translation of the Vulgate. In his first edition (1516) he writes “Quamquam 
in calce hujus libri nonnulla verba reperi apud nostros, que aberant in Grecis exemplaribus, 
ea tamen ex Latinis adjecimus” :—see Introd § 8. Thus in ver. 16 he rendered the et 
matutina of the Vulg. by kai dpOpives, for which we must read with &, A, B (cf. ch. ii. 28) 
6 mpwvds,—before which «ai (found only in A) is to be omitted]. Ver. 17 epxou twice.— 
épxécOm.—om. kai before 6 OéAwv.—daBeérw vdwp. Ver. 18 Maprup@ eye mavri ra [contestor 
enim, Vulg.].—émi67 ew’ aita.—ro BiBrio. Ver. 19 apéAn.—ov BiBdiov.aehet.—rov Evrov 
[de libro vite, Vulg.].—om. last kai [et de his que scripta, Vulg.].—r@ BiBdio. Ver. 20 om. 2nd 
vai [This vai Er. took (as he has taken the whole verse) from a reading supplied by Laurentius 
Valla; it is not presented in the Vulg., nor is it read by any Uncial MS.]. Ver. 21 om. juav. 
—om. Xpicrov.—om. tpav [A peta Tavrwv. pera tOv dyiwv.—B reads pera 
mdvrev rev dyiov|—{[A omits ’Aunv].—[Gratia Domini nostri Jesu Christi cum omnibus vobis. 
Amen. Vulg.).J 


1. And he shewed me] Ch. xxi. 10 is here 
caken up and continued. 

Ezek. xlvii. 1-12 should be read carefully 
m connexion with verses 1 and 2; cf. also 
Joel ili. 18; Zech. xiv. 8. 


a river] Omit the word “pure,”—see 


wv. il, 
Here at length, and in ver. 2, the types which 


Paradise presented are fulfilled: —(i.) We have 
first of all the “river” which “ went out of 
Eden,” Gen. ii. 10. See on ver. 2. 

For this restoration of a better Paradise. 
see on ch. ii. 7. 

of water of life,| “There is ariver, wrote 
the Psalmist, “the streams whereof shall maxe 
glad the City of God” (Ps. xlvi. 4)—streains 


v. 2.) 


proceeding out of the throne of God 
and of the Lamb. 
2 Inthe midst of the street of it, 


not of seal water ; but of the spiritual life 
promised by Christ,—John iv. 10, 143 Vii. 
38 ; see also ch. vii. 17; xxi. 6. 


bright as crystal, proceeding out of the 
brone of God and of the Lamb,| From one and 
the same throne,—see ch. iii. 21. In Ezek. 
xlvii. 1, the “waters issued out from under 
the threshold” of the Temple. In the New 
Jerusalem there is no Temple (ch. xxi. 22), 
and the river proceeds “ out of the throne 
of God and of the Lamb,’—cf. ch. v. 13; 
vii. 17 

The Lord, while on earth, had spoken of 
the “ rivers of living water ;” and St. John 
(vii. 39) has added the comment : “ This spake 
He of the Spirit.” Here, the “river of water 
of life” “ proceeds out of the throne of God 
and of the Lamb”—affording a remarkable 
illustration and proof of the Article of the 
Creed: “I believe in the Holy Ghost, Who 
proceedeth from the Father and the Son.” 

Note carefully the connexion of this verse 
with the first clause of ver. 2. 


2.inthe midst of the street thereof.] 
1e., ‘The river proceeded out of the throne of 
God and of the Lamb, in the midst of the 
street of the City.’ “The street” is taken 
tollectively, as in ch. xxi. 21. The con- 
nexion of these words with ver. 1—which 
alone seems to render the words that follow, 
especially the word “ And,” intelligible—was 
first pointed out by Matthia; and has been 
adopted after him by Ziillig, Filler, Bisping, 
and Burger. The great majority of com- 
mentators however, with the A. V., place a 
full stop at the end of ver. 1; but in that case 
the whole analogy of the Apoc. would suggest 
the existence of “and” at the beginning of 
ver, 2—introducing a new clause; see e.g. 
ch. iv.1. The analogy of Ezekiel’s vision also 
leads to the same result. There the waters 
issue forth “ eastward,” in the direction of the 
principal avenue of the Temple Court,—“ dy 
the way that looketh eastward” through which 
the Prophet is led (Ezek. xlvii. 2); and in 
neither ver. 7, nor ver. 12, of which this 
passage is an almost verbal transcript, is there 
mention of a “way” or “street” in con- 
nexion with the “trees.” 

And on this side of the river and on 
that was the tree of /ife,| Or,a tree of 
life. (See vv.//., and the references there 
given). The new clause begins, as usual, 
with “dnd.” The word “tree” in the Greek 
is anarthrous, but is taken generically to repre- 
sent the numerous ¢rees which grew on either 
side of the river—see on ch. xxi. 16; or tqwo 


REVELATION. XXII. 


and on either side of the river, was 
there the tree of life, which bare 
twelve manner of fruits, and yielded 





trees merely may be signified, in contrast to 
the ove Tree in the original Paradise. 

Diisterd. allows that it is very difficuh, with 
the ordinary punctuation, to expiain the con- 
struction, which Alf., after him, renders thus: 
“* In the midst of the street of it (the city), and 
of the river, On one side and on the other, — 
the gen. (‘of the river’) being governed by 
‘in the midst’ (as Ewald, Diisterd., and others), 
not by ‘on either side’ (as De Wette): and 
the meaning being that the trees were on each 
side in the middle of the space between the 
street and the river.” 

I. Williams renders: “In the midst, &o., 
and on either side of the river was 
there a tree of life;” the absence of the 
article before the word “7iver” in ver. 1, as 
well as before the word “#ree,” implies, he 
suggests, “in both cases a River and a Tree 
not to be confounded with any other men- 
tioned in Scripture from its transcendental 
nature.” And he explains (after Dean 
Woodhouse and Dr. Wells): “in the midst — 
of the river encompassing the street 
on this side and on that side” :—“On 
the sides of the River, then, not, as in 
Ezekiel many trees, for the solace of our 
weakness on earth, but the one Tree of 
Paradise; when the faming sword of death is 
removed. Not a river dividing into four 
heads to replenish the earth, but one River 
and one Tree, restored to the unity which is 
in God. One river, encompassing in the 
midst of it ‘the tree of life.’” (p. 471). 

(ii.) In “the tree of life” (cf. ch. ii. 7) we 
have the second type from Paradise—Gen. 
ii. 9; iil. 22. See on ver. 1. 

In the note on Gen. ii. 9 see Dr. Kenni- 
cott’s remark as to the generic force of the 
word “tree”; whence he infers that all the 
trees of Paradise, except the Tree of Know- 
ledge. were Trees of Life. 


bearing favelve [manner of | fruits,| Or, 
twelve crops of fruit. “As before, the 
one Foundation of Christ was found to be in 
the Twelve Foundations with Twelve pre- 
cious stones of every colour, so here the one 
Tree of Life bears ‘ tqwelve manner of fruits’” 
(I. Williams, p. 469) ;—“ signifying,” notes 
Ebrard, | “the ever new enjoyments of the 
Blessed. 

On ae other hand Hengst. writes: “ We 
are not to think of different kinds of fruits ;” 
—but merely “ew fruits,” indicating that 
“the enjoyment of life shall be without inter- 
ruption.” And so Burger, “a t welve-fold 
harvest of fruits, as the verse goes on to 


GGG2 


835 


836 


her fruit every month: and the 
leaves of the tree we-e for the healing 
of the nations. 

3 And there shall be no more 
curse: but the throne of God and of 





explain—a new harvest each month.” And so 
Stuart renders: producing twelve fruit 
harvests, so asto afford an abundant, not a 
varied, supply. 

yielding its fruit every month:] (Omit 
the initial “ and” ofthe A.V.: and see vv. //.). 
The words of Ezek. xlvii. 12, “whose leaf 
shall not fade, neither shall the fruit thereof be 
consumed : it shall bring forth new fruit accord- 
ing to his months,’ rather support Hengst. 
against the A.V.; viz., that the Tree yields 
“new” fruit every month in never-ending 
succession. The fruit of the Tree, notes 
Reuss, is no longer forbidden; on the con- 
trary, it is offered with a fecundity of which 
actual nature presents no example. 

The number Twelve is again suggested by 
the word “ month:”—cf. the Twelve gates of 
Pearl (ch. xxi. 21), to which the expression 
“ every month” has been taken to correspond; 
just as the thought of the “ Nations” walking in 
the light of the City (ch. xxi. 24), corre- 
sponds to the closing words of this verse— 


and the leaves of the tree [were] for the heal- 
ing of the nations.| Compare: “And the 
Sruit thereof shall be for meat, and the leaf 
thereof for medicine ”—Ezek. xlvii. 12. The 
sense clearly is that the healing virtues of the 
Tree of Life supply the remedy for that sick- 
ness of the soul which troubled the “ Nations” 
during their earthly existence, but to which 
they shall no more be subject in the City of 
God. The objection of Hengst.is ground- 
less, who limits the healing to the present 
state of things: “Healing implies disease. 
But this belongs only to the present life.” 
As little can one argue from ch. xxi. 4, that 
the tears which God shall wipe away, imply 
that sorrow still exists in the New Jerusalem. 
The tears are those which men weep under 
the troubles of earth, but which cease to flow 
in the Life Eternal. Diisterdieck refers to 
those who are “ athirst,’ as we read in ver. 
17; ch, vii. 16;—and to the wretched and 
miserable in ch. iii. 17. The virtue of the 
Tree of Life, as of the Cross, is not limited to 
Jews only, but extends to all the “ Nations” 
of the earth, who are within the Christian 
Zion—see ch. xxi. 24-26. So Words.; and 
see the notes on ch. xx. 2; xxi. 24. 

On the other hand, De Wette, Zullig, 
Ewald, Alf., understand the “ Nations,” dwell- 
ing outside the heavenly City ;—Bengel un- 
derstands the ‘“‘ Nations” to which the Gospel 
has not been preached in this life ;—Ebrard 


REVELATION. XXII. 


7 
[V. 3—4e 


the Lamb shall be in it; and his 
servants shall serve him: 

4 And they shall see his face; 
and his name shall be in their fore- 
heads. 





from sin, but from the state of undevelo 
faith in Christ.” 

Renan comments thus: The Apocal is 
“ par excellencethe Book of Jewish pride. ee 
cording to the author, the distinction between 
the Jews and the pagans will continue in the 
Kingdom of God. While the Twelve Tribes 
eat of the fruits of the Tree of Life, the 
Gentiles must content themselves with a 
medicinal decoction of its leaves (‘ d’une dé 
coction médicinale de ses feuilles. Trait 
ironique’).”—p. 475. 

3. And there shall be no curse any more:]} 
Or, no more anything accursed. On the 
word rendered “ curse” see vv. i/.,and Matt. 
xxvi. 74 (xardOeua — “ Apud profanos non 
exstat,” Grimm), and cf. ae oie rans 
Zech, xiv. 11 (LXX.). 1 upon which the 
curse (Gen. iii. 17) might rest has departed 
from the community of the Blessed—see ch. 
XX. 10, 15; xxi. 27; therefore what follows 
naturally results. Because there is no more 
curse, the Divine rule shall never be with- 
drawn. 

and the throne of God and of the Lamb 
shall be therein:) Note, “and,” not “ Sut.” 
One and the same Throne,—see ver. 1; 
ch. iii. 21. 


and bis servants shall do him service;] 
See ch. vii. 15. Shall worship Hizz—not them , 
for Christ has said, “I and the Father are 
One ”—John x. 30. 

Burger would translate “shall serve him 
as priests,” enjoying the rights co in 
ch. i. 6; v. 10; 1 Pet. ii. 5. That the verb 
here used (Aarpevw) does zot signify this, see 
Archbishop Trench’s Synonyms, p. 118. 

As in ch. xx. 7, the descriptive style of the 
Vision has passed in this verse into a direct 
prediction. 

4, and they shall see bis face ;| See Matt. v. 
8; 1 John iii. 2; cf. Ex. xxxiil. 20; Ps. xvii. 
15:—“*Not through veils and mysteries” 
said Arethas (after “the great Dionysius,” 
ap. Cranmer, /c., p. 491), “but even as He 
was seen by the holy Apostles, on the holy 
Mount,” when they said “Jt is good for us 
to be bere,”—Luke ix. 33. See on ch. xxi. 22. 

and bis name (shall be] on their foreheads. 
See ch. iii. 12; vil. 3; xiv. 1:—“ Not engrav 
in plates of metal, as on the forehead of the 
High Priest, but written by the finger of 
God.”—I. Williams, p. 473. 


makes “ the healing” import not “ the oe 


Saa. 
lex 


v. 5—7°} 


5 “And there shall be no night 
there; and they need no candle, 
neither light of the sun; for the 
Lord God giveth them light: and 
ord shall reign for ever and ever. 


REVELATION. XXII. 


sayings are faithful and true: and 
the Lord God of the holy prophets 
sent his angel to shew unto his ser- 
vants the things which must shortly 
be done. 

7 Behold, I come quickly: blessed 





And he said unto me, These 
5. And there shall be night no more;] 
See vv. //, The description of ch. xxi. 23, 
25, is here repeated :—cf. John ix. 4; xi. Io. 
and they need no light of lamp, zetther 
fight of sun;] See wv. il. The Codex 
Alexandrinus reads, “they shall need.” 
No night:—No lamp, no Sun is needed 
now,— 
Sor the Lord God shall give them light:] 
See vv. //.: Gr. shalllighten upon them, 
and they shall reign for ever and ever.] 
Not for a definite period as in ch. xx. 4, 6, 
but “unto the ages of the ages,”—-see on 
ch. i. 6. The rule of glorified man over the 
New Earth is to be of a different character 
from that exercised by man over Nature 
according to the law laid down in Gen. ix. 2. 





With this promise the Revelation Proper 
(ch. iv. 1-ch. xxii. 5) comes to a close, and 
the description of the New Jerusalem is 
ended :—see the remarks introductory to ch. 
xvii. 








11]. THE EPILOGUE (6-21). 


The Third of the three great divisions of 
the Book. 


THE ANGELIC CONFIRMATION (6-11). 


The Visions have now ceased which dis- 
close the future; and the Epilogue follows 
where, in vv. 6-11, the Angel confirms the 
truth of the communications received by St. 
John; and where Christ Himself, in vv. 
12-16, adds to this His testimony. In vv, 
17-21 the Prophetic Book itself is concluded. 

The Epilogue closely corresponds to the 
Introduction :—The recapitulation, vv. 6-12, 
corresponds to the theme as stated in ch. i. 
7, 8;—The words “I John,” ver. 8, corre- 
spond to ch. i. 9;—The Benediction, ver. 21, 
to the Salutation, ch. i. 4-6. 

6. And be said unto me,| The “ Angelus 
Interpres,’ the interpreting Angel who has in 
general conveyed the revelations :—see on ch. 
iL 1; xxi. 5. Notso, writes Diisterd., under- 
standing the Angel who is the speaker in ch. 
xxi. 9. Differently still Ebrard,—he decides 
that there is here no new utterance of the 
Angel who speaks in ch. xxi. 9; but that St. 
John, as in ver. 8, is himself the speaker, who 
pow recalls to his own recollection and to tha. 


of his readers two facts,—(1) the statement of 
this Angel in ch. xxi. 5; and (2) the truth 
that the entire of the Apocalypse is of Divine 
origin. 

These words [are] faithful and true:| See 
ch. xxi. 5; and cf. ch. xix. 9; Dan. viii. 26. 
It is clear from vv. 7, 18, that the Angel 
refers here to the entire of the Apocalypse. 


and the Lord, the God of the spirits 
of the prophets,] See wv.//. Not, as we 
read in Num. xvi. 22, “the spirits of all 
Jiesh,” but in the restricted sense expressed 
in 1 Cor. xiv. 32, and also in the words “the 
spirit of Prophecy” —ch. xix. 10. 

“The spirit of the prophets ” notes Hengst., 
“‘is the spirit of Prophecy which rests on 
them ;” the Spirit itself is the same for all (1 
Pet. i. 11; 2 Pet. i. 21); but each prophet has 
his own measure of the Spirit’s gift,—1 Cor. 
xii. 11: and so De Wette. Diisterd. however 
understands the prophets’ owz spirit, which 
God makes His instrument, guiding it by the 
Divine Spirit. This latter seems to be the 
true meaning. 

sent his angel to shew unto bis servants] “ In 
(or “concerning”) the churches,’ as in 
ver. 16 ;—to believers generally. 

the things which must shortly come to 
pess.] The verbal agreement of this verse 
with ch. i, 1, intimates that the conclusion of 
the Book begins here. This agreement also 
proves that these words apply to the whole 
Apocalypse. 


7. And behold, I come quickly.| (See vv. 
//.:—in ver. 12 “ And” is omitted). “And 
still He is not yet come. See ch.i. 1; and 
2 Pet. iii. 8” (Words.). In the Inscription 
(ch. i. 1-3), the order of the clauses is not 
the same as in this verse,—the words “ the 
time is at hand” closing the third verse in 
ch. i. 

The words “ I come quickly” are now thrice 
repeated—here, and in vv. 12, 20; seealso ch. 
ii, 16; iii, 11. The fundamental prediction 
is given in Mal. iii. 1. The present passage, 
although uttered by the “‘ Angelus Inierpres,” 
is evidently spoken from the Person of Christ 
(see ver. 16; cf. ver. 20; and also ch. xi. 3): 
—the person sent, speaking from the Person of 
the Sender, as in Gen. xix. 21, 22. If this be 
borne in mind, the discussion as to who is 
the speaker in the different clauses of the 
chapter—e.g. in vv. 12-15—is not of much 


837 


838 


is he that keepeth the sayings of the 
prophecy of this book. 

8 And I John saw these things, 
and heard them. And when I had 
heard and seen, I fell down to wor- 
ship before the feet of the angel 
which shewed me these things. 


profit. On the change from the first to the 
third person Burger compares Jer. xxxiv. 
Ebrard, who considers that St. John, not the 
Angel, is now the speaker, notes that the 
Seer reminds his readers of the saying of 
Christ, “ Behold I come quickly,” in ch. iii. 11 ; 
just as he has quoted at ch. xvi. 15 a similar 
saying in ch. iii. 3, “ Iqwéll come as a thief” :— 
see on ver. 8. 


Blessed is he that keepeth the words] 
The words are “‘ faithful and true” (ver. 6; 
ch. xxi. §). Cf. ch. xiv. 13; xvi. 15; xix. 9; 
xx, 6. 

In ch. i. 3 the verse Jegins with the Bene- 
diction, see above. 


of the prophecy of this book.| The addition, 
“ of this Book,’ is made to what is said in 
ch. i. 3, as the command given tothe Seer in 
ch, i. 11, 19, has now been obeyed. 

“This Book” —not as yet written—is re- 
ferred to here, and again in vv. 9, 18, 19. 


8. And I John am he that heard and 
saw these things.] See vv. J. Com- 
meniators note here the present tense of the 
participles—marking, without temporal sig- 
Nificance, the ecstatic condition in which 
St. John “hears and sees” these things— 
as contrasted with the aorists that follow, 
and which refer specially to vv. 6, 7: cf. the 
tense of the participle in ch. xx. 10; xxi. 9; 
&c. “John,” writes Bengel, “had placed 
his name in the title of his Book (ch. 
i. 4, 9),-.-. and now at the close he 
names himself again, so that we might per- 
fectly know that he, the Apostle John, had 
written this testimony as to the Coming of 
Jesus Christ.” It is common to his Gospel, 
Epistles, and Apocalypse, that the truth of 
the facts recorded should be established by 
the evidence of Aearing and seeing—e.g. John 
4145 XIX: 355 XXI..145 ¥ John 1; a-siv. 14. 
“These things,’ here and at the end of the 
verse, refer to the entire contents of the Book. 

Dionysius of Alex. (ap. Euseb. vii. 25) con- 
nects this clause of ver. 8 with ver. 7; so that 
the Seer includes himself in the blessing there 
pronounced. 


And when I heard and saw, J fell 
down to worship] As in ch. xix. 10, where 
see the note. Observe the aorists in this 
olace—see above. 


REVELATION. XXII. 


[v. 8—1o. 





9 Then saith he unto me, *See*hss 


thou do it not: for I am thy fellow- 
servant, and of thy brethren the 
prophets, and of them which keep 
the sayings of this book: worship 
God. 

10 And he saith unto me, Seal 


before the feet of the angel which shewed 
me these things.| Note again the tense of 
the participle rendered “ which shewed” 

When St. John had heard the words 
“ Bebold I come quickly” (ver. 7), he supposes 
that He who speaks is the Lord Himself: he 
therefore falls, as in ch. xix. 10, before the 
Angel; so Bisping.—Hengst. considers that 
the offered worship in ch. xix. ro had respect 
solely to the contents of the preceding verses; 
here, on the other hand, it has respect to the 
contents of the entire Book ;—Ebrard (see on 
ver. 6) decides that there is no repetition of 
the act of worship; but that as St. John, in 
ver. 6, had recalled to mind what he had 
heard in ch. xxi. 5; and, in ver. 7, had ree 
called to mind ch. iii. 11; so here he merely 
re-states what he had written in ch. xix. 10, 
in order the more carefully to preserve the 
record: of a fact and a warning of such 
grave importance for the instruction of the 
Church of all time. Asin the Old Test. 
the person of the Prophet is sometimes lost 
in that of the word of God Himself who 
speaks through the Prophet, so it happens 
here. Thus in ver. 9 it is said “I am thy 
fellow servant,’ and then, without any inti- 
mation of change of person, we read in 
vv. 12, 13, “ Behold I come quickly,” “I am 
Alpha and Omega” (see on ver.7). To pre= 
vent therefore any ambiguity, what occurred 
in ch. xix. 10 is again introduced. 


9. And he saith unto me, See [thou do st] 
not: I am a fellow-servant with thee 
and with thy brethren] (Omit “jor” be- 
fore “I am,’—see vv. /l.). So far there is 
perfect agreement here with ch. xix. 10, where 
the words which follow, “that Save the testi- 
mony of Jesus,” are now replaced by 


the prophets, and with them which keep 
the words of this book: worship God.] 
The command to “ worship God,” is the same 
in both places. On this reference to “the 
prophets” Bishop Wordsworth notes: “ The 
prophets were St. Jobn’s brethren, and this 
spiritual brotherhood is displayed in the Apo- 
calypse. He and they were inspired by the 
same Spirit, and as is here observed by an 
ancient Expositor, ‘how many words of 
Isaiah, how many words of Zechariah, do we 
read in this book of St. John!’” Dutsterd. 
likewise observes that “the prophets” are here — 


v. 11, 12.] 


not the sayings or the prophecy of 
this book : for the time is at hand. 

11 He that is unjust, let him be 
unjust still: and he which is filthy, 
let him be filthy still: and he that is 


distinguished from the rest of the believers 


as “brethren” of St. John (an idea which does « 


not appear in ch. xix. 10); the design being 
to exalt St. John’s authority as a Prophet, and 
the authority of the Apocalypse. To this 
inference corresponds the Angel’s command 
in ver. 10 (cf. ch. i. 11, 19) that the Seer should 
unpart the Revelation to others,—a command 
to be contrasted with the words of ch. x. 4 
(cf Dan. viii. 26 ; xii. 4,9). Alford refuses to 
recognize any distinction between “prophets” 
and “ brethren.” 

After this episode, as it were, of vv. 8, 9, 
the utterances of the Angel in ver. 7 are re- 
sumed. 


10. And be saith unto me,| These words 
either indicate that the discourse of the Angel 
here takes a new beginning; or rather serve 
to point out that his words in ver. 7 are con- 
tinued :—see on ver. 9. 


Seal not up the words of the prophecy of 
this book ;| The public announcement of the 
revelation is here enjoined,—see on ch. i. 19. 
In ch. x. 4 an opposite command is given. 

The end of all things under the seventh 
Trumpet (ch. x. 7) as now come. 


Sor the time is at hand.| See vv. ll, The 
words of ch. i. 3 are closely followed. 

Ebrard would once more see not an actual 
utterance of the Angel, but a reminiscence 
on the part of the Seer of the commands “ #o 
qrite” given in ch, i. 19; xxi. 5. These are 
now expressed in the different form “ seal not 
up;” just as the reason given”in the words 
“the time is at hand” replaces the form “ I 
come quickly” in ch. iii. 11, and ver. 7 above. 

As m P2n. viii. 26; xii. 4, God is wont to 
command His prophets to “seal up” His 
prophecies when they refer to remote times; 
80, when they refer to times near at hand, 
He commands that the revelation should not 
be sealed, as the Angel commands here (C. a 
Lapide). The nearer the time is at hand, so 
much the more does the Church need the 
consolation with the Apocalypse conveys. 

1l. He that is unrighteous,] On 6 
ad.ixay, cf. Matt. xx. 13. 

Jet bim do unrighteousness sti//:] Or, 
“yet more.” The Angel, with a retrospective 
glance at the previous visions which reveal the 
eternal ruin of the ungodly, and the eternal 
glory of the Saints, now addresses to both 
solemn words of practical exhortation, not 
unmingled with a certain irony,—cf. Ezek. 


REVELATION. XXII. 


righteous, let him be righteous still : 
and he that is holy, let him be holy 
still. 

12 And, behold, I come quickly 
and my reward is with me, ‘to give, 


ili. 27; xx. 39; Matt. xii. 33; xxvi. 45. The 
time isso short there is hardly need to change: 
—so the majority of commentators. The 
moral is— Change while there is time ”! 

Hengstenberg notes that this verse stands 
between the sayings “the time is at hand” 
(ver. 10), and “J come quickly” (ver. 12); 
and that its meaning is to be determined by 
its position :—Each of its statements is alike 
agreeable to the will of God. If men will not 
sanctify Him, He will sanctify Himself upon 
them. If they will have it so, let it be so ;—if 
it is right in their view, so is it also in God’s, 

Burger regards the first two members of 
this verse as conveying a thought similar to 
that contained in Luke xvii. 26-30 :—every 
man will continue to act according to his dis- 
position and the bent of his will, as long as 
there is time todoso. This time, however, is 
short. “Behold,” says the Lord, “I come 
quickly” (ver. 12). 

Ebrard makes this verse also to be the in- 
ference of St. John. 

and he that is filthy, let bimbe made 
filthy s#i//:] Or, “yet more.” See vv. lI. 
Cf. James i. 21; ii. 2; 1 Pet. iii. 21, on the 
word translated “(ji/thy.” Alf. would take 
the verb “in the constant middle sense of 
passive verbs when the act depends on a 
man’s self”’—“and let the filthy pollute 
himself still” Cf. on ver. 15. 

and he that is righteous, let him do right- 
eousness still:] Or, “yet more.” See vv./l. 
On the word “ righteous” cf. ch. xv. 3: and 
as illustrating the »anner of St. John, com- 
pare the use of this form of speech in 1 John 
li, 29; iil. 7:—see Introd. § 7, IV. (/). 

and he that is holy, let bim be made holy 
still] Or, “yet more.” Alf. would render 
the passive verb as before: “and the holy 
sanotify himself still.” 

Bishop Butler (Azalogy, ii. ch. 1) quotes 
this verse in order to illustrate the fact that 
“the light of Reason does not any more than 
that of Revelation, force men to submit to 
its authority.” 

The verse is also quoted in the Epistle of 
the Churches of Lyons and Vienne (ap. 
Euseb. H. E. v. 1):—see Introd. § 2, (a) 
No. (13). 


CHRIST ADDS His TESTIMONY (12-16). 


12. Behold, I come quickly ;| Omit ‘“‘ And,” 
see vv. //.; and on ver. 7. <A passage (o™ 


839 


5 
¢ *. 


840 


ae man according as his work shall 


In 4: 4 13 [am Alpha and Omega, “the 


6 
ees 


Pegnnng and the end, the first and 
the last. 


REVELATION. XXII. 


‘ve 13—I5. 


14 Blessed are they that do his 
commandments, that they may have 
right to the tree of life, and may enter 
in through the gates intc the ci 

15 For without are dogs, an sor= 





12-16,) where the utterance is from the Person 


of Christ Himself, now begins :—the objec-. 


tion to this division, founded on ver. 14, is 
removed by the true "reading i in that place. 

Ver. 16 proves that the speaker here is 
Christ,—or, at least, whichamountsto thesame 
thing, the Angel in "His Person, see on ver. 7. 

Hengstenberg decides that “the speaker 
here, as in ch. i. 8, is simply Gop in the 
undistinguished unity of His Being, or God 
in Christ. ... Where the Angel does not 
speak in his own person, or the speaker 
is not more definitely described, as at ver. 16, 
there it can be only God in Christ.” _Dus- 
terd., however, makes St. John himself the 
speaker in vv. 12-15; and he takes wv. 12, 
13, to be an introduction, in which St. John 
(who knows himself to be the true interpreter 
of the whole revelation) passes over to his 
own exhortation (ver. 14) from the utterances 
of the Angel. The Seer does this by the use 
of the two Divine sayings of vv. 12, 13, just 
as he had done in ch. i. 8. 

and my reward is with me,| Or, wages. 
Ie., the reward which I bestow ;—see ch. 
xi. 18; Isai. xl 10; Ixii. 11. These words 
of Isaiah belong to those Divine sayings which 
identify St. John as a prophet—see on ver. 9. 


torender] ‘The injin. epexegeticus, cease 
as a complement after the verb “ I come ;” 
cf. John iv. 15: see Winer, § 44, 1. 


to each man according as his work is.] 
See vv. //. The Apocalypse here at its close 
cf. ch. il. 23; xx. 12, 13), insists upon the 

loctrine on which St. Paul without ceasing 

dwells,—God “ will render to every man ac- 
cording to bis works”—Rom. ii, 6; xiv. 12; 
1 Cor. iii. 8; 2 Cor. v. 10; &c. 

These words intimate that the entire life of 
a man is to be regarded as ome continuous 
“ qwork.” We may compare 1 Cor. iii. 12-15, 
where also the singular, “qwork,”—1ro €pyov, 
— is found. 

13. I am the Alpha and the Omega, 
the first and the last, the beginning 
and the end.| See wv. //.:—vcompare Isai. 
xli. 4; xliii. 10; xliv. 6; xlvili. 12. St. John 
again follows the prophetic utterances of 
Isaiah —see on ver. 12 above. 

In this place only the three Apocalyptic 
titles of Christ are combined:—(1) “The 
Alpha and the Omega” —see ch.i. 8; xxi. 6; 

2) “The First end. the. Last” —see ch. i. 17; 
i. 8; (3) “The Begsnning and the End”—see 


ch. xxi. 6. The first title is symbolical; the 
second is borrowed from the Old Test. (see 
reff. above); the third is philosophical. 
sense is, ‘I am He from Whom all Being has 
proceeded, and to whom it will return ;—the 
primal Cause and final aim of all history ;— 
Who have created the world, and Who will 
perfect it.’ 

As before, Alford and others ascribe these 
words to God the Father. 


14. Blessed are they that wash their 
robes,| This (see wv. //.) the reading of 
the Alexandrine and Sinaitic MSS., Dusterd. 
imagines to have been suggested by a desire 
not to allow the Divine utterances in vv. 
13, 16, to be interrupted by an intervening 
utterance of St. John, which he takes this 
verse to be. This reading alone, bowers 
renders the meaning clear, and the connexion 
intelligible. 

For the full doctrine of what is here ex- 
pressed, see ch. vii. 14,—from which verse 
the Vulgate has supplied “in sanguine Agni” 
in this place. 

Bishop Wordsworth still retains the readin: 
adopted in the A. V., “that do bis com 
ments.” This reading i is found among Uncials 
only in B (C and P are defective here); 
and among Versions in the Copt., Syr., and 
Arm. Andreas has it, and therefore codex 
1. Itis found in Tertullian (De Pudicit. 19 
and also in Cyprian (Epist. 294) who a 
to Matt. xix. 17. Cf. ch. xii. 17; xiv. 12. 


that they may have the right [to come] 
to the tree of life,| Or, the authority over 
the tree of life; and thus “li live for ever” 
—Gen. iii. 22: cf.the promise, ch. ii. 7; and 
see above ver. 2. On the constr. “that 
they may” see on ch. xiv. 13. Words. ren- 
ders: “that their authority may be upon 
the tree of life”—“i.e., may extend fo it, 
and may be exercised upon it, so that they may 
take and eat of its fruit.” Ebrard here (as in 
ch. xiv. 13) makes this a dependent clause,— 
‘They wash their robes in order that they 
shall, as the result, receive authority to eat of 
the tree of life.’ 


and may enter in by the gates into the 
City.) Or portals (wvAGow). Christ Him- 
self is the “ Gate’””—see John x. 9 ['Eyo eis 
7 Ovpa]; and on ch. xxi. 21. See on ver. 9. 

The former clause of this verse Ebrard 
refers to those who dwell within the City; 
this clause to “tbe Nations” (see on ch. xxi. 





| 


— 


v. 16.} 


cerers, and whoremongers, and mur- 
derers, and idolaters, and whosoever 
loveth and maketh a lie. 

16 I Jesus have sent mine angel 





26; and above on ver. 2) who dwell with- 
out. It is more simple, however, to under- 
stand that the great object and aim of 
believers—“ The right to come tothe tree of 
&fe”—is first set forth; and then the way 
that leads to it, entrance “by the gates into 
the City.” 

15. Without are all dogs,| Omit the 
“ For” of the A. V.—see vv. //. The article, 
here represented by “ail,” precedes each of the 
first five nouns. In the first noun there is a 
general description of that moral impurity 
which is specially noted in ver. 11—an idea 
borrowed from the wild, unclean type of 
“ dogs” in Eastern lands, and still preserved 
in the French word canaille :—cf. Matt. vii. 6 ; 
Phil. iii. 2. This verse pronounces a sentence 
of eternal exclusion of all such from the City 
of God. 

Diisterdieck suggests that the contrast 
which is presented here to the Benediction in 
ver. 14, rather requires that these words 
should be taken as a command—‘“ Hinaus die 
Hunde!” “Away ye dogs!” (“ foras ”—scil. 
* sunto,” not“ foris ”—scs/. “sunt ;” supplying, 
in fact, €orwoav). Words. compares“ Procul, 
O procul este profani.” The former sense 
seems far more natural. 


and sorcerers,| See, in a different order, 
the catalogue of sinners given in ch. xxi. 8. 

Or render, Without [are] the dogs, and 
the sorcerers, and the fornicators, &c. 


and every one that loveth and doeth 
a lie.] See vv. /i.:—or, every one loving 
and doing. The ‘doinga lie’ stands opposed 
to ‘doing the truth,’ John iii. 21; cf. ch. xxi. 27. 
As in the summary of ch. xxi. 8, all single 
gins are here also comprehended in the 
general idea of “a ke.” 

Hengst., having noted that in ch. xxi. 8 
those who are excluded from the Kingdom 
of God “ form four pairs,” and that in ch. xxi. 
27 the enumeration “is comprised in the 
number three,” goes on to observe : “ Here the 
excluded are seven, and the seven is divided 
by the four and the three, just as in Isai. i. 4.” 

“Tam not sure,” writes Bossuet, “if an 
portion of Scripture can be found in which 
terrors and consolations are better inter- 
mingled than they are in these last two 
chapters. There is everything to attract in 
this most blessed City; all in it is rich and 
glorious ; but everything also is fitted to in- 
spire one with dread,—for we there perceive 
still more of purity than of grandeur.”— 
Comm. in loc. 


REVELATION. XXII. 


to testify unto you these hings in 
the churches. i am the root and 
the offspring of David, and the bright 
ana morning star. 


Burger notes that wy. 14, 15 show the 
results, on either side, of the choice left free 
for every one (ver. 11), and of the Judgment 
(ver. 12). 


16. I Jesus have sent mine angel| Asstated 
from the very first, ch. i. 1. These words 
contain a direct reference to the present re- 
velation to St. John. See on ver. 7; and 
compare ver. 12 as to the relation of the 
speaker throughout to our Lord. 

The Apocalypse here resumes as at the 
beginning the form of an Epistle. Here for 
the first time, and only here, at the close of 
the Book, and as the seal to all that is written 
in it, the Lord styles Himself by His personal 
name JESUS. 


to testify unto you these things in the churches, | 
See vv. //. The reading év is adopted here; 
but if émi be read translate concerning the 
churches, as in ch. x. 11 (cf. John xii. 16): 
so Hengst., Zullig, Dtsterd. Hengst. takes 
“unto you” to mean “my servants the pro- 
phets who are represented by John, cf. vv. 6,9; 
ch. i. 1.” Disterd., omitting the prep. (with 
codex 1) translates, have sent mine angel 
unto you the churches [i.e the Seven 
Churches of ch. i. 4] to testify, &c. Burger, 
likewise without the prep., suggests the same 
translation. If, however, the prep. (émi) is 
to be read he refers “unto you” to the 
Angels of the Churches, and renders, “con- 
cerning the churches.”  Bengel, also 
omitting the prep., refers the dative “unto 
you” to the Angels of the Seven Churches; 
and he takes rais éexkAnaias to be an ablative, 
rendering “‘in the churches.’ Vitr. translates 
“in commodum Ecclesiarum’” (émi):—“ Grotius 
recte vertit Ecclesiarum bono.’ Alf., likewise 
reading emi, nevertheless translates “in the 
churches” (“the emi of addition by juxta- 
position— John iv. 6; Rev. ix. 14”). 


I am the root and the offspring of David,) 
See ch. v. 5 ; Matt. xxii. 41-45 ;—cf. also Isai, 
xi. 1, 10; Rom. xv. 12. On the words “ of- 
spring” (yévos) Diisterd. quotes in illustra- 
tion: “Credo equidem ... . genus esse 
Deorum”—47, iv. 12. Vitringa notes 
“ Sensus est, in Christo solo stare et conser= 
vari familiam Davidis ” (/.c., p. 915). 

At the -word “ David” the cursive manu- 
script, “1,” used by Erasmus breaks off—a 
manuscript which has so greatly influenced 
the Textus Receptus and the modern trans- 
lations of the New Testament. From this 
point to the end of the Apocalypse the 


841 


842 


ss heareth say, Come. 


17 And the Spirit and the bride 
say, Come. And let him that 
¢And let him 
that is athirst come. And whosoever 
will, let him take the water of life 
freely. 


REVELATION, XXII. 


({v. 17—18, 


18 For I testify unto every man 
that heareth the words of a pro- 


phecy of this book, /If any man/Dete 
shall add unto these things, God shall Pra a=. § 


add unto him the plagues that are 
written in this book: 





“ Authorized Version” is a translation into 
English, of the re-translation by Erasmus 
of the Vulgate into Greek. On this subject 
see vv. /]., and the Introduction, § 8. 


the bright,] Omit [and], which is not in 
the Greek. Compare 


* Hesperus that led 
The starry host, rode brightest.” — 
Par, Lost, IV. 605. 


the morning star.] Omit and,—see 
wv. /l. on this, and also on the word translated 
“morning.” See onch. ii. 28. 

In this, and in the preceding title, the Lord 
refers to the past and tothe future. He Who 
after the flesh is the Son of David, is now the 
Herald of the coming Dawn;—from Him 
proceeds the light of the eternal Day: see 
ch. xxi. 23. “JI will give bim the Morning 
Star,” is His promise to every one “that 
overcometh ” (ch. ii. 28). 

Sir. I. Newton compares 2 Pet.i. 19. 


THE CONCLUSION (17-21). 


17. And the Spirit and the bride say, Come.| 
Or translate “ Both the Spirit and.” See 
wv. /L: cf. the same form, “Epxov, in ch. vi. 

In response to the Lord’s announcement in 
ver. 12, “ Bebold, 1 come quickly,” the Universal 
Church,—the “ Bride,”—inspired by the Holy 
Ghost (cf. Acts xv. 28), answers, ‘“ Come”! 
Not the Church triumphant, as in ch. xxi. 2, 9, 
but the Church still waiting for Redemption 
—cf. John XV. 26, 27. 

It is unne to refer precisely, with 
Hengst., to the Spirit of Prophecy (ch. xix. ro), 
or yet to the Spirit of the prophets (ch. xxii. 
6), in which St. John found himself on the 
Lord’s Day (ch. i. 10; iv. 2), and which 
through him (ch. xiv. 13) ;—or, with Ebrard 
and Bisping, to the Spirit abiding with be- 
lievers (Rom. viii. 26);—or, with Dusterd. 
and Alf., to the Spirit in the churches and in 
the prophets (ch. ii. 7, 11; xix. 10) ;—or with 
Zullig, to the Prophets (ie. the prophetic 
Spirit), and the Saints, ch. xi 18; xvi. 6; 
BVitl. 20, 24. 

On the “ Bride,”—the symbol by which the 
Courch is represented,—see ch. xix. 7; xxi. 
3, 9. 

And he that heareth, let him say, 
Come.] See ch. ii. 7, 11—he that heareth 


“qhat the Spirit saith unto the Churches :” 
cf. ver.18; ch. i. 3. Ebrard understands ‘he 
that heareth the words of Christ in vv. 12-15’; 
— Disterd., ‘he that heareth the promise 
the Lord’s coming’ ;— Alf. and Burger, ‘ he that 
heareth the cry of the Spirit and the Bride” 
We cannot overlook the Lord’s own repeated 
admonition (see Matt. xi. 15), where also the 
“ bearing” is taken absolutely. 

And he that is athirst, let him 
come:] See ch. xxi. 6; John iv. 14; vii. 37; 
cf. Isai. lv.i. See wv. //. 

he that will,] Omit “and,” see vv.il. 
Here, notes Ebrard, is the turning point of 
this exhortation:—to be “athirst,” and to 
“will,” are the essential conditions of “ coming” 
to Christ. 


let him take] See vv. Ul. 


18. I testify] (Omit “ For,”—see vv, 
/1.). The personal pronoun is emphatic; ‘I 
John testify.” We have here the Apostle’s 
final warning ;—not, as some (e.g. Ebrard) 
who appeal to ver. 20 conclude, a continuation 
of the Lord’s address in ver. 16. Burger takes 
Christ Himself to be the speaker, and notes: 
“This is the Seal which the Lord Himself 
stamps upon the Book.” 


unto every man] As in ver. 16; Heb. x. 15. 
Alf. suggests “of every man,” as Rom 
x. 2; Gal. iv. 15. : 

that heareth the words of the prophecy of this 
book,| Note the accurate repetition of the 
words of ch. i. 3, where the Seer pronounces 
a Benediction on those who “read” and 
“bear,” and “ keep the things that are written 
therein.” 

The solemn menace now follows:— 


If any man shall adduntothem,] See vv. Ul. 
Gr. upon them—and so in the next clause. 

The anathema here, in accordance with the 
whole spirit of the Apocalypse, is founded on 
the Old Test. :—e.g. “Ye shall not add unto 
the word which I command you, neither shall 
ye diminish ought from it,” Deut. iv. a; 
xii, 32; Prov. xxx. 5, 6. Speaking of the pers 
fections of God, the son of Sirach writes: 
“Unto Him may nothing be added, neither 
can He be diminished,”—Ecclus. xlii. 21. 

These words, writes Burger, are ade 
dressed to the entire Church and its teachers. 
“Here,” notes Words., “is a prophetic pro- 
test against the spurious Revelations forged 


v.1g—2!. 


1g And if any man shall take 
away from the words of the book of 
this prophecy, God shall take away 
his part out of the book of life, and 
out of the holy city, and from the 
things which are written in this book. 


REVELATION. XXII. 


20 He which testifieth these things 
saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. 
Even so, come, Lord Jesus. 

21 The grace of our Lord Jesus 
Christ de with you all. Amen. 





by false Teachers in the name of Apostles 
(see Fabricius, Cod. Apoer., N.T.; Jones, On 
the Canon: Liicke, &c.).” 


God shall add unto him the plagues that are 
written in this book:| For a Old Test. 
parallels see Deut. vii. 15; ill. 27, 60. 
For the references to the “ Book” ab” itself the 
first six Trumpets, ch. viii. 7-ix. 21 may be 
referred to; -— the “Seven Thunders,” ch x. 3; 
—the “ Seven Vials,” ch. xv. 1-17 ;—the 
“ Earthquake,” ch. xi. 13 ; xvi. 18 ;—the fall of 
Babylon, ch. xviii. Of course the penalties on 
-additions or omissions are denounced against 
‘those who would, as Hengst. notes, assail ‘‘ the 
proper kernel of the Book ; such as would sub- 
‘stitute for the narrow way presented in it, a 
broad one; or would in some measure extin- 
ies the light of hope that shines in it for 

Christians.” Asa commentary on this passage 
we may well refer to the similar denunciation 
by St. Paul in Gal. i. 8, 9; and also to his refe- 
‘rence to Hymenzus and Philetus who taught 
“that the Resurrection is past already; and 
overthrow the faith of some” (2 Tim. ii. 
17, 18). 

19. and if any man shall take away from 
the words| E.g. the exhortations to patience, 
ch. xiii. 10; xiv. 12;—to be “/aithf unto 
death,” ch. ik. 10; iii. Io. 

There have been at all times tose wno say 
“Let him make speed, and hasten His work, 
‘that we may see it” (Isai. v. 19; 2 Pet. 
ili. 4). 

God shail take away his part] See vv. ll. 
For the phrase “Sis part” cf. ch. xx. 6; xxi. 8; 
John xiii. 1; and see Introd. § 7, IV., (c). 

The words that follow are clearly figura- 
‘tive. 

from the tree of life,] For thisimportant 
change of reading (rod EvAou for 8iBdov) in 

adopted in the A.V., and intro- 
duced by Erasmus from the Vulgate, “de 
&bro vite” see vv. jj. Compare also Introd. 
§ 8. 
and out of the holy city,| The two pre 
wns “from,” and “ out of” (amd, éx) are 
connected with the verb “ shall take away.” 

The Tree and the City were both mentioned 
in ver. 14. “In these Fae notes Bengel, 
“stands the sum of the blessedness written 
in this Book, at its beginning and at its close, 
—ch. ii. 7; iii. 1a; xxi 2; xxii 2.” 


[even from] the things which are written 
in this book.] Or translate, “from the tree 
of life, and out of the holy city, which 
are written in this book.”] (Omit “and,” 
before “ from the things,” see vv. il.). As“ the 
plagues” in ver. 18 are described as “written in 
this Book,” so Hengst. would refer the words 
“which are written in this Book” both to 
“the Tree” and to “ the City.” Wordsworth 
comments: “The reading of the text [viz, 
the omission of “and”] is important as de- 
claring that the Holy City belongs to those 
who are written in this Book;”—and he ren- 
ders, “out of the Holy City of those 
that are written,” &c. 

Ebrard notes: “Not John, but only He, 
the Lord, has power to issue such threaten- 
ings, as we readin vv. 18, 19.” These words 
have caused offence to many. Thus Luther, 
in his Preface of the year 1522, expresses 
strong disapproval at St. John’s assigning so 
much greater weight to his own Book than 
to the other Holy Books (“ Darzu dtinkt mich 
das allzuviel sein, dass er hart solch sein eigen 
Buch mehr denn andere heilige Bucher, da viel 
mehr angelegen ist, befiehlt und drauet” 
u.s.w.); and, following him, De Wette, 
Kliefoth, &c. Luthardt justly replies: “ As 
Paul, Gal. i. 8,f. invokes the curse on the 
man who corrupts the doctrine of faith, so 
John invokes the curse here on the man who 
corrupts the doctrine of ope ; for the subject- 
matter here is the true consolation and light 
of the Church in the heaviest tribulation, and 
also the Word which has power :u preserve 
the faithful so that they may not fall in the 
great Temptation, and perish.” 

The presumption, notes Bisping, would be 
intolerable, were such words to issue from 
the mouth of one who was not an Apostle. 


20. He which testifieth these things saitb,] 
The speaker is Christ, see uh. i. 2 ; xix. ro :— 
“ The testimony of Jesus Christ. it 

This idea of “testimony” (uaprupia) ap- 

at the beginning, and recurs at the end 
of all the three greater documents which we 
have received from St. John :—Johni. rg ; xxi, 
243;—1 Johni, 2; v. 11 ;——Rev. i. 23 XXii. 20. 

The words “these things” refer to the 
whole Book,—see vv. 6, 18 ; and cf. John xxi 
24. In what follows we have the parting 
sayings of the Lord, and of His Apostle. 


Yea: I come quickly.| Here with the 


843 


844 


reiteration of that promise which is the 
essence of the entire Apocalypse the Lord’s 
own sayings come to a close. 


Amen: come Lord Jesus.] (Omit “even 
so,” see vv./].). Thus the Seer answers in the 
name of the Church Universal. The Lord 
nad promised the beloved Disciple an age 
above that of others (John xxi. 22): “If I 
will that he tarry till I come.”—As if remem- 

sering these words, the longing of his soul 
gateers itself up in the parting cry: “ Amen: 
Come Lord Jesus.” 


21. The Grace of the Lord Jesus] 
mit “ our,” and “ Christ,” see vv. I. 


se with all Amen] Omit “you,” see 


REVELATION. XXII. 


vv. il. According to readings of more or leas 
authority we may render, “be with the 
saints”; or “with all the saints.” These 
variations in the text have, doubtless, arisen 
from the desire of the scribes to bring this 
Benediction into more exact conformity 
with the closing words of St. Paul’s epistles,— 
as e.g. 1 Thess. v. 28. It would seem from 
this place, and from ch. i. 4, that St. John had 
regard to the Pauline form. 


To this close may be byeT — other 
ayn. of St. at Ee : oka ii, 28 

fittle children, in Him; 

that, ee He shall appear, we may have com= 

fidence, and not be ashamed Him @ 
HIS COMING. 





Hie fi filly 
he) 
4 


sola Ye 


ahs 














> <<, 


i de Ee 


=_ 


oe 








DATE DUE 


dad 
TE A 
ii 


AUG 3 1: 


ame | 
ar ae 


DEMCO 38-297 











TOT 





